User talk:MBK004

This user is in the middle of a college semester and may not respond swiftly to queries.


User Page	Talk Page	About Me	Userboxes	Battleships	Sandbox	Userspace	Contributions

WikiProject Houston

Thank you for becoming a participant! Your expertise in the areas you mentioned will surely benefit the project. Please feel free to discuss anything related to the project at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Houston and add/update the collaboration items at Wikipedia:WikiProject Houston. Also, please add the project banner/article assessment template for every new project-related article you create. The templates are found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Houston/Resources. Thanks again, Postoak 02:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft Wikiproject

I see you joined up, so a personal welcome! The Aircraft, and to a larger extent, the Aviation Wikiprojects, and all the sub-projects and taskforces are some of the most active and well organized on the encyclopedia. There's always something going on, and always lots to do. Jump in, and if you want any help, suggestions or direction, don't hesitate to ask! AKRadecki^Speaketh 03:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Article spam"

"Keep - I agree that improvements are needed, but the issue is is this article spam, and is this school notable. I don't think the article is spam and I believe the allegation is ridiculous. The school is definitely notable because of the IB degree (only available at this campus in the district), and I can confirm the GRAMMY Signature school recommendation, I live in the area and also know the band director.-MBK004 01:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)"

The nominator said it was spam because Mercedes spammed the articles. I will punish her if she doesn't stop. WhisperToMe 05:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Klein

Hey thanks for the strike!...I really appreciate the good faith move, it was really cool of you to do!! – Dreadstar † 00:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need help

{{helpme}}On my userpage, the Novice Editor Service Badge is displayed in a position I don't want it in. I would like it moved to the extreme right of the page at the same position it is in. In other words, on the other side of the contents box at the right side of the page, as an Image would be manipulated if it were not in a gallery. If someone knows how to achieve this (because I don't) I would appreciate it if they would either let me know how to do it or do it themselves. Thanks,MBK004 00:39, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

KTC 00:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was an accident

Hey, sorry about that undo on Amelie Mauresmo. I saw the vandalized page before I logged in, and logged in specifically to undo it. I guess I was viewing a cached page, and that it had already been corrected by the time I got to the history. I was trying to undo the vandalism, but I guess I accidentally undid the undo. VineetKumar 04:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Numismatics

Greetings!! I'd like to welcome you to WikiProject Numismatics. Anything you see that can be improved upon, go for it, anything that is lacking add it, anything that is all together absent, please fill us in. There are quite a few knowledgeable people of both numismatics and Wikipedia, in this little project, so don't hesitate to ask. Please be sure to read through the whole of the project pages, as we have just recently started using some of them. Hope this gets you off and contributing to the little project that makes the world go round. If you need anything don't hesitate to ask either me, or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics. Cheers, -- Chris B • talk • contribs 19:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1964 Peace Dollar

Hey, welcome to Wikipdia. I saw you asked if anyone had a 1964 Peace Dollar. I thought you'd get a kick out of the April fools joke I played on my forum members last year. Funny Stuff. Bobby ^{I'm Here, Are You There?} 00:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was great! You'll see I asked the same thing with the 1934 $100,000 Gold certificate as well. I guess there is hope one of the 64-D Peace Dollars made it out just like the 1933 Double Eagles. To me, an authentic 64-D Peace Dollar is the 'Holy Grail' and would interest me even more than any more newly-discovered authentic '33 Double Eagles (I favor American silver coins over gold coins).-MBK004 00:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starship Troopers 3

I am not new to Wikipedia and I removed that content because it is plagiarism, it is plagiarism because it was copied directly from IMDb, also it is not true because Johnny Rico is a General NOT a Colonel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by General Mannino (talk • contribs) 20:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USRD Inactivity check and news report

Hello, MBK004. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:

Please update your information at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Participants, our new centralized participant list. Those who have not done so by October 20th will be removed.
There are important discussions taking place at WT:USRD relating to whether WP:USRD, WP:HWY, or the state projects should hold the "power" in the roads projects.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 23:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Klein Independent School District

I restored an older version of the article. Is this a version you can work with? Cheers! Into The Fray ^T/C 04:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, thanks a bunch.-MBK004 05:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat. Twinkle works wonders. If you have or are able to install one of the browsers it supports (i.e. not IE), I highly suggest it. It let's you restore old versions with a couple button clicks to get around intervening edits. Into The Fray ^T/C 05:14, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments for WP:SHIPS

Hello. Thanks for all your hard work on WikiProject Ships' assessment drive! When assigning an importance rating to non-standard articles, you might want to double check the assessment criteria. Specifically I noticed that you have given ([1], [2]) Mid importance ratings to canceled ships, which we generally assess as Low importance. Also, disambiguation pages should be assessed as NA for both class and importance, rather than Low ([3], [4]). Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks, --Kralizec! (talk) 19:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing the discrepancy to my attention. I must have assessed those and others (I've changed the ones I remember) when I was in a groove and forgot about the specific ratings for the canceled ships and disambigs.-MBK004 19:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk Page

Please stop posting on my talk page, I have been a member of Wikipedia for a long time and I know that I can do whatever I want with my talk page except for some things, please stop, you are harassing me and I do not appreciate it, please stop. General Mannino 20:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've been a member of Wikipedia just as long as I (you can check via this [5] for me and this for you [6]. You are allowed a wide berth with your talk page, but as I remember reading, you are not allowed to remove the warnings from your talk page. If you would like verification I would suggest contacting an impartial admin to confirm. Also, accusing me of harassment breaches the policy on no personal attacks. This reply was copied to your own user talk page.-MBK004 21:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you just please leave me alone, I do not wish to be contacted. General Mannino 23:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, dispute resolved. Please use due diligence in the future to sign talk page comments, and use edit summaries on any future contributions. I won't press this issue anymore. I do belong to WP:CVU and accordingly usually in response to vandalism leave warnings on talk pages. Other than that, I won't contact you again.-MBK004 23:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine then...

