Please put any rewards, such as barnstars, here.
Stop preventing me from making the flat tax page actually talking about flat taxes as opposed to flat rate taxes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 12:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
- 1 About David Sarnoff
- 2 Reverting anon harasser's edit on my talk page
- 3 Removed speedy deletion tag: New wikipedia
- 4 Can I have that?
- 5 did you know rastafarian herb because they clever
- 6 Please do not misuse CSD G7
- 7 Vandalism alert
- 8 Article: Germany
- 9 Talk pages
- 10 Accusations of vandalism
- 11 Death (metal band)
- 12 Thanks
- 13 Vandalism?
- 14 Hank j wimbleton
- 15 No vandalism
- 16 Edit of Road Fighter page
- 17 Lady Gaga PROD
- 18 Return of Mittens
- 19 Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit
- 20 Moron page
- 21 USADA
- 22 Revert changes
- 23 Regarding "politically motivated" comment
- 24 Speedy deletion
- 25 Last warning
- 26 Sorry
- 27 Persian/Urdu comment
- 28 Sexist
- 29 Higglytown Heroes
- 30 Sunwing flight
- 31 Nomination of Sunwing Airlines Flight 772 for deletion
- 32 Fields Medal page
- 33 Peacock terms
- 34 DNC 2016 listed at Redirects for discussion
- 35 ArbCom elections are now open!
- 36 ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
About David Sarnoff
Hi, You've erased my edit concerning Sarnoff nationality a couple of times now,and I'll kindly ask you to stop doing so.I find your remarks irrelevant to the topic as the nationality is determined by the place of birth of the person and nothing else.If you continue deