User talk:Boing! said Zebedee

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) May 2010 Vandals Hey, when you come across a vandal, such as 82.25.221.4, who is obviously making a nuisance of themselves straight after a block, you can normally report them to AIV straight away rather than give them more freebies. This guy is obviously determined to make himself a pain in the arse so I've reblocked him. Keep up the good work! Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC) Pleased to hear he's blocked - and thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee 20:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC) article for deletion someone removed the article for deletion tag for Westernised Chinese language. Thoughts? --71.111.229.19 (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC) Yes, I withdrew my nomination and it was closed. -- Boing! said Zebedee 07:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC) I'm renominating the article for somewhat different reasons.--71.111.229.19 (talk) 10:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC) OK, I'll take a look -- Boing! said Zebedee 11:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC) ... My problem was that you didn't make an request for deletion page. --Albanian222 (talk) 13:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC) Yes, I did make the page - you have already commented on it -- Boing! said Zebedee 14:00, 6 May 2010 (UTC) Dandelion I know I have to delete the dandelion information, I was just trying to use that template because I do not know how to write in the code. Haven't finished my work yet... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klburns (talk • contribs) 20:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC) OK, that's cool - good luck with it -- Boing! said Zebedee 23:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC) I added notable stuff to GfxEditor page I have added some notable stuff to the GfxEditor page, please check it out. TRSI page need to be updated with reference to GfxEditor, because member of group TRSI is the developer of GfxEditor web-application. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mersicainc (talk • contribs) 04:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC) Thanks, but there's no need to notify me here - I have the page on my watchlist and I'll see any changes. I have added further comments to the AfD page. -- Boing! said Zebedee 09:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC) Bir Tawil Thank you for your Information. I have found Somerset articles in German about Nikoku. I cannot say why, but you are right, I cannot find any articles in English in Google News. Wiki source: tried to edit it and was not able to, so that I think that the government created this One. By the way here is a link: [[1]]. So now again the question: you found not a single word about Nikoku on the internet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.173.74.158 (talk) 01:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Thank you for your information. I will be interested to share it with other people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.173.74.158 (talk) 01:37, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Moutray... ...based on their reply to the FisherQueen situation, I was prepared to remove talkpage access for the duration of the block. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Yeah, I think he was pretty close to it - his reply to FisherQueen was not acceptable. But he seems to have calmed down a bit now and does actually appear to be understanding at least some of what he's been doing wrong, so I'd be tempted to give him another chance myself -- Boing! said Zebedee 15:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Electrical vs Electronic Engineering in the Computer Engineering Field In one of your edits on the Computer Engineering page, you insist on writing that CE is a mix of Electronic Engineering and CS, and that Electrical Engineering is a different thing. Well, it may be true to some extent in Europe, but it definitely isn't true in North America. In US and Canada, electronics is the main part of Electrical Engineering and the term Electronic Engineering simply doesn't exist. As a side note, I am a graduate of electrical engineering from Sherbrooke University (in Quebec, Canada) and I can tell you that among the 120 credits I gathered for my degree, only 3 were done in the field of power (energy transmission, motors, etc). All the rest concerned the information aspect of electrical engineering (electronics, signal processing, telecommunication, microprocessors, etc). That's why in Canada and USA, degrees like the B.Eng. in Electrical and Computer Engineering are so common. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.203.214.148 (talk) 06:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Well, I wasn't so much "insisting" on anything (and I didn't actually write anything in the article myself), I just reverted a change that wasn't really explained properly (in either the edit summary or the Talk page). As Wikipedia is a worldwide thing and not USA/Canada-centric (and not UK/Europe-centric either, of course), then changing it from one to the other is equally inaccurate. I'd suggest that both terms are included, specifying the geographical differences, rather than just changing it to be American/Canadian. Best regards -- Boing! said Zebedee 08:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC) I've modified Computer engineering now to use both terms in a geographically neutral way -- Boing! said Zebedee 08:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Supergrass when can i change it from present to past? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.189.123 (talk) 22:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Read the article and see if you can find out when their final tour ends, and you should then be able to work it out yourself -- Boing! said Zebedee 22:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Vandalism on Gavin Menzies pages Dear User, Thank you for your good faith edits but as you must know the links on Gavin Menzies pages were deleted by some vandals without due justification. As such the links to those original pages should be restored Thank You! