User talk:Peridon

Hi

Thank you so much for the sandbox warning. Here's a token of my appreciation. Please feel free to thank me on my user talk page once you finish watching the video.

Thank you. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVtGb7NigCw

Just in case anyone wants to talk to me.... Peridon (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

marked 'Erodov' as spam

Could you suggest changes then? Stonedsurd (talk) 22:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the removal -- although the fact that you put the tag is evidence that you *did* feel something was wrong, so I am still open to any suggestions for improvement :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonedsurd (talk • contribs) 22:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I rather dislike the hand-formatting on wikipedia, can't seem to get the hang of it :/ Also, I'm working on the references, but it might take me a while. And it's not my site :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonedsurd (talk • contribs) 22:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doing anti-vandalism

Hi, I noticed you have been undoing the vandalism of an editor. Rather than get in an edit war with them, it would be best to undo their changes once or maybe twice, leaving them a message on their talk page, each time. That way the next editors who come along can consider whether to block them from editing. (I just left a message on [1] myself, that cover all the changes you made to this point.)

Let me know if you'd be interested in using one of the anti-vandalism tools that automates this process. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 22:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of the advantages to using a standard tool is that, since anti-vandalism editors usually make the same evaluations, you aren't put in the position of being in an anti-vandalism edit war. The articles are brought in an orderly manner, so that even if a vandal reverts, the next anti-vandalism editor will probably see it. Here's a list of tools. I use Mike's Wiki Tool, which is very fast for me, but not others, and has some limitations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cleaning_up_vandalism/Tools Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ta muchly. Will look into those. Peridon (talk) 22:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this is the correct place to put this comment, but your statement regarding CBS Synge Street is incorrect, it is not vandalism, do you know the person in question that you keep removing from the CBS page? This is all factual, including the link to the discogs page, do you think it was just plucked from thin air? If this is not the correct place to put this comment please let me know. Regards User Talk: PC007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pc007 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if he is really notable - the description of him appeared to be one of those schoolboy attempts at getting importance. If you leave out the tea boy and T shirt bits and concentrate on his area of achievement, it'll give a more encylopaedic look to it. I take it he's a musician. Not in my areas, I think (classical, folk, world and metal). One source of trouble on Wikipedia is that people use it (or rather, try to use it...) as a vehicle for boosting a business or career. It's not for that. There could be new sites opened (WikiSpam and WikiPuff?) for these things. Might suggest it some time..... Peridon (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC) PS - This would have been better as a new section at the end, but it doesn't worry me.[reply]

Liberty Horn and typos

...isn't the spell checker amazing? (I just wish I could tell it "ignore proper names and British spellings.) Queenmomcat (talk) 17:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob's Pillow Editing

I agree with your opinion there is not alot to change so how do you get rid of the the tag? (Camilittle (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Fivemiletown

Oh no it's alright. Live the section on it - I don't mind. unknowneditor

Jason the French

Re this, I'm afraid your edit summary is a bit obscure. Are you saying you can understand the text and it's nonsense? --Dweller (talk) 15:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks nonsense to me. There's no stops, only commas, and there are English words that the French don't use. As to sense - I can read French to a fair degree (I've read Mauriac, Sagan and Bazin in the Original) and can speak it (best when in France), but this sounds like a cross between a bad dream and a poor attempt at a thriller. It's hard to work out what's going on. It's definitely not encyclopaedic. Peridon (talk) 15:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. --Dweller (talk) 16:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha

Assuming that wasn't sarcastic, thank you. In reality i just needed the format and a few seconds. i typed it on word and imported it so i could print it out and it look like a wikipedia article to do just that.

Thanks again. A new article will come soon.

