User talk:Kbh3rd

You can use this link to add comments to the bottom of the page. And please be kind.

Archive of this page from the beginning to May 24, 2005
Archive of this page from June 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005
Archive of this page from January 1, 2006 to March 31, 2006
Archive of this page from April 1, 2006 to March 19, 2007
Archive of this page from April 10, 2007 to September 25, 2007

Fed Board of Governors

Just as it is important information to know that all BoGs (who have 14yr terms) were appointed by GWB, its important to know they're Jewish. For a race/religion that represents at most 5% of the US population, I find it notable (for whatever reason) that they hold 100% of the seats on the fed. Don't you?

Wrong Person

The paragraph that someone else added in September 2007 to the article about me does not pertain to me. It is either about a different person, or false (or possibly both). I vaguely recall webmentions of a different person with the same name being interested in cars, so it might be that person. I don't know him, am not related to him, and have never communicated with him.

You never used the bio I sent last year. The only addition, which I think Wikipedia doesn't use, is that I'm in "Who's Who in America 2008" that comes out this month (October 2007).

Please disambiguate the article about me, and supplement it however you think you should. Thank you. Norman Sperling, editor The Journal of Irreproducible Results, nsperling@california.com . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.56.100 (talk) 03:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed that paragraph about "Pimp My Ride". A very brief googling didn't show me where that might have been based on someone else. (I've never seen that show, though my wife and I did see an installment of "Trick My Truck" while eating lunch at a roadhouse in southern Missouri. Very strange.)

I've been cognizant that I should update that article, but haven't made the time to do it. I'll try to get to it this weekend. Perhaps I owe it to you for being so good about observing Wikipedia's recommendation against editing articles too close to home. --Kbh3^rd talk 03:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I didn't make it on Sunday. Sometime this week I promise! --Kbh3^rd talk 05:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Corona Del Sol High School

Quit being a jerk and deleting all of my input. You don't even know the school. Why don't you cut it out you wikipedia bully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.181.2 (talk) 04:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've only reverted 72.208.181.2 once on that page. Perhaps you also edit from 72.208.177.18? Let's examine some of the high-quality edits from those IPs...

"Members must have GPA > 3.7 and complete 24 hours of community service per day."[1] Per day?? Citation needed
Philosophy Club: "But they usually talk about nothing."[2] I personally believe that philosophy consists of unintelligible answers to imponderable questions, but I don't put that into Wikipedia articles. POV.
Ping Pong Club: "It is possibly one of the greatest clubs for the benefit of mankind."[3] Puh-leez! POV.
"Señors 08!!" [4] So very encyclopedic.
"In addition, trumpet soloist has been an outstanding assistant principal"[5] Really? POV

Please read Ownership of articles; understand that all articles must meet Wikipedia's standards and that because an article is about your school does not make it your personal playground.

--Kbh3^rd talk 15:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images and Commons

I'm not sure if you still do, but please avoid uploading (free) images to Wikipedia. They should be uploaded to Commons. The reason I come here is that I tried to link to an image of rye from a Commons image, but you have uploaded another image under the same name here (Image:Secale cereale.jpg). Would you be able to move it there? Richard001 23:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are so annoying

You can be so annoying with your constant reverts. Have you ever considered that the "vandalism" some people carry out are acts of civil disobedience? Which believe it or not is a constitutional right in my country. Do not try to block me again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.210.117 (talk) 04:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are so wrong. --Kbh3^rd talk 13:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from SLUH

Just wanted to say a word of thanks for your constant vigilance of the SLUH site. I check it every day I'm in the office, but you've usually found and corrected any vandalism before I see it. It is a big help. Patke@sluh.org 13:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SAVVIS Reverts war looming?