.....What do you suppose we do about the "nicknames" section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.222.185.2 (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Establish consensus on the talk page through discussion, and later if agreed upon, implement the proposed edit.-MBK004 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JoeMonkeyPotato says he is sorry

I am sorry and it will never happen again. I was just having some fun with articles and Wikipedia doesn't have anything to practice or get good at learning all this stuff. You guys don't even have a type of Sandbox to play around with.

I will not do this to Morgan Webb's page or any other page on Wikipedia. I just have one question though. How would you be able to tell I am banned from Wikipedia if I were to hypothetically create a new account? The system just does not work. I mean absolutely no dissrespect by that. I hope to bury the hatchet by forgetting about this and not doing anymore of this behavior.—Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMonkeyPotato (talk • contribs) 14:58, 6 October, 2007 (UTC)

There is a sandbox here, and there are ways to even create your own.-MBK004 15:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link suggestion.

Seeing as you are an editor at the Royal Caribbean International article, I'd like to submit www.RoyalCaribbeanFan.com as a possible link to an unofficial web page dedicated to travel on that line. As I'm the creator of the page, I can't do so myself objectively. Could you review, as time allows, the link and provide help decide if it has enough merit to include. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NWLB (talk • contribs) 00:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following WP:COI by making the suggestion on the talk page. I will take a look and enter my comments on the issue in a few days.-MBK004 01:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USS Constitution Edit

Sorry, thanks. Flash176 05:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Battleship edit

Sorry, I will watch that from now on. 70.135.170.16 03:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How would my edit be vandalism?

What about the edit makes it vandalism? Look at the paragraph, it supports the headline. The battleship is obsolete, and the evidence is that none are left in service. What is there to debate? 204.52.215.107 05:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The point that they are obsolete would be debated by many because of the awesome capabilities of the Iowa class battleships. Right above the Today section, it says: The U.S. Marine Corps believes that the current naval surface fire support gun and missile programs will not be able to provide adequate fire support for an amphibious assault or onshore operations. This suggests that although they aren't in service, their capabilities are not obsolete and are actually valued to this day, which contradicts obsolescence. If you like, I'd suggest placing this matter up for debate on the talk page here:Talk:Battleship

-MBK004 05:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. 204.52.215.107 18:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle Scripts

I have added an edit summary. Thanks for the reminder Haysead 18:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Large denominations of United States currency

Regarding the edit; my exact phrase was strike a line; see talk. I lost my connection and had to hit the back button to submit it; looks like FireFox treats the edit line as an arbitrary field and doesn't save the information in them. I lost the line; it wont happen again. Regarding the signature; broken key is now fixed, also won't happen again. Lostinlodos 20:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template Fixing

Thanks for fixing LeoGard's unblock request. --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I saw it pop-up in the list of recent changes and decided to take a look since the edits to put it up did not have an edit summary.-MBK004 03:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment named October 2007

Please do not add unhelpful comments to people's talk pages.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.100.199 (talk) 18:06, 25 October 2007

Warnings are not unhelpful when you are reverting edits with properly sourced and referenced information.-MBK004 23:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, warnings serve a very important purpose when an editors actions do not foster good civility and discussion about a topic in question. Atari400 23:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear MBK004. I am amazed with your attitude. As an apprentice editor I imagine you want to become a full time one. Yet your behavior is severely at odds with this aspiration. You have been extremely unwelcoming to me as a new contributor, you have left unhelpful messages to me, you have failed to check back on the history if edits (if you did you will see that Atari400 was the first to revert my corrections AND then laid unfounded accusations at me claiming I was stalking.) I would have thought those wanting to become editors would be welcoming, polite and constructive. Whereas you seem to simply add terse and unhelpful comments on people's pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.100.199 (talk) 06:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(reset)Well, let me digest that...your behavior was at odds because YOU were removing information that was sourced and was properly referenced. If you thought it was wrong, the correct means to have it removed would have been to suggest it on the talk page associated with the individual article and wait for a consensus to be reached. Although being bold is encouraged, removing information that has been properly ascertained and credited goes against the common good. The messages are not unhelpful and that was already covered above with Atari400's comment and these warnings are approved by the community because they are what is loaded into Twinkle. Terse and unhelpful comments I think not. Please excuse me not replying until now, I have been in the hospital over the weekend and thereafter recuperating without computer access.-MBK004 17:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UAA backlog

The other day, you enabled the backlog notice on WP:UAA as per this edit. Unfortunately, the edit broke the automated bot removal of blocked accounts. It's been fixed now. The bots will also automatically add the backlog notice should there really be a backlog (more than 8 outstanding reports for WP:UAA) so you should not manually add the backlog notice. Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo 23:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well i quite disagree hun.

you are sooooooooo unfashionable because if you knew ANYTHING about classy styles, you'd know what Petit Bateau is. Almost any fashionably sain man would know that Petit Bateau is a multi continent company which soooooo deserves a wikipedia page. Just cause your a lesbian doesnt mean that Petit Bateau doesn't exist.--Savetheeggs 01:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- hun, i told you that this page wasn't required for speedy deletion. if you did not think i was talking to you then who did you think i was talking to sugs? you are a lesbian, which si probably why you don't know what Petit Bateau is. Wikipedia is a non biased sight babe, just cause your not familiar with the concepts doesn't mean you get to delete them<3