Understandinly,

Me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kygistan (talk • contribs) 22:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blaine Robinson

Almost certainly you added the db-tag just as the first admin deleted it, but your edit was still in the job queue and thus recreated it. Happens quite a lot! Black Kite 21:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

if you insist

do whatever it is you do best, just trying to help in case of red links or misspellings. Wilkos (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting user talk pages

In regard to this edit to User talk:Dilbagh chaudhary, please do not submit user talk pages for speedy deletion just for promotional content. If the page had been speedily deleted, the user might never have seen the notice as to why the content was inappropriate. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Out of interest, do you regularly contribute to the NPOV noticeboard? -- Skarl 20:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No - don't get time to go everywhere. I'm mostly involved with new accounts, and some articles for deletion. (I defend some things that are flagged for deletion, and flag others myself. I seem to do a lot with vandalism on school articles, and other stuff that the people using the wiki tools seem to miss.) I do copy-eds sometimes, bein very good at grammer ans spelink. I just picked up on your dispute somehow and sought to defuse the situation. Peridon (talk) 20:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look, sorry to be so terse, I'm just a bit irate at the moment. You clearly acted out of good faith and I should have no complaints in that regard. -- Skarl 21:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'S OK. See my suggestion at NPOV board about how to get it sorted. Peridon (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Todos

Hi. I converted this into a redirect, since I have no doubt that that is what the original author would have intended had he known what he was doing. - Richard Cavell (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary

"is an American Judo Leader, a successful sales entrepreneur", "Gary found his way back to judo forming Goltz Judo Club in 1987 which is today the largest in the US Judo Association. He helped coach the US Blind Judo Team at the 1991 World Championships in Tokyo and has been a Defensive Tactics Advisor to the Los Angeles Police department since 1997.", "Gary today holds a 7th degree black belt and has become a national judo leader. He is volunteer Chief Operating Officer for the USJA. In 2006, Gary hosted the first Judo Winter Nationals helping to unite the USJA with its former rival organization the USJF", " He was awarded his 1st Degree Black Belt at 21 and went on to become Judo Chairman for the Allegheny Mountain Region of the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU)." are all assertions of notability so it can't be speedied. Schuym1 (talk) 19:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Goltz revisted

I had a look at this, too, and I understand your concerns. It does, however, assert notability. It would be interesting to go through the copious external links, to see which are WP:RS and which need to be removed. I started, but it will take more time than I have. I did not do a search for RS. left a note on the creator's talk page. Anyone who can right and link as thoroughly as that should have no trouble fixing whatever problems are fixable. Cheers, and happy editing. Dloh cierekim 20:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, the thing has its problems. Haven't looked for sources, so don't that it would/would not survive AFD. or even PROD. If you've done the leg work-- looked for WP:RS with WP:V that would support/establish notability, and come up empty, then you could prod or AFD the thing. If you do AFD, and RS do turn up and the subject really is notable, then that can be embarrassing. Just because something does not meet WP:CSD does not mean it can or should stay. It just means further effort should be made in the decision. It might be worth the effort to fix. It might not. If you feel strongly that this should go, and that's the sense I get, then you can always PROD or AFD. Cheers, and happy editing. Dloh cierekim 20:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prod

Hi Peridon, just a quick note re this, [2], it is actually acceptable for a user to remove the prod tag from an article they created, see Wikipedia:Proposed deletion#Conflicts. Major weakness I know, but there you are--Jac16888 (talk) 23:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Raglan

Your thoughts coincide with mine, but I admit it escaped my attention that there was anything on the talk page. Deb (talk) 22:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Folder Scout

Hey, i've removed your csd tag from this article. The text of the article does not constitute spam; simply being about a product is not enough to classify it as an advertisement. Ironholds (talk) 15:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong tagging for speedy deletion

Hi Peridon. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted you to inform that I declined to delete First Purpose Evolution Theory, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion because of the following concern: The reason you used is not a valid criterion. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered Non-criteria. In future you should rather tag such pages for proposed deletion or file them at articles for deletion. Regards So Why 16:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for the advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadeperson (talk • contribs) 17:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Video profiling article

Greetings! You originally tagged the article Video profiling for deletion as spam. I deleted it partly due to those concerns but mainly due to copyright infringement. The copyright issue is cleared up (GFDL release via OTRS); I've edited the page to, hopefully, remove the promotional text. If you'd like to revisit the article and review the text as well as my comments on the talk page, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 16:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alonzo33

