User talk:Marek69

Status: Online

If you leave a message here, I will respond here, unless you ask for a response on your talk page.

This is Marek69's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65

Archives

WP:DERM

Do you have any interest in dermatology? If so, I am always looking for more help ;) Regardless, thank you for your work on wikipedia! kilbad (talk) 21:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kilbad, thank you for your message. Yes, I have an interest, but sadly little knowledge :-(

However if there's anything I can help you with, drop me a line, I'm always keen to try something new. Marek.69 ^talk 15:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey thanks i appreciate that .

Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me} ^Guestbook ^{Hate Comments} 05:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

flaming lawyer has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hey

Hey Marek, good to see you patrolling. I had been patrolling for the last few hours with only ClueBot on my side... -- Menti fisto 18:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mentifisto, Good 'ole ClueBot - Does that guy ever sleep?!! ;-)) Marek.69 ^talk 03:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Awarded to User:Marek69 by User:Mikaey, because you're always beating me to the punch on reverting vandalism edits on Huggle! Matt (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much :) Marek.69 ^talk 20:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. :-) Matt (talk) 20:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cookie

Its the Cookie Monster (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Mmm.. Thank you, Cookie Monster :-)) Marek.69 ^talk 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its nothing, Its my job--Its the Cookie Monster (talk) 03:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for revertin vandalism on my user page =) Cheers! DP76764 (Talk) 06:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all :-) Marek.69 ^talk 06:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi Marek69, Thanks for greeting me. It is my pleasure to talk to you. Further, I am an Administrator in Telugu wikipedia. When ever I feel doubt or doubts, or feel to ask you, surely, I will write to you without hesitation. Thanks once again, leaving best wishes for you, :-) అహ్మద్ నిసార్ (talk) 16:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi అహ్మద్ నిసార్, sure if there's anything I can do to help, drop me a line. Happy editing :-) Marek.69 ^talk 17:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Haydon Jones

I suggest you take a look at the logs of "Tennis Expert" (who is anything but) and Thermo Space or whatever he calls himself. I believe there is a rule on wiki about making 3 reverts in a 24 hour period. Both are engaged in an edit war and I suggest that instead of making threats to block me, that they follow the rules set by wiki themselves.

My point is that they are insisting on a heading being added to this page, when it does not exist in any other tennis player bio on wiki in identical sections. Thus, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that they are picking on one editor. If they weren't, then they'd busy themselves by adding this header to every tennis bio on wiki where it does not appear. But they do not. They simply keep making changes on this one page. Surely the rules should apply to them as they do to anyone else? Experts or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.186.107 (talk) 00:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I had a look and the article is referenced, so no longer needs a {{Unreferenced}} tag. I have now removed it. Marek.69 ^talk 01:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

However, I would advise you do not get into an edit war with these other users, as you could risk a block Marek.69 ^talk 01:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I trust the same "advice" is being given to ThemFromSpace and (not a)Tennis Expert? Edit wars are generally contributed by more than one editor. Or is it that because they've reached some exalted status on wiki that they are exempt from warnings? If you note, they were consistently changing a page. More than three times in 24 hours. Grounds for a ban to any other user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.186.107 (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The final edits you made to this page have been reversed - yet again - by (not a)TennisExpert. Under the three revision rule, should he not now be suspended from wiki? These are the rules I believe:

"You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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 that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.103.79 (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message. I would just like to say there is no such thing as a ‘final edit’ on Wikipedia due to the ever-changing nature of the medium. Secondly if someone puts an {{unreferenced}} tag, I think the best solution is to provide some extra references for the text, rather than get into an edit war of deleting and replacing the template - clearly unproductive. I'm no expert on tennis, buy I'll see if I can find a few citations. Kind Regards Marek.69 ^talk 18:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So why has (not a) Tennis Expert not been banned under the three revert rule? I note that the editor he engaged in a war has been banned. Where is the fairness in that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.103.79 (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've managed to find a couple of new references for the article and added them.

The question why a particular user hasn't been banned - I can't say - have they been reported? Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

I would say that this disagreement should first be discussed calmly on the Ann Haydon-Jones talk page to try to achieve a compromise which is acceptable to both parties.

From the article's history I think it may be necessary to ask a neutral party to act as a mediator. Regards Marek.69 ^talk 04:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your candid welcome

Thanks a lot for your candid welcome... I think we need more users like you, that are willing to help newcomers. Not just people who tend to delete things quite quickly. I will be asking for your help soon, thanks a lot. xxx Wikisexygirl (talk) 21:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for your message. Happy editing :-) Marek.69 ^talk 03:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BS

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		My thanks to you for quickly removing the vandalism from my userpage; I really appreciate it! MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - I'm hunting vandals. Thank you very much for the barnstar, MelicansMatkin :-)) Marek.69 ^talk 05:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re

ok i will —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.247.185 (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Tubbablub (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

thanks for the welcome! :) Tubbablub (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi Marek69, I am registered as maximo88 in Spanish Wikipedia, but I can't understand why I can't log in with this credentials on English Wiki. Do I have to create another account for all languages that I want to edit? Thank you!--87.220.40.15 (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maximo88, I'm not sure why it's not working. You may find the answer on this page m:Help:Unified_login (or same page in spanish m:Help:Unified_login/es.)

