User talk:Bongwarrior

Drug abuse supports prostition, theft and even terrorism. Grown men should not promote it as though it were a bit of a giggle. It derides the credibilty of wikipedia

I'm still researching more data on my subject is this article not good enough?

Brandon A. Harnois

I'm afraid we have to send this one to AFD--(s)he removed the PROD notice, and hoaxes don't qualify for CSD (although I think it is a foregone conclusion that this will not pass). Thanks!--Xnuala (talk) 19:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for letting me know, sorry if i used the speedy tag improperly. --Bongwarrior 20:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, in a case like this it would be a lot simpler if we could just speedy it, but I think the rules are there to prevent the cases that aren't so obvious from being speedied without a chance to be improved. Thanks for helping keep Wikipedia accurate!--Xnuala (talk) 20:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: speedy

Sorry if I was little terse. Something like "same Rob G. (also speedied)" would've been a little more informative. I know the taggers and the deleters are all in a hurry though. John Reaves (talk) 22:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no problem. It wasn't speedied at the time, but I figured it was only a matter of time. I didn't bother to speedy the second article because he made some vague claims that I didn't feel like looking up. All's well that ends well. --Bongwarrior 22:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Steel

I was going to give it a ((in-universe)) tag. "This article or section describes a work or element of fiction in a primarily in-universe style and may need cleanup. " I did a google. Its real. Real fake. But he exists. Since you put it up for speedy. I'll let you decided if you want to possibly add this tag, or lower to a regular nomination for afd. Its real just the article doesn't need to be written as if he is real not a character. Can't really tell how notable and I'd rather be doing RCpatrol and other stuff than researching him :-) --Xiahou 23:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took it off, do it your way. I don't think it will matter much either way. It just looks like some entertaining nonsense. --Bongwarrior 00:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

someone else got it with a interesting delete tag I haven't seen before. I agree it souned real odd. --Xiahou 00:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

J. Bryan Scott

The J. Bryan Scott is a more than legitimate article. The site has had lots of coverage and serves over 200,000 page views per month. Please reconsider your speedy deletion action. s. stallings 02:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did reconsider, but someone else has taken it to articles for deletion. You can make your case there, and others will do the same. --Bongwarrior 03:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Speedy... of Hillbilly Techno Ranch

Hey, dude, why mark a page for speedy deletion barely five minutes after it is created? Not everyone is a Wikimaster, lv. 63, and some of us like to build something piece by piece when we aren't entirely comfortable with the knowledge we have of the scripting language used... Seriously... Just trying to bring attention to something new and “interestin”(sic), only to have you quickly mark us for deletion... Come on... Passive aggression isn't my stronghold, so please be a little more considerate for us noobs...

I have contested the speedy deletion, but as a man who respects the rules set in place, I have not removed your request for speedy deletion... TheDefiniteArticle 07:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AND Atleast7isbiggerthanRowan's! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

I just thought I would bring this to your attention, too...

TheDefiniteArticle 07:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for respecting the rules. Please understand no one is picking on you for being new. Simply put, neither the label nor the band meet Wikipedia's notability requirements for music at this time. If that changes in the future, you are more than welcome to resubmit them both. --Bongwarrior 07:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for having the decency to explain - being new plays little role in my concern (this is in fact not a new concept to me, it is simply a lack of practical understanding of the scripting used in Wiki stuff) - and in the meantime I appreciate your forwardness. I'm sure it will not be too long until we can do all this again... TheDefiniteArticle 08:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Name

Not sure exactly why, but your User Name is genius and is cracking me up. Jmlk17 08:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, I try. --Bongwarrior 08:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Ramone Cooper

WELL , We did put do not delete the page . we are working on it ! could yooh at least give the page an hour after being created or so ... we just made it , my sistaer and i.

