User talk:Bongwarrior

; Archives
	Archive 1 (April 6, 2007 – October 3, 2007)
	Archive 2 (October 6, 2007 – January 9, 2008)
	Archive 3 (January 10, 2008 – April 18, 2008)
	Archive 4 (April 18, 2008 – September 7, 2008)
	Archive 5 (September 8, 2008 – April 17, 2009)
	Archive 6 (April 18, 2009 – present)

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Unsigned messages will likely be removed. For messages left here, I will usually respond here. If I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch for a response there.
Start a new talk topic.

RfC on Joseph Priestley lead image alignment

A RfC has been opened to discuss the issue of alignment of the lead image on the Joseph Priestley article. Because you have previously commented or been involved with this issue, your input is requested. Please stop by Talk:Joseph_Priestley#RfC_on_lead_image_alignment and leave any feedback you may have. Thank you. Madcoverboy (talk) 03:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Priestley lead image alignment

You previously have commented on the RfC at Talk:Joseph_Priestley#RfC on lead image alignment on whether or not the lead image should be left-aligned. A straw poll is under way to determine what, if any consensus have been developed towards resolving the debate. Go to Talk:Joseph_Priestley#Major_options and indicate your relative levels of support for each option. Thank you. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jesslovesthetigers unblock request

Says they're sorry and would like to edit articles about tennis and animals. This is the kind of unblock that moves me to offer a second chance. Your thoughts? Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contacting me about this. I wouldn't have any objections if you'd like to unblock. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bongwarrior, I have made an interesting discovery about this blocked user that you can see here.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 03:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Surratt

Thank you! Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chew Xuanjie

He belongs to ColourWolf, a highly dangerous banned user from Singapore that has been a menace here since 2007. He has apparently adopted the Grawp handbook now. What should we do? I know Grawp is absolutely deadly... Arbiteroftruth ^{Plead Your Case} 11:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RBI works for me. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding an article I just made

I just made my first article for Las Hermanas Montoya, but whenever I do a Google search it keeps showing up as User:Hatman1960/Las Hermanas Montoya. Is there any way I can get rid of the User:Hatman1960 before the article title when performing a Google search? I've tried requesting an Administrator to delete the page created under my username, but it still shows up, so I recreated it just so it could serve as a redirect to the main article. How can I get the title to show up as just Las Hermanas Montoya in Google and searches? --Hatman1960 (talk) 05:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, also, would you mind responding on my talk page? It's just a lot easier for me when I get the alert saying someone has replied to me. Thanks! --Hatman1960 (talk) 05:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Reverted

I would like to know why you reverted my comment.Frogo Baggins (talk) 05:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer can be found on your talk page. -T'Shael, Lord of the Vulcans 06:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attributing work

Wondering if you can answer a question I've been trying to resolve lately (the admin I previously asked has been away). To simply reiterate: I'm trying to figure out how I might give a proper attribution for work that was originally posted on a Wikia site (by me). This is in regards to the Beverly Hills, 90210 franchise article, which has adapted some material from its Wikia counterpart (though they are not exactly the same).

I've been reading over the WP:Plagiarism page and came across the link to planetary nomenclature. I've attempted to apply the method displayed there to the article in question. I'd just like to verify that it's been done the right way. If not, do you know how I might go about it? -- James26 (talk) 06:31, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'll probably want to double-check with someone smarter, but it looks fine to me. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- James26 (talk) 06:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal Revert

Some vandal decided to vandalize your page see[1]and here[2]and I reverted him and reported as well. Thought I'd let you know;) RegardsSchnitzelMannGreek. 23:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking out, all the best. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should have checked to see that you were an admin and could have protected it yourself. --Bastique ^demandez 20:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe he keeps it unprotected so that I have something constructive to do. ;) -T'Shael,The Vulcan Overlord 16:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC 20:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, no worries, Bastique. It's the thought that counts. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong, Technically Franken is a senator go look at this!

United States Senate election in Louisiana, 1996! This is similar because it was contested and she wasnt seated until October, but her senate started at January 7, which mean Al Franken is a senator with 94th Seniority! I wish you all ADMINS will go do your research before deleting things on wikipedia!_BLuE^DOg^Tn 20:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the edit history of the article. I think you have me confused with someone else. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wtf

Why do you keep deleting my articles? Why does it have to "meet the guidelines" of Wikipedia? It's freaking wikipedia, I thought that was the point of this website. If it's not offensive or causing any damage why does it have to be deleted????

Omglmaowtfbrb (talk) 05:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because if Wikipedia didn't have notability guidelines, every bored high school kid would have their own wikipedia page. -Falcon8765 (talk) 05:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And whats the problem with that? Not doing any harm. I fail to see the significance here. Why does it matter if every damn high school kid in america has their own wikipedia page? Nobody will ever see it, so what's the problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omglmaowtfbrb (talk • contribs) 05:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because that's not the purpose of Wikipedia. We're an encyclopedia, not a social networking site. If you'd like to find ways you can contribute, please take a look at the welcome page. Take care. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like an admin power trip to me, but whatever, thanks for the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omglmaowtfbrb (talk • contribs) 05:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bong

Do you smoke pot? Texcarson (talk) 19:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]