Jump to content

User talk:Woohookitty: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Notepad47 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Notepad47 (talk | contribs)
Line 79: Line 79:
== how am i being uncivil? he and i are engaged in a discussion. if he wished to end it, he could simply say so. why do you find it necessary to end our conversation? ==
== how am i being uncivil? he and i are engaged in a discussion. if he wished to end it, he could simply say so. why do you find it necessary to end our conversation? ==
[[User:Notepad47|Notepad47]] ([[User talk:Notepad47|talk]]) 06:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
[[User:Notepad47|Notepad47]] ([[User talk:Notepad47|talk]]) 06:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

:according to what standard does my use of the word "ignorant" make me uncivil? Keep in mind daedalus used the word as well. Please show me a documented policy which dictates that use of the word "ignorant" is uncivil. Is the NY Times being uncivil by using the word in the following three articles? I think it is a word, a word with a negative connotation I admit but since when in discussion do we have to be happy and compliment each other 24/7? passionate debate requires the use of the words we find appropiate and you are encouraging a [[chilling effect (term)]].

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/us/27history.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9A0DE0DD163CF936A15756C0A960948260
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE4DF133CF935A15751C0A96F948260
[[User:Notepad47|Notepad47]] ([[User talk:Notepad47|talk]]) 06:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:31, 23 July 2008

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 5 days are automatically archived to User talk:Woohookitty/Archive11. Archives prior to 16 June 2007 were compiled by Werdnabot/Shadowbot3 and can be found at the right hand side of this page. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Template:Education by country

Why did you delete Template:Education by country without first dealing with the pages that were still using the template? I have removed the template from Category:Education by country

Other pages that still need to be fixed include:

Then there are the various user pages, but those are a different matter, but the three linked pages about should have been dealt with prior to deleting the template. Dbiel (Talk) 19:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi, as a regular TFD closer, could you close one nomation for me (either as keep or delete). See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 June 28#Template:Greek Female Artists. It's already going on for a while. And I might be totally wrong, but some of the more recent votes remind me of wp:duck, so a close would be nice. Garion96 (talk) 06:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um excuse me, it seems that there were an equal amount of keeps and deletes and several unanswered responses. Grk1011 (talk) 12:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the close. Garion96 (talk) 21:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Woohookitty! Would you mind reinstating the above re-direct even though it defaults to the capitalized Native American? Two reasons: 1) re-directs are cheap; 2) it will prevent someone from re-creating it anyway, and more people watch existing articles (or re-directs) than they watch red links. Some of these race links are subject to abuse and I was trying to stay one step ahead of the idiots. If not, would you mind if I re-created it? Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 17:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--  jj137 (talk) 03:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for templates

FYI but when a template has the {{documentation}} tag then categories and interwikis go in the documentation page. Gary King (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hm it should always work, as long as it has the includeonly tags. Perhaps the page needed purging? Gary King (talk) 05:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your edits to Demographics of the Arab League

please explain your edits to Demographics of the Arab League. i do not think that they help the article, in your "tidying" you have simply made the article harder to understand. Please explain your logic on my talk page or I will revert your edits in short order. Thank you for your compliance!. Notepad47 (talk) 08:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your threats on my user page

how do you mean that my stay will be a short one? are you threatening me, my life or property? are you threatening to get rid of me? please clarify your statement immediately on my talk page or i will contact the authorities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notepad47 (talkcontribs) 09:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

but y ou did make comments about my attitude. i'm just being extra helpful why do you have to be so negative? are you just complacent with how things are? i'm sure if you tried you could be as helpful and articlulate as i am. Notepad47 (talk) 09:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
how am i attacking people? i realize that i am being very helpful and putting a lot of effort in, but i dont see why that should be considered an attack. isn't the idea behind wikipedia that we should all challenge each other to produce the best possible work? what is your take on this? i think complacency is bad. Notepad47 (talk) 09:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i guess i see your point. so, as an experienced administrator would it be correct for me to gather that you would rather see me just correct what i percieve as mistakes instead of consulting people on the changes they've made? i guess i was afraid that i would make a mistake, or that someone would be upset or offended that i would alter their work without consulting them first. thank you for taking the time to help me with this i really want to help out i'm just learning i guess. thanks! Notepad47 (talk) 09:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANotepad47

This guy has gone whacko. 09:15, 22 July 2008.

I am out today before the clowns come to eat me ... there must be a heatwave somewhere and all the good minds on the wikipedia melted. --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 09:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; this person has gone nuts. Here he says he is "reverting vandalism" when he is reverting good-faith edits. Please help! (I am using an anonymous IP because I've seen how ANotepad47 stalks people and do not wish to be stalked.) 69.10.33.204 (talk) 14:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indians

Hey, sorry about that. Didn't mean to say not a link - just meant to say it's not a page (other than being disambiguous). Well anyway I didn't realise you were trying to disambiguate it, so I apologise once again for any inconvenience --Maurice45 (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how am i being uncivil? he and i are engaged in a discussion. if he wished to end it, he could simply say so. why do you find it necessary to end our conversation?

Notepad47 (talk) 06:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

according to what standard does my use of the word "ignorant" make me uncivil? Keep in mind daedalus used the word as well. Please show me a documented policy which dictates that use of the word "ignorant" is uncivil. Is the NY Times being uncivil by using the word in the following three articles? I think it is a word, a word with a negative connotation I admit but since when in discussion do we have to be happy and compliment each other 24/7? passionate debate requires the use of the words we find appropiate and you are encouraging a chilling effect (term).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/us/27history.html http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9A0DE0DD163CF936A15756C0A960948260 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE4DF133CF935A15751C0A96F948260 Notepad47 (talk) 06:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]