I got it covered

lol...i got it covered.. i found the template and I am goin to add it now..but thans anyway..oh and i can see u were about to delete the page me and ma sister (the girl in tha comment above dis one aka Nicki Bookie..=])made.. u reallly should be a little more considerate when wikipedians put things like "we are working on it dont delete" no offensee..=] Push It Baby!! ..Dats Muh Song!!..=] (Tay) 22:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None taken. Likewise, there is an under construction template you can use for new articles, rather than "DO NOT DELETE DIS PAGE CAUSE WE STILL EDITIN IT" which really doesn't belong on an article page under any circumstances. Thanks. --Bongwarrior 22:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol thanks..=] Me and my sis against da world!!! 22:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

J. J. M. Roberts

I saw you had notability concerns about J. J. M. Roberts. I expressed the same, but another user suggested that holders endowed chairs at major universities are almost always notable. If that's correct, I guess the question is, Is Roberts an exception to the rule? --Flex (talk|contribs) 12:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. It looks like he wrote some books too. I'm removing the tag, and hopefully someone can expand the article. --Bongwarrior 17:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arson Committee

What more information needs to be added?

References, for one. Two college newspaper citations and two MySpaces doesn't cut it. I tried to look for some myself, but google yielded very few related hits. More than ten minutes of recorded output, for another. A label. Right now, the whole thing smacks of blatant self-promotion, and that isn't what Wikipedia is for. --Bongwarrior 00:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

is there a way i can get that page(s) back so i can save it and re-enter it when they have more references?

Any admin should be able do that for you, I think.--Bongwarrior 00:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

.

What right does a burned out stoner have to tell ANYONE they are not credible?

You know, I get that all the time.--Bongwarrior 14:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What the fuck, bongwarrior? Really dude, please don't infringe upon our liberty to cover our hometown. The meaningless stats do little to reflect the true character of elkhorn, however the "dating scene" section certainly does.

Happy Bong Hitting...

I wasn't infringing anything, I was reverting obvious vandalism. --Bongwarrior 01:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Uhland, Texas. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Just because one user is violating 3RR doesn't give you permission to violate it while reverting them. —dgies^t_c 05:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my humble apologies. --Bongwarrior 05:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: G.E. Stinson

Hey, I wanted to tell you that I removed your speedy tag from this article. He actually is a notable musician---one of the founders of the band Shadowfax. But, the article is terrible, completely amateurish. I have tagged it for improvement. Cheers! ---Cathal 05:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, my mistake. I saw the myspage pages at the end and that sort of convinced me it wasn't for real.--Bongwarrior 05:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware it was a copy-vio! My god it was so awful, I was sure a 12 year old wrote it! Oh well... A notable musician, regardless, but what a dreadful article. Thanks for your message. ---Cathal 14:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: removing vandalism to my talk page

Got the bugger an indefinite block. Party on BW.Notmyrealname 21:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what warning to use

when someone blanks their User Talk page to delete warnings, is there another warning we can use? if now, what is the next step? I'm talking about HaboFreakNumber2's talk page --Jru Gordon 08:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I think they're all at WP:UTM, but I went to look and I didn't see one that fit. It's late, I might just be missing it. --Bongwarrior 08:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

vandilism

That is not vandiilism. It is a picture someone showed me of Bob Saget. It should not be deleted, as its liscence is also correct. Please explain why you deleted it.

I already have. See Talk:Bob Saget. --Bongwarrior 23:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason to delete it. It looks and is is acting like Bob Saget, and has a correct liscence, scince the owner took the picture with his own cellphone.

Mah bad yo

Yo bro mah fault for the edit of Saddam's page. The thing i added about Lee Hotti wuz vandalism i'm mad sorry yo. However i coulda swore that it is "Hung" and not "Hanged" therefore i'm appealing your revert bro. W/e yo ur obviously not Italian. AIght i gotta go gell mah hair for da crowbar later, 1 yo

Reliable sources are required per WP:BLP policy

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Bob Saget, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Please find and add a reliable citation to your recent edit so we can verify your work. Uncited information may be removed at any time. Thanks for your efforts, and happy editing! Burntsauce 23:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

liscinceing concern

There is no reason to delete it the Bob Saget in his stand up comedy. It looks more like him than the previous picture, and acts like Bob Saget too. It has a correct liscence, scince the owner took the picture with his own cellphone. I don't understand why you keep reverting the picture.

FYI, this guy's trying to say you support the picture's inclusion now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Josh97 San Diablo 16:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, and thanks for setting the record straight. --Bongwarrior 17:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

Interesting how quickly you've reverted the vandalism. Lol.

