User talk:Kingoomieiii: Difference between revisions
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs) →The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010: new section |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
== Up for some Vandal Battle? == |
== Up for some Vandal Battle? Yes I am fag== |
||
There's a Tsunami of vandalism at the [[Tosh.0]] article going on right now that will likely last for the next day or two because of comments made on the show (Super funny show by the way if you haven't seen it yet). Thought you might be interested in watching it unfold. [[User:Nefariousski|Nefariousski]] ([[User talk:Nefariousski|talk]]) 17:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC) |
There's a Tsunami of vandalism at the [[Tosh.0]] article going on right now that will likely last for the next day or two because of comments made on the show (Super funny show by the way if you haven't seen it yet). Thought you might be interested in watching it unfold. [[User:Nefariousski|Nefariousski]] ([[User talk:Nefariousski|talk]]) 17:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 01:23, 18 February 2010
Status: Offline 
 | If you don't care for my talkpage stalking, feel free to say so! I don't want to be a nuisance. |
 |
|
 | |
| Wikipedia ads | file info – #24 |
|
Archive 1: Jan '09 - May '09 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Up for some Vandal Battle? Yes I am fag
There's a Tsunami of vandalism at the Tosh.0 article going on right now that will likely last for the next day or two because of comments made on the show (Super funny show by the way if you haven't seen it yet). Thought you might be interested in watching it unfold. Nefariousski (talk) 17:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw it. I was thinking it might be smart to lock that page whenever the show mentions wikipedia, like the Colbert Report. --King Öomie 18:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010
- News and notes: Commons at 6 million, BLP taskforce, milestones and more
- In the news: Robson Revisions, Rumble in the Knesset, and more
- Dispatches: Fewer reviewers in 2009
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Olympics
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Nat Gertler Edit War
All of the diffs should be working know I believe... would you mind letting me know if I did something wrong. I am having trouble determining if he's technically reverted more than 4 times in one 24hr period though. It sure looks to my untrained eye that he's been edit warring though. Jstanierm (talk) 23:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Tillman...
...is not worth my time. It is he who is doing the insulting, not of me, but of the wikipedia readership, by insisting on this "myth" stuff - and only for the Bible, not the Quran or anything else. He absolutely will not budge from that POV. My solution to that is to not watch those articles anymore and to let others deal with that guy. But I'm going to point his POV-pushing out when I happen to run across it. Because he's flat out, dead wrong, and he knows it. And I know he knows it, because his response boils down to, "I don't care." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I want to leave this message on your talk page
Your strong warning is uncalled for. Two changes don't call for this mis-use of a warning. And by the way, the term "myth" has NOT been dealt with. It was "dealt" with last Fall, that myth should remain out, and yet it made it back. Now you think it's dealt with?? (how convenient for you!) Why didn't you think it was dealt with last Fall when "myth" was rejected? 75.144.70.141 (talk) 20:17, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- The page's self-styled owners have taken over, to call it a fairy tale in the first sentence, thus furthering wikipedia's reputation as dominated by liberals and atheists. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- "Self-styled" doesn't mean what you think it means. Seems a pattern of phrases I can say that about. --King Öomie 20:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- Self-styled adj (prenominal) claiming to be of a specified nature, quality, profession, etc. -Collins English Dictionary
- I implore, nay, beg you to show me a diff where ANYONE claims to WP:OWN any of those pages. --King Öomie 20:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- I tried to by stock on in this talk page but the price was too high. The "Creation Myth" issue has been sorted out over and over and over just because certain users want to plug their ears and pretend it hasn't doesn't change the fact that the "Creation according to Genesis" article got consensus to be moved to Genesis creation myth, that the Creation Myth article has been stable for quite a long time and that it only seems to be fundamentalist christian editors losing their cool over this non-issue while everyone else accepts it for what it is. Please feel free to read the following Talk:Genesis_creation_myth/FAQ if you want some clarification. Nefariousski (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- Consenus by shouting down those who want to keep it neutral. You may own the page, but that doesn't mean you get to own it in silence. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
- If you want to post here, fine, but I ask that your comments have at least a facet of truth. --King Öomie 01:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
- Consenus by shouting down those who want to keep it neutral. You may own the page, but that doesn't mean you get to own it in silence. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
- I tried to by stock on in this talk page but the price was too high. The "Creation Myth" issue has been sorted out over and over and over just because certain users want to plug their ears and pretend it hasn't doesn't change the fact that the "Creation according to Genesis" article got consensus to be moved to Genesis creation myth, that the Creation Myth article has been stable for quite a long time and that it only seems to be fundamentalist christian editors losing their cool over this non-issue while everyone else accepts it for what it is. Please feel free to read the following Talk:Genesis_creation_myth/FAQ if you want some clarification. Nefariousski (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010
- News and notes: New Georgia Encyclopedia, BLPs, Ombudsmen, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Singapore
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News