I made specific notes on the TALK page trying to avoid a war, and you have chosen to make changes to the page that have survived careful edits by dozens of editors for several years, all without a peep on the talk page of the article in question. While I believe your recent reverts to be both poor judgement and to have been carried out in arrogance (ie, no attempt to join in the communication process), I am trying nevertheless to reach you directly so we can discuss this prior to asking for higher intervention. The changes you are trying to delete are central to the paragraph (without the line you continually delete, the title endowed by the press makes no sense, and it was these two interlocking items which resulted in McCormicks [forced] resignation. I am a personal, first party witness (who can prove this through over four hundred MSM news articles that place me there, including such notable outlets as the BBC, Washington Post, CNET, etc.: I am definitely a party with first hand personal knowledge. I have also bent over backwards to maintain NPOV - to the point of standing by silently while entire relevent portions of this article have been butchered in the past (by IPs registered to Savvis legal, Savvis engineering, and even Savvis executive departments. I did this to avoid an edit war, and because it was possible to cleanly impart this information in ways that made all parties agree the article was fair, balanced, and accurate.

Now, after a LONG period of general agreement that this article was accurate, NPOV, balanced, etc., you have arrived - apparently without looking at ANY of the information on the talk page nor investigating the material itself, and made the opening overtures in an edit war.

I am asking you to please contact me. I don't think you actually read talk pages, so I'm not sure this will work, but I'm gonna try it, as it's both the right thing to do, and WP official policy. Next monday, if I have heard no response, I will be forced to ask for assistance and possible intervention by an editor with The Powers. Please help us to avoid this becoming a bloody and thereby useless excersize of mere bile: contact me so we can try and get this resolved. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Measl (talk • contribs) 10:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Get a grip. This little edit was a simple prose-tightening copyedit to remove excess verbiage that to me is very obvious from preceeding content and therefore unnecessary on purely stylistic principles of English composition. If you think the article somehow falls apart without it, you can always add it back. Then try to grok this. --Kbh3^rd talk 18:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Norman Sperling

Thank you! Totally correct and well-proportioned.

I prefer to keep my birth date private purely because of its potential mis-use by baddies. I will tell you privately by eMail if you really MUST know.

Best wishes, Norm Sperling —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.32.85 (talk) 16:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter to much to me, just seems to be right for biographies. Perhaps it can wait until we have the other date to go along with it, sometime in the very, very distant future. :-) Thanks. --Kbh3^rd talk 03:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nick heath article vandalism

Oops - I was wondering how things worked on wikipedia. I did not intend for it to be a bad thing. I meant to undo it but I forgot. I'm sorry and I will not do it again. Sorry to bother you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.177.248 (talk) 02:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sperling image

I overlooked this, but could you multilicense your modifications under the original three licenses as well? I licensed it under the GPL so that it's compatible with GPL images (for example, screenshots of Linux). The way it is now, the cropped version cannot be merged with GPL images, nor with cc-by-sa-3.0 images.

In short, I don't want a GPL project to restrict a Creative Commons project from using GPL derivatives of my work.

SteveSims 21:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember me?

Perhaps you remember me kbh3rd. I gave you some trouble a month or so ago all in the name of civil disobedience and my anti globalization stance. I have realized that wikipedians do not respect this and will revert any blatant vandalism (namely a certain kbh3rd and cluebot). Thus I have developed a new guise. Over the past few weeks through the use of several of my own computers and some public ones I have develped a number of new user accounts. With these accounts I have made small factual changes that have decreased wikipedias accuracy significantly. I literally have succesfully vandalized hundreds of wikipedia pages without anyone realizing. This defeats my purpose. So now I have generaed a list of the vndalized pages and give them to you. I feel a little bad for my work as I too am a lover of history and free speech, but it is my values that drive me to do this. On each page I list I have vandalized it in some small yet significant way. Being the do gooder that you are you will try to fix them all. Your porogotive, not mine.

Kideo TV Ōtemachi Candy Atherton Darby Conley Xantus's Murrelet Grater Ludwig Kögl Bobby Taylor & the Vancouvers USS Wadsworth John D. Craddock William P. Rogers Crook, County Durham Liberalism in Belgium Field Day (band) Erin Mouré How the West Was Won (Led Zeppelin album Music of Punjab

Oh by the way you're a pissant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.39.106 (talk) 22:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:216.56.27.115 needs reblock?