Boring67890 07:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC) Boring[reply]

Clark Magnet High School vandalism removal

That page looks like a mess. I tried my best to find the correct version, then moved along...—Gaff ^ταλκ 07:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion: Netheroth Kaythos

Yeah, I'm not really sure what I am supposed to do to make my page more acceptable. Any advice on that?

Editor review

I reviewed you. Yechiel Man 08:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Yechie, rock on. --Bongwarrior 13:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Jerome Price

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Jerome Price, by Sam42, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Jerome Price seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Jerome Price, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Jerome Price itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 09:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weird, I never created this article. I notified the bot operator. --Bongwarrior 13:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Bongwarrior. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that a quick check of your last 5k contributions has shown that you often not warn users when reverting. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. «Snowolf ^{How can I help?}» 10:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You and Your Wikipedia habits

I couldn't help but notice that you seem to take it upon yourself to rid wikipedia of mindless crap, however most of these are decent and fine submissions, and I see know reason for you to just to go around and delete peoples hard work. So please stop.

Thank you, The Blammer

Can you give any examples of edits that I wrongly reverted? --Bongwarrior 08:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I can, the Niddrie Secondary Collage page, the paragraph about Anne Fox didn't seem to be mindless crap. As well as the fact that you messed up a guy page when it was half finished--The Blammer 08:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not mindless crap, but it was one person's uncited opinion, not really important to the article, and needed to be removed. I don't know who the "guy" was. --Bongwarrior 09:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how it isn't important because it relates to the principal and the things said there were ture because I go to NSC and can easily back all the things said. And I belive that the guy was Reepicheep85 --The Blammer 09:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your tireless efforts fighting the vandals, especially when they hit my user page! —Gaff ^ταλκ 16:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Stromboli Master...

Don't you like strombolis? I think a Strombolian would be proud to have such a delicassey named after their land.

A stromboli is okay. But it's no calzone. --Bongwarrior 08:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Bongwarrior! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel 13:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Vandalism

Hey! I'm pretty new to editing Wikipedia (though I have had an account for quite some time). I see you have been contributing quite a lot so I thought I'd ask you a question. I noticed your very diplomatic comment on Iikkoollpp's talk page. Is this the usual way to "warn" vandals? Do common user like me do this at all, or do we leave it to administrators? Fenrisulfr talk 00:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Fenrisulfr, that's just a warning template, which you can find here. That particular one was the test1 template, which I try to use for a first offense. There are different warning levels and messages depending on the situation. They aren't just for admins or anyone special, all users are encouraged to revert and warn vandals as needed, but always try to assume good faith and remember what appears to be vandalism might just be a clumsy edit by an inexperienced user. You can go to Wikipedia:Vandalism for more information. Take care. --Bongwarrior 01:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Think I get it now :) He's still doing his thing though... Fenrisulfr talk 01:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, if there's a particular vandal you're having trouble with, you can report them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism after they have been properly warned. An admin will look into the matter and block them if needed. Hope this helps. --Bongwarrior 01:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Award

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		While this is for anti-vandalism work, of which you do a wonderful job, I figured this barnstar looks a bit nicer ;). But keep up the great work! Jmlk 1 7 05:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terry delano moore, et al

At random, tonight I decided to do some recentchanges patrolling. So far, I've seen at least four non-notable biography articles have their speedy tags removed. Is that really common? Nyttend 03:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not too common IMO. If anything, they remove it once, get warned for it, and put on the hangon tag instead. --Bongwarrior 03:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Bonds

A friend and I are discussing your changing back of what I wrote. I am confused because I think everyone knows that what I wrote is true. My friend agrees that what I said is understood by everyone to be undeniably true, but he says that he thinks you changed tit beccause what I wrote is not "encyclopedia style" writing. But I thought that anyone could write here, so maybe you can explain what I did wrong.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.17.251.233 (talk) 05:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted this edit because it was a blatant violation of Wikipedia's neutral point of view and biography of living persons policies. I'm not a big Barry Bonds fan myself, and I'm not too crazy about him getting the record, but until there's proof... --Bongwarrior 05:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MadAngels Blocked

