User talk:Todd Vierling

Motorcycling Wikiproject

Welcome to the Motorcycling WikiProject. Hopefully you have a good time, start many new articles and can contribute lots to the existing ones as we need that. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Todd good to see you've joined the project - I've not been here very long but learning fast so if there is anything you're not sure about I'm happy to help. I am working though all the missing articles and stubs for British Bikes and would welcome any help if you have the time. There is a category for British motorcycles and its linked to the Category to the Commons British Motorcycles so if you could help with matching pics to articles or adding the missing images to the Commons that would be great, as its a fairly quiet corner of Wikipedia Thanks Tony (talk) 06:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry it took so long to respond. Unfortunately, besides a very rich background in safety equipment, my knowledge of the machines themselves is very much rooted in UJM standards and sport bikes. Indeed, that probably makes me a little too American to be able to give a good perspective on most European manufacturers. Todd Vierling (talk) 03:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

UE Tags

Hey, I happened to notice you placed two tags on the UE page, but then did not attempt to explain why you placed the OR tag. I urge you to please explain on the UE talk page why you placed the OR tag and also to help correct the problems and work with the other editors to improve the article. I also ask you that if you placed the citation tag on the article that maybe you could also help find more citations to back up the statements within the articles.

One thing that has always disturbed me is people running in placing tags up on the page and doing nothing to help improve the article. It's like people want to barely point out the problems, but do nothing to help improve it. Instead I would love to to see others who place tags on the article to actually help improve it.

As I mentioned I'm asking you to both describe the problem areas within the article on the article's talk page and also to help improve the article too. Thanks Brothejr (talk) 15:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Added an explanation. If I had more references to add on hand, I'd add them. However, the article's on my watchlist specifically so I may be able to help out at some point in the near future. I also created the stub Modern ruins recently as a related term. Todd Vierling (talk) 19:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply to your comments as I had been pulled into a couple other dramas, but you do bring up some really good points. I know that some of the ref's already used, could conceivably be also used to back up some of the statements you pointed out. Otherwise, if they cannot be cited, then I don't see a problem removing them as their removal would not dramatically impact the article. Brothejr (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

stop

can you stop spaming me thank you 72.208.118.127 (talk)

I was bringing back a recent content warning that you deleted without explanation. These warnings exist for a reason. If you are editing constructively, then it's no problem, and I'll let this one slide for now. I would highly recommend creating an account so that you aren't editing as a raw IP address (as logged-in users tend to be considered more trustworthy in the long run). Todd Vierling (talk) 14:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

IMPROPER ACTIONS BY FLEWIS

Talk page content on 96.224.32.254 which you reverted I felt should be removed b/c the "warnings" you note by Flewis on the talk page referenced were wholly inappropriate, as explained, and when I posted/replied on his talk page, he kept deleting immediately my input on his talk page; if he can delete my entries on his and not respond to the issue, I should be able to delete his on mine; also, if you could report his behavior I would appreciate it; there was NO WAY my edit could be construed as vandalism, the cites he links to were WHOLLY inapplicable and he made his actions so quickly it shows he didn't bother thinking (wrong to me) and then his spiteful failure to address the issue substantively or even keep it on his page is lacking in wikispirit. Vandalism is a strong charge and all I did was update and clarify information publicly listed!96.224.32.254 (talk) 19:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, you removed substantive edits to the page I'd made myself, which I rightfully restored; nonetheless, I feel it's best the whole page be blanked, as I note/d.96.224.32.254 (talk) 19:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and the latter four post sections or so that Flewis did keep in on his talk page after and before reverting mine all referring to improper warnings he posted are not mine; please give him a warning as to what appears spiteful editing of his page. Just as others questioned him on his page, I believe that was the appropriate place; as the issue was unresolved, he didn't reply, it should not have been deleted in my view, that is hostile (the fact he is reverting and warning willy-nilly should be cause for concern in my view). 96.224.32.254 (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)96.224.32.254 (talk) 20:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't simply blank a user page completely of an anonymous IP when there are active, recent warnings on it -- valid or not. You're free to go to the editor's talk page and respond to the warnings there, much like you wrote comments here. Better yet, I highly recommend that you create an account, since logged-in users are typically given more leeway than anonymous ones. Strange, unexplained edits by anonymous IPs are usually considered suspect at first glance, and you'll probably get better treatment when logged in instead. Todd Vierling (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

He seems only to be a member for 10 days or so and his "vandalism" warnings appear generally inappropriate and voluminous - I think his status should be reviewed and a warning or watch placed on him - just reading what is on his talk page seems to indicate as such - he is undoing the work of valid editors and causing needless irritation and loss of content and wasted effort.96.224.32.254 (talk) 20:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I offer the same suggestion to create an account and log in. I'm not defending the actions of Flewis, because I didn't do that change; I only restored a warning message on an anonymous IP talk page. Todd Vierling (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

There is absolutely no need or requirement for me to create an account and log in each time; you neglected to note that I DID respond to Flewis' talk/discussion page and he DELETED it; furthermore, there was nothing STRANGE in my edit and I explained it in the discussion page and description in history. His actions appear wrong and I do request you follow up on what I've noted. He appears to be doing significant harm on the site and targeting users who don't create pages is WRONG. Wiki does not require accounts. His vandalism warning/cite referral should be removed; please review the situation and edits and if you are not in a position to do so, please refer this to an admin for me. Thank you, I do feel it is important, especially seeing his talk page and his removal of content and posting of wrong content. I repeat he needs to be monitored from what I've seen and his short time here. THat you did not note that I DID reply to his talk page which I clearly stated is disturbing as it makes your reply nonsensical in that regard (suggesting I do what I already did and failing to take into account his action in response, which I flagged to you, and then telling me I will be "treated better" if I create something I don't need to or want to use at present and Wiki wholly supports (many articles are started and edited by illustrious (ie, qualified and well intentioned) non-account folk.96.224.32.254 (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The Mystic Knights of Tir Na Nog

I'm not deleting a message from another person's user talk page. I'm doing it on my own one. --98.192.44.39 (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware. Please do not remove recent warning messages from an anonymous IP talk page. If you would like more flexibility and trustworthiness on Wikipedia, I highly recommend creating an account. Todd Vierling (talk) 20:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The user and I spoke about the situation and settled it. Also, how did you come up with my user talk page? --98.192.44.39 (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Understood; leaving it alone. Todd Vierling (talk) 21:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)