User talk:Wronkiew: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:59, 15 October 2008

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 27 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

PLEASE stay OUT of private business between me and FridgeMagnet.

Thanks..

Re: SpaceColonization Userbox

I'm not really working on the userbox, so if you're creating one (I don't know if you were implying that or not), yours would almost definitely be better than mine. As well, I'm not exactly sure how to make it "add the user to the WikiProject Space Colonization category". I just edited the template so maybe it does it now, but I truly don't know.

Also, I don't really like the pictures in them very much. But they were the best I could find. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsimmons666 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh nice. I really like your templates. I'll leave my page there, just in case, but I'll hide the code so no one mistakenly uses the templates. --Bsimmons666 (talk) 13:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philitas of Cos

Thanks for your review of Philitas of Cos; it was really quite helpful, especially the list of unfamiliar terms. I tried to fix all but one of the points raised (the one exception was grammarian), and responded in Wikipedia:Peer review/Philitas of Cos/archive1 #Wronkiew. Eubulides (talk) 06:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn al-Haytham

Hello Wronkiew, thanks for picking up the GAN of Ibn al-Haytham. I look forward to your review, and don't worry about it taking a while, it gives me plenty of time to fix anything you feel might need fixing! Deamon138 (talk) 18:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Prose issues. I am going to fix them like you ask (assuming I see no problems), but I was just wondering, a lot of these issues don't seem like issues to me, but since I'm willing to learn, could you explain some of them to me (maybe on my talk page) or point me to the relevant guideline, because I don't see the point in some of them? e.g. initiating to starting. Don't worry, I'll change it, I just don't understand why, and I'm an inquisitive guy. Thanks if you can. Deamon138 (talk) 01:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: protest

Damn it, he moved his talk page to archive it, so I didn't see those. Hrm..... I really don't know what to do here... His edits the last few days were good, but having those warnings less than two weeks ago is concerning. Since he's done better lately, would you have a problem if I leave his rollback, and just keep a very close eye on him? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 21:54, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GAN: Adrastea (moon)

Hey, thank very very much for the detailed comments. I believe I solved almost all of them, though I still have some issues with a few. Let me know what you think now. Nergaal (talk) 07:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Except for that attribution issue, all the issues should be solved now. I will take a look later tonight at that attribution. Nergaal (talk) 18:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Nergaal (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting that vandalism to my user page earlier today. I appreciate it. Canderson7 ^(talk) 22:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT?

What I do wrong? Huh? Whaaaat? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noamshouseparty (talk • contribs) 04:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia? What? What is considered? I speak to you, I need to know HOW talk wikipedia when good?

Thnx

Thanks for the rv on my page. --> Halmstad, Talk to me 16:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Good Faith

Thanks for the reversion of this edit on my userbox page, although the edit was the best example of Good Faith I have ever seen. The vandals are getting cuter! - weebiloobil (talk) 19:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I bestow upon thee The Barnstar of Diligence, because your review of Ibn al-Haytham was so detailed that I think it deserves this recognition. Well done, and keep up the hard work! Deamon138 (talk) 21:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi there, you picked up some vandalism on my user page & reverted it. Thanks very much for doing that. Have no idea why that user picked on my user page, but there you go - there's no accounting for some folk! Happy editing --Whoosher (talk) 10:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NSSDC

Hey, saw your change on Infobox Space station...good thing. However, I'm going to move it to just above Callsign, since the NSSDC is the primary universal identifier for orbital objects. Seems like such an important bit shouldn't be sitting at the bottom of the box. Cheers! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ACC admin protest

I protest the granting of account creator privileges to Techman224. A quick look at his contributions to WP:Usernames for administrator attention reveals a very poor understanding of username policy. My concern is that legitimate account requests will be denied because he does not like the username chosen. Wronkiew (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll watch his actions on the account creation tool and I will deal with any problems if they arise. Stifle (talk) 18:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake!

My mistake! I am sorry! I was musguided :) Everthying is fixed now :) --creaɯy!^Talk 15:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

block evasion

Yes, it does look like they are the same person. But they have stopped editing and not edited since they were warned, and they can switch to another IP anyway, so it's better not to block them right now and to carefully watch the Enjoy Yourself Tonight article for more activity from this person. Academic Challenger (talk) 03:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

[Message from 67.206.218.111]

```` not the user just read it and found it very offense and NOT true.... I know who he is and admire his work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.206.218.111 (talk) 07:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thank you

No prob. Glad I could help out. I can semi-protect it for you if you don't feel like having spray paint indiscriminately spread over your personal stomping ground. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 00:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me get tired of reverting??! How dare you insinuate such a thing!!! </joke> No, I never get tired of it, so if it doesn't bother you, it's no big deal. Have a good evening! J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xinyu

Hello. I have nothing against the user personally, I was just making an effort to expose a little hyppocracy on his part. Is it really that big a deal? By the way, are you Xinyu, or are you his keeper? 98.221.133.96 (talk) 05:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The only way to improve this encyclopedia is to work within the rules. Otherwise nobody can tell a good edit from vandalism. What specifically is your complaint?" I don't have a complaint, perse. Did you actually look at the page itself before you undid the revision?? Xinyu had written on his page the he believed 'rules were meant to be broken,' and he used this tactic to abuse Wikipedia's policies, trying to act like a (corrupted) administrator. I was attempting to parody this by quoting that section and commenting on why I was violating the rule of vandalizing the page.

Now, this is very, very important. I think it is imperative that before anyone edits a page, they view the page first. Did you actually view my edits, or did you simply revert them?? 98.221.133.96 (talk) 05:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I was trying to show him his own hyppocracy. Thank you for hearing my case. 98.221.133.96 (talk) 05:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Gerard K. O'Neill

Hi Wronkiew, I've decided to take over the GA review for this article. Regards, Reyk _YO! 07:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate

Why did you remove the statement about my alternate account?Special K(KoЯn flakes) 17:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hi, sorry about reverting your edits. I was trying to protect your account from what I suspected might be an impersonator. I'll revert the message I posted at the alternate account, if you haven't already. Wronkiew (talk) 17:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I can see your reasoning behind that, given that the name is perilously close to my actual name. But in your edit summary, I think you should put your reasoning. Thanks anyway, Special K(KoЯn flakes) 18:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my edits were a little confusing. My edit summary was limited by the maximum length of the field. I should have posted a note on both talk pages explaining what I was doing, instead of just posting one to the alternate. Wronkiew (talk) 18:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never thought to check there. Special K(KoЯn flakes) 18:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re deletion of "Alexander R. Povolotsky's problem 1"

Please see my thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Apovolot (talk) 02:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of AI

We've finally reached my personal October 15 deadline at WT:1C for copyediting chores, and I'm all caught up, so I can take on new projects. I just offered my help to Charles on History of AI; I see we're getting near the end of your window for pass/fail. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 13:08, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]