Good news MadAngels has been indef blocked, sorry I couldn't revert the last two bits of vandlsim but my browser locked up. :) --Lwarf ^Talk! 09:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw, I was keeping track :P Thanks for helping me out. --Bongwarrior 09:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page yesterday! Cheers --RandomHumanoid^(⇒) 05:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop vandalising Wikipedia

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to WP:3RR, you will be blocked from editing. Come inside 07:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm terrified. For what it's worth, this user has four edits. Three of them are nonsense edits to Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, and one is this warning. --Bongwarrior 07:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is wrong with you

My image is so much better than the original. Whats going to happen now? Im proberly going to revert it 3 times and then you will block me without negociation. No wonder wikipedia is going down the pan. I read about its faulres in an article in PC World this morning. --Yeald and Moore 07:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UAA

Not sure where you were going with this, but the user was blocked indefinitely... Which is why the bot removed it. Grand master ka 06:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, he was only blocked for 24 hours. It should have been indefinite, which is why I tried to re-add it. --Bongwarrior 06:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Had A Feeling The User Would Be Back

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage. I've never seen someone get that mad that his non-notable band wasn't fit for Wikipedia before. Thanks again. :) -WarthogDemon 15:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you section

Thank you for fixing the vandalism of my user page. (At least Rawhider didn't claim that I had a little one.) —SlamDiego_←T 12:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for fixing the vandalism on my user page, John Turner (architect) and Paley Street. Glad that the good guys outnumber the bad. Nancy Skittle 09:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to extend my thanks to you for fixing the vandalism on my user page and talk page. I couldn't believe it, I hadn't had my page vandalised at all, then two seperate people within ten minutes! It's amazing what a bit of new page watching can result in.Teiresias84 06:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent report to WP:AIV

Hi, I removed your block request to AIV, as you provided no evidence for us to follow on. Please put yourself in our position, if we were to block someone with no evidence or information, then we could leave ourselves open to all sorts of problems. Also AIV isn't the place for sockpuppet problems and they should be address to WP:SSP, If you have any further questions don't hesitate to give me a shout. Cheers ^Khukri 08:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be specific as to which one you removed? I believe everyone I've reported has been blocked. --Bongwarrior 08:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

S'ok I got to AIV after Nate1499 had been blocked, and hadn't seen the previous. Nate1500 was blocked at the same time I removed it, so no problems. Thanks ^Khukri 09:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism to your talk page/sockpuppetry

Greetings Bongwarrior! Just wanted to let you know that after reverting some vandalism to your user talk page, it looked suspicious so I reported it here as suspected sockpuppetry if there's anything you want to do to add to or modify the case. It's my first time reporting, so I wasn't sure if I had done it correctly. Here's hoping your talk page stays vandalism free! :) Eliz81 14:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Eliz, and thanks for creating the report. I've been taking it on a case by case basis so far, but that's probably a better way to do it. I'll be sure to add to it later. Take care. --Bongwarrior 14:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hey Bongwarrior,

The vandalism you have reverted is for statistical reasons and would have been reverted later on today if it was not already. Apologies for any inconvenience. You responded in under one minute. These statistics we collect will be used in the media and, will assist in improving the Wikiemdia Foundations's image. If you need to talk to me I am on #wikipedia as user symode09

Thanks and apologies, Wikivandaltest2007 05:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:NuclearFart

Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. Unfortunately your report has been removed due to the username not violating policy, or not being blatant enough for a block. Please remember you should only post blatant infringements on this page. Others should be discussed with the user in question first, using the {{UsernameConcern}} template. A request for comment can be filed if the user disagrees that their name is against the username policy, or has continued to edit after you have expressed your concern. Thank you. Andre (talk) 08:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adam bulkley

Don't you think that this page should be moved to this user's userpage, since it seems to be about himself? He might just be confused about where to put this information. KJS77 06:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it matters much. It's mostly nonsense, there doesn't appear to be much salvageable content. I don't usually move it to userspace unless it's pretty clear that's where it belongs. I figure if the deleting admin wants to, he can. Take care. --Bongwarrior 06:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Man!

Geez dude, you have people gunning for you lately! This is the third time in as many days I've seen someone just get enraged when you revert their vandalism. Keep up the great work, and, as always, happy editing! Jmlk 1 7 08:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've noticed that too. Thanks very much for the kind words. --Bongwarrior 08:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]