While putting another vandal warning on User talk:216.56.27.115 I noticed all the notices. Can you stomp on them again? I'll go clean up the rest of their recent mess but won't bother with more messages. (SEWilco 18:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hotmail classic logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hotmail classic logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Senator Larry Craig

Since you have the following in this article:

Former Wham! lead singer George Michael was arrested for "engaging in a lewd act" with another man in a public restroom. His first post-incident single was "Outside" which had a music video with disco ball styled urinals.

it is inconsistent and illogical to eliminate the reference to Senator Larry Craig's conviction for admitted misconduct in a public restroom. It was a short reference with a link to the Craig article and to the NY Times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.207.182 (talk) 11:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both references were deleted from the article. Neither arrest had any entrisic relationship to urinals, which is subject of the article. (The use of urinal imagery in the George Michael video is perhaps related but not necessarily worth mentioning.) The Craig affair had nothing at all to do with urinals. There were probably some in the same room, but so what? How is the device that is the subject of the article related? It is not. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and every fleeting news item does not need to be dumped into every tenuously related artcle. --Kbh3^rd talk 14:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Curiousities" and "Trivia" should be consolidated and put under the better title "Popular culture"

That's my suggestion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.207.182 (talk) 12:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks much for reverting the vandalism on my user page and for blocking that vandal. TimidGuy 12:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Suany

Oops, sorry, I was using a nifty tab installed on the top of my pages to request speedy deletion, and since you had deleted it since I loaded the page, it recreated it. My apologies. Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 04:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks for the note. --Kbh3^rd talk 05:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake

Hello, I just wanted to let you know, I think you were mistaken on this edit here. Please be a bit more careful. :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Correction

I am not vandalizing. You are doing a poor job as an editor. Please be more careful in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.230.182 (talk) 00:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Disingenuous denials will get you blocked more quickly.

--Kbh3^rd talk 00:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Parkway West HS logo.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Parkway West HS logo.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Zedla (talk) 05:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So let it be written; so let it be done. --Kbh3^rd talk 21:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Page Vandalism

Thank you very much for catching that! :) GlassCobra 21:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank-you for correcting my spelling error on the Saint Louis (disambiguation) page. Calling me a 'looser' might have been a slightly heavy-handed move, though :) JERRY ^talk _contribs 03:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raymond Leo Burke

Would you please take a look at the article about the Archbishop of St. Louis-Raymond Leo Burke? Some unregistered users made some changes to the article and I am not sure what they took out. Also I inserted some citations from the La Crosse Tribune about Bishop Burke leaving La Crosse for St. Louis in 2003-2004 and when he return to La Crosse concerning the Guadalupe Shrine last weekend. I do not know if you people would make use of the St. Louis papers as citations about Archbishop Burke. Thank you-RFD (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the changes by anonymous editors between November 28 and your recent series of edits can be viewed here. Including your changes is here. Use the history link at the top of the page to see what changes were made between whatever versions interest you. You can go back further if you like. The undo links will often let you undo a particular edit even if it's not the last one, depending on how interwoven the intervening changes are. See also Help:Reverting if you're unfamiliar with it.

I don't own that article; no one does. Though I've reverted vandalism on the page and perhaps made some minor copyedits to it, you seem much more interested and familiar with the subject. It appears that you've been here a while. Please feel free to make what proper changes are necessary. And "we people" (whoever we might be) accept newspaper citations in many contexts. --Kbh3^rd talk 19:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your comments and your help.-RFD (talk) 20:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Statler Bros-All American Country-1991.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Statler Bros-All American Country-1991.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cupid

HELP - i'm confused..... it seems like you think that i am "promoting" businesses or commerce or a soap box or something with my postings on CUPID and maybe Santa..... so i'm confused. i'm a mom and an anthropologist (and a writer) and i found a great site that re-examines the holiday myths and uses the characters to look at diversity and globalization and other issues. it's not a commerce site, no one is making any money anywhere, yet my posts got taken down as violating some policy that i guess i don't understand.... i was trying to take part in a discussion about these characters in pop culture, that's all. but the posts promoting movies (like the new Vince Vaughn film) remain. I'm not trying to promote anything other than a cool depiction of beloved holiday characters as a representation of how cultures use these characters throughout time....

in the case of cupid it said i had inserted advertising? i didn't mean to, and i don't know that would be since nothing is being sold anywhere.....

honestly, not trying to sell or scam anything. just love the idea of cupid as a cute black girl - reminding us that the spirit of these myths are what matter, and they live in all of us.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hudroy (talk • contribs) 01:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]