Please let me know how you get on. Marek.69 ^talk 19:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here I am, thank you very much. I have put 1980 instead of 1981, I think that this is right. I used http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:MergeAccount like you said me. See you soon from Spain--Maximo88 (talk) 20:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very pleased its working Maximo. Wishing you Happy editing :-) Marek.69 ^talk 20:33, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, I hope to eat some delicious cookies like those ;)--Maximo88 (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request help covering Poland for EP2009

Marek69, hi!

The European Parliament election, 2009 is fast approaching, but we have insufficient non-Anglophone wikieditors to cope: User:Nightstallion can cover Austria, User:Checco can handle Italy, User:JLogan covers the EU institutions, but other countries' coverage can be lacking. Poland is one of these examples: 40 million people, one of the major forces in the EU, and the coverage en:Wikipedia has of it in EU politics is at the "isn't that where all the plumbers come from?" level. Ouch. We have to use pan-European/American terms such as "national conservatism", "christian right" and "euroscepticism" to cover Polish concepts like "national catholicism" and "Europa Ojczyzn", and a lot of the subtleties are being missed. "Forward Poland" split from the LPR five months ago and we didn't have an article about it until today. I'm trying to plug the gap, but my Polish is non-existent and I can't work fast enough. So if you know of any major changes in Polish politics regarding the EU, can you notify me? The reason why I'm asking you is because you're down as a Polish WP:EU member and I note you do Polish<->English translations. Any help would be really appreciated. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 01:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anameofmyveryown. Sure, I'll give it a shot. Just let me know what you want me to do. Marek.69 ^talk 04:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really reasonable for me to ask you to bring European Parliament election, 2009 (Poland) and/or Poland (European Parliament constituency) up to spec. But it may be reasonable of me to ask you if you could point me to the following:

A Polish site (newspaper/tv station) that covers the EP election in Poland in English. Failing that, one that does it in Polish would do.
The site that gives the official Polish results (I assume that will be in Polish).

If you could give me that, then I'll do the best I can with that. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I shall have a look and see what I can do :-) Marek.69 ^talk 01:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you for that! That's very helpful. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Urban75

It's not "vandilism" I correct and the old statement false.

Please do not keep shoving your ore into my business of edits. Thanks. Vchuffter (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your two edits [1] and [2], are exactly that: removal of {{Fact|date=February 2009}}, replacing with <sup>9</sup>.

Please explain these edits then Marek.69 ^talk 00:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "9" i replaced with as that connects the source with proof of editors statement that he was putting ad's on the site for beer money. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vchuffter (talk • contribs) 00:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should replace it with a citation eg <ref>[http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/ urban75 forums]</ref>, if that is what you want to do. Kind Regards Marek.69 ^talk 00:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks!!!!

Thanks

For revert of my User page. I must have done something to upset them... ;-) and then they often seem to stop vandalizing at the fourth occurrence... Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:26, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, funny that :-) Marek.69 ^talk 00:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up my talk page

You caught the vandalism before I did, and I'd like to thank you for reverting it so quickly! --Ericdn (talk) 03:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're Welcome Ericn. :-) Marek.69 ^talk 01:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

We tried to be polite and not "vandalize" any of the pages we edited, yet, on the last page we editted, we stated an absolute fact, and you still removed it. Why??

Do you consider these [3], [4] [5] edits polite? Marek.69 ^talk 05:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you Marek! :) I appreciate the welcome. The cookies were delicious! :D Aabh (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Query

The biblical passage surrounding Naomi and Rachel is in fact used frequently at HOMOsexual wedding ceremonies, in particular Lesbian commitment ceremonies, because Naomi and Rachel, two WOMEN, are sometimes understood as having a romantic relationship. This particular passage would have to be used wildly out of context to be applied to a heterosexual wedding, hence the edit. I was not trying to be destructive, just the opposite. I was trying to revert a flawed and ignorant understanding of the passage in question. It simply doesn't make sense theologically that a passage expressing love or strong friendship between two women would be used in a heterosexual marriage.

Sorry, it looked wrong on first glance. I've changed it back now. :-) Marek.69 ^talk 04:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Christopher Daniels has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Marek.69 ^talk 04:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]