User talk:Hotcrocodile

Humour article

sorry =( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.185.15.203 (talk) 07:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. Hotcrocodile (talk) 12:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Gefilte fish article

Hello Hotcrocodile, can I just have gifelte fish? have you ever had to eat the stuff thats what it tastes like. You'd know that if YOU were jewish. I think it should say that, it's clever, it's unexpected and it's ironic. it's just what people should expect from their pages, and I think it would show a lot of character on your part if you could just let it go. Thanks a lot my friend66.31.200.233 (talk) 05:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for discussing this. I do get the joke, but I'm afraid an encyclopedia isn't the place for it. Hotcrocodile (talk) 12:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

oh you're no better than the kids at hebrew school and they'll start calling me sweet charley and they'll chase me until I trip and my shoes fall off. Can't you see it in your heart to just let me have this one maybe?66.31.200.233 (talk) 06:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Balding

Thanks for your improvement to the account of what Balding said. How did you get the exact transcript...do you have a recording, or is there an internet source? Thanks, Jandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 10:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I transcribed it from a recording of the BBC's broadcast of the race and interviews afterwards. Unfortunately the iPlayer only show highlights of the race and cuts the interview just before Clare Balding mentions his teeth. Hotcrocodile (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Bone cell

I'm very sorry for the vandalism put on the bone cells page. Somebody I know must have been on my computer when this happened. Once again my apologies. - 173.70.245.176 (talk) 01:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. Hotcrocodile (talk) 11:43, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Will Young

Hi there, thank you for getting in touch. We all felt that despite your view on the clarity of his sexuality within the article that it was not sufficiently publicised that he is a queer. As such, you will see that I have again given it sufficient prominence. Thank you again for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.219.190.33 (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Please note that your edit constitutes vandalism and as such, is not welcome. Hotcrocodile (talk) 13:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Rick Rosner

Hello. Not sure how i can find a source that Rick Rosner was on "Obsessed", but he was. I just watched the episode myself. I doubt you'll find a source that has his real name listed as one of the featured persons. So what do I do. It's true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.193.212 (talk) 03:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid Wikipedia rules state that "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true". This is especially important for biographical information, please see WP:BOLP. Thank you.  ⊃°HotCROCODILE...... (talk) 03:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Socionics (metaphysics) (disambiguation)

I originally created that page and deleted it because of the weird delete tag that was added. Why was it added to begin with? --Rmcnew (talk) 00:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Your "Idiots..." comment flagged up on my Anti-Vandal filter so I rolled the page back, but as you had blanked the page after that, my rollback took it back to before then. Please leave the page alone and I will mark it for speedy deletion.  ⊃°HotCROCODILE...... (talk) 00:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Striped Pajamas

Hi. I saw your comment about not changing the boy's age from nine to eight. I came to The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas from WingClips, and the clip I watched there has the prisoner saying he's eight and the Nazi's son saying he's "the same age". But that's the movie: not the book.

I've noticed in several WP articles that writers get movie and book details confused. --Uncle Ed (talk) 13:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ed, thanks for the information, very interesting, that would explain the confusion, Bruno does indeed say that he is eight in the film trailer.  ⊃°HotCROCODILE...... (talk) 13:51, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Late-2000s recession

I'm pretty sure it was funny changing all the words 'assets' to 'asses'. With these hard economic times, I feel like a little laughter might do us all a little good. There was no harm in the article. I feel that if was kept wikipedia may become a successful comedy site. Much better than that lame uncyclopedia. Please consider reverting back to my changes. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.66.46.18 (talk • contribs) 17 June 2009

Please note that your edit constitutes vandalism and as such, is not welcome.  ⊃°HotCROCODILE...... (talk) 12:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Well you're vandalizing my artistic integrity, thus impeding on my right to free speech. There was no reason to do what you have done. For that, I am extremely displeased. Perhaps others would differ as to whether it is "welcome" or not.

Love ya, G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.235.141.107 (talk) 17:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Hotcrocodile

sorry. I was worked up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.66.46.16 (talk) 00:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology.  ⊃°HotCROCODILE...... (talk) 00:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

vandalism

Thanks for reverting vandalism on one of the pages I have edited.Ft12 (talk) 01:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Livermore Police Department

I don't feel that the change I made to the article was any less "neutral" than the statement "The department is renowned for its professionalism, respect, courtesy, efficiency and community involvement." The fact is that the LPD frequently breaks their own codes and laws while on duty (myself and many people I know can attest to this, and also I have the court documents to prove it), and another fact is that because of the previous truth they do have a terrible reputation. The statement that I quoted earlier is far more non-neutral than my addition, because it is only an opinion (most likely written by someone from the police department), while I have actual documents to prove my addition to be true. All this aside, I still kept the original statement in the article, so it would be well balanced. Even though I disagree with it and felt it to be completely non-neutral, I figured I would neutralize it by adding the other side of the story. Perhaps I should have not added the word, "supposedly" before the first statement, but I think that the rest of what I added should stay. Please reconsider my addition, for I feel the population of Livermore and Livermore as a whole would be better represented with it.

"Wikipedia has a neutral point of view, which means we strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of view, presenting each point of view accurately, providing context for any given point of view, and not presenting any point of view as 'the truth' or 'the best view'." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.53.71 (talk)

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Your edits are unsourced and therefore appear to not comply with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view or Wikipedia:No original research.  ⊃°HotCROCODILE...... (talk) 11:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

How is it then that "The department is renowned for its professionalism, respect, courtesy, efficiency and community involvement" was allowed to stay when there is no source for any part of that statement? Should I have to put up scans of court documents which prove the LPD's unlawfulness and get quotes from citizens that would showcase the LPD's terrible reputation among it's population to get my edit to stay when the previous statement did not have to find any source whatsoever? That statement is downright untrue and unverified, so if my edit can't stay I request for that statement to be removed from the Livermore entry.