I love internet moderators! "like a rhino in a corn field"? So poetic yet SO powerful! You say no use of magazine articles which is ironic. I used and credited a magazine article on a page that already has a Forbes article used credited. No deletion there lol. Oh but Orange Mike says that Entrepreneur Magazine does 'puff pieces' and yet Forbes does not? At least TRY to be consistant. Besides the blatant lack of consistancy, is there any order or just pick away at whatever you choose? Too funny. And I even asked Mike 3 times to explain the 'puff piece' comment and still have no reply. At least admit you're wrong and have no basis rather than hide. Oh wait, this is the web, I forgot. When in doubt, just hide. Good stuff for sure!Alonzo33 (talk) 20:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(moved by Peridon to correct place) I am sincereley struggling here lol. I am trying to post the actual magazine article WITH the reference. It merely speaks of the growth in the aloe industry AND mentions many other companies. This is in reference to forever living products and Terry Laboratories.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alonzo33" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alonzo33 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ControlCircle

Yes, I will stop deleting the spam stamps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradomski (talk • contribs) 19:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for reverting my talk page. My first thought was that my account had been compromised and used to make bad edits, so actually quite relieved it was just crappy talk page vandalism. --Jameboy (talk) 20:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ghosts

No worries. I was a bit confused. Looks like he's a few other contributions which probably need looking at. I simply reverted a couple anyway. Peanut4 (talk) 21:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tea Talks with CEOs

Will you change your opinion if we appear in London newspapers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acakdeniz (talk • contribs) 00:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Peridon. We hope to put new sources when we appear more.Thank you--Acakdeniz (talk) 22:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)comment added by Acakdeniz (talk[reply]

politicians

"I also wouldn't reckon that all Congressmen were notable"

I saw your comment on AFD. I have seen quite a few Congressmen article of questionable notability. Should we delete these? When people put in genuine effort and write a reasonable article, it's a bit mean to try to delete it. It's easier to try to delete the poorly written obscure article. What do you think about William Nelson (congressman), for example? I try not to be WP:POINTY but I'm unsure that that and similar articles. What is your opinion? Chergles (talk) 00:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Destruction of Lord Raglan

Yeah, it had to be done. It was most puzzling. 'Cause of the Crimean War - Fleas in the tents'. HeHe. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 16:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

Thank you for the info! I've added it on the Investigation page, feel most welcome to provide more detailed information. Siru108 (talk) 21:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add it on this page instead, under comments by other users? If you can show the edits as diffs, that would be excellent! Siru108 (talk) 21:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

jeff

Hi i am dissapointed that you deleted my section on little humby as i have lived there all my life i think i know more about it than you so dont undo it thankyou —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Roberts (talk • contribs) 20:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tommy reilly

regarding the advice on not redirecting, should I do a disambiguation page, or...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NPervez (talk • contribs) 20:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh cheers, I fixed it, I hope it's okay and doesn't count towards vandalism --NPervez (talk) 21:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Festy cock

I deleted as a not so subtle attack on a former president, then I reviewed the history and restored the non vandalized versions. Cheers, Dloh cierekim 22:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid it's not much right now. When I saw President Bush's picture and the caption, I deleted without hesitation. Oh well. Sometimes the gut makes you push the button before checking the history. IMHO, we're better of without those versions I left out. Dloh cierekim 23:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:England_Leeds_Mission

Hi. From Talk:England_Leeds_Mission - all clarification gratefully received - I'm a bit confused! :) DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're suggesting merging an article about an English city into an article about a Latter Day Saints Mission? Come on! Peridon (talk) 21:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see where this was suggested - can you please clarify? Thanks DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - amazing. Maybe the original proposer had an attack of guilt/shame and buried it! Anyway, thanks very much, and I will zap it with an appropriate note. Thanks and best wishes, DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 21:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To Bloviate Is Divine

We appreciate you're willingness to see the possibilties! :) We hope you have a laugh. http://geddongear.com/wackapedia.aspx

AFD

Hi, I thought you might be interested in voting on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alamela since you voted on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allison Harvard. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppet