User talk:Beaker342: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:13, 18 November 2006

Welcome!

Hello, Beaker342, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Stifle (talk) 23:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Smart

I am considering filing an RFC against User:Supreme_Cmdr due to conduct and persistently ignoring consensus. Would you certify the basis for the complaint if I filed such an RFC? Stifle (talk) 23:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does the process entail?--Beaker342 00:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You would just need to read and sign that you agree that you have tried and failed to resolve the dispute. I will let you know when it is ready. Stifle (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Supreme Cmdr is now ready. Please review, and sign if you agree. Stifle (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OR

Look, if there's a source provided, then pretty much by definition it's not original research. If the external website is now dead, archive.org can be consulted, for instance. DS 00:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that the Santos page falls into OR under "new analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position — or, in the words of Wikipedia's co-founder Jimbo Wales, that would amount to a 'novel narrative or historical interpretation'." The page collects materials from the web to string together a theory that Santos and MLB are lying about his age and that his real birthdate is 1972, with no source whatsoever other than speculative extrapolation from said materials - i.e he went to college but no official records say he did, therefore he is four years older than he says he is. If this is a coverup, why hasn't there been a story about it anywhere else on the web, let alone from a reliable source? I really don't care if he was born in 1972 or 1976. I think that the inconsistencies are facinating, and I think the page should report them. I just think the page as it is now engages in speculation that qualifies as OR.--Beaker342 01:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eden Mor

[1] What is FU? Free use? How do you know? Don^MEGĂ|60645 01:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

You said [Y]ou'll find that we cannot use a copyrighted image merely to illustrate what someone looks like. Please enlighten me as to what the purpose of a picture is. Thanks in advance. Don^MEGĂ|60645 16:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I shall cease and desist until I go to Israel, find the woman, and snap her picture myself. <:^( *sigh* Don^MEGĂ|60645 13:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RE:Locke
Thanks for correcting my mistake. Have a nice day --Rettetast 20:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AdamC387
Beaker342, thanks for your explanation on my talk page... I've made some comments and suggestions to you there, not sure if I'm supposed to respond there or here. AdamC387 16:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. I'm fine with many of your edits, but I have some strong concerns about a couple. Please take the time to read my response on my talk page (not sure if I'm supposed to put it here or not). I don't know why I'm not allowed to edit the Kristol page and use my judgment about what I think is important for the world to know. Isn't that what Wikipedia is about? Just because you don't think the quote is relevant -- why should that trump my view that it is? AdamC387 23:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please look at my edits to Kristol. I think these are consistent with the policies you have brought to my attention. I really don't think that just because I made a mistake by citing blogs that my substantive contributions should be questioned, especially since I have agreed to correct my mistake re: blogs. AdamC387 23:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your last edits on Kristol. I'm happy with the changes you just made. I'm about to go on vacation for a week, but when I get back I'll do more research to find specific discussion of the implications of this quote. The quote is significant for many reasons not the least of which Al Franken has talked about it a lot and I know there were op-edds that discuss it and what it says a pre-war tone of extreme confidence that today is compared to a common mantra from many neocons (including Kristol) that the war would have gone great had Bush done things differently. I'll try to make it more clear when I edit it later. BTW, the original offsetting was not something I added -- someone else did that originally after I added the quote. I'm not sure why it shows up as my edit. I'm fine with removing it. AdamC387 02:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 23:50, 17 November 2006 edit AdamC387 (talk \| contribs) 38 edits →AdamC387 ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:13, 18 November 2006 edit undo AdamC387 (talk \| contribs) 38 edits →AdamC387 Next edit →
Line 38:		Line 38:

	Please look at my edits to Kristol. I think these are consistent with the policies you have brought to my attention. I really don't think that just because I made a mistake by citing blogs that my substantive contributions should be questioned, especially since I have agreed to correct my mistake re: blogs. [[User:AdamC387\|AdamC387]] 23:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)		Please look at my edits to Kristol. I think these are consistent with the policies you have brought to my attention. I really don't think that just because I made a mistake by citing blogs that my substantive contributions should be questioned, especially since I have agreed to correct my mistake re: blogs. [[User:AdamC387\|AdamC387]] 23:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

			I saw your last edits on Kristol. I'm happy with the changes you just made. I'm about to go on vacation for a week, but when I get back I'll do more research to find specific discussion of the implications of this quote. The quote is significant for many reasons not the least of which Al Franken has talked about it a lot and I know there were op-edds that discuss it and what it says a pre-war tone of extreme confidence that today is compared to a common mantra from many neocons (including Kristol) that the war would have gone great had Bush done things differently. I'll try to make it more clear when I edit it later. BTW, the original offsetting was not something I added -- someone else did that originally after I added the quote. I'm not sure why it shows up as my edit. I'm fine with removing it. [[User:AdamC387\|AdamC387]] 02:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)