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.69 (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC) If you disagree with the changes, discuss them on the Talk page - but do not edit war, and do not leave the article in a state in which it has links that link back to itself -- Boing! said Zebedee 22:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC) No, due to the fact these deletions and changes were unjustifiably made without logical reason, the article and links should be restored and returned to it's original form temporarily, and then discussions can continue on whether or not to delete or change —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.69 (talk) 22:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Then resolve that issue FIRST before adding back the links, because if you add back the links first they are circular! -- Boing! said Zebedee 22:29, 12 May 2010 (UTC) And another thing, we are not vandals and we are NOT edit warring. Check the history and you see it is the other users who continually delete without just cause and post derogatory libelious statement on Gavin Menzies page, which technically is a Biography. And as such it must conform to Wikipedia's official policy on Biographies, that they must not be libelious against the person. You should check out the vandalism and bigoted edit warring committed by ClovisPt and the vandalism and hostiles messages sent to me by John Smith's Those pages that were deleted were unjustifiably deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.69 (talk) 22:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Repeatedly reverting each other's edits IS edit-warring! I am not taking sides here - all I am asking you to do is stop leaving the article in a nonsensical state in which it has links that link back to itself - sort out your disputes FIRST, and then only put those links back when they link to separate articles! If you succeed in getting the original articles reinstated, then put the links back AFTERWARDS! -- Boing! said Zebedee 22:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC) As I explained before (but for some reason you decided to remove my messages from your talk page), no articles have been deleted - they have been redirected. And you've threatened to have me blocked (for some reason), as well as stating that even if you were blocked (presumably for breaking the rules) you'd just create more accounts - so please don't set yourself out as some sort of victim here. That said if you would use the talk pages it would be more constructive. John Smith's (talk) 22:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC) When I said to use the talk page, I was hoping you'd be constructive. Instead you've jumped on a soapbox with your header "The Links to the 1421 and 1434 articles have been deleted by vandals who are trying to suppress this information from public". John Smith's (talk) 22:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Do you think the two of you (and anyone else involved) could take this over there, rather than arguing here on my Talk page please? I take no side in the dispute - I just request that the article is not left in a half-state with links that link back to itself -- Boing! said Zebedee 22:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC) The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010 News and notes: Backstage at the British Museum In the news: In the news WikiProject report: WikiProject Essays Features and admins: Approved this week Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2010 (UTC) remove this the plot or summary of Two Men and a Wardrobe roman polanski film is wrong it has nothing to do with this given in this wiki On a sunny day, two men with a three-door wardrobe come out of a sea. The wardrobe seems to chain the two men together as they struggle with this piece of furniture through the beach and then throughout a city. There is no acceptance of them in the world--the by passers are either scared of them or hostile towards them. Finally, they arrive back at a beach and then disappear in the sea. It deals with perceptions of the same thing by different people, how they react, and why It is considered an allegory which illustrates how a relationship between two friends causes them trouble in everyday life. The two men always carry a wardrobe, but when other people see them carrying it, they run away or try to get rid of the two men, as if they were afraid of the wardrobe. Or is it something else? please remove this nonsense.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.136.64 (talk) 21:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC) I'm not qualified to judge, but it seems to reasonably match what it says at IMDB, here. Now that might be wrong, but if you think it is, it's best if you discuss it on the Talk page first and present some sources to show a more accurate plot summary -- Boing! said Zebedee 21:27, 18 May 2010 (UTC) I've edited it now to be a simple factual summary based on what I can find at a couple of review sites, and have left it with no analysis -- Boing! said Zebedee 21:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC) Talk:The Number 23 Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:The Number 23 are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. 71.77.20.119 (talk) 00:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Well, thanks for the egg-sucking lesson, but I'm not interested in discussing any topics and I'm not asking any questions - I just reverted your removal of some very old Talk page content, as I don't think you should be refactoring other people's old comments. It's years old now, and if you're worried about it cluttering up the page then it should probably be archived rather than just removed - but I'm not really bothered enough to argue about it. -- Boing! said Zebedee 01:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Also, don't template the regulars. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 01:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Yes, that too - thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee 01:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Why did you template me? How do you define a "regular"? 71.77.20.119 (talk) 02:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC) It's generally taken to mean registered users who have been around a good while and have a lengthy track record - but I'm not really bothered as I'm happy to assume you were acting in good faith, as indeed I was. Best regards -- Boing! said Zebedee 02:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC) I was actually referring to the IP templating BSZ. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 02:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Smarstim Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:HalJor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.232.170 (talk) 11:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Please discuss this on the article's Talk page at Talk:Erotic electrostimulation, and not on a multitude of individual User Talk pages -- Boing! said Zebedee 11:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC) no discuss on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:HalJor as per WP protocol as this was the first mod involved. If you don't know how to mod, don't mod! 95.149.232.170 (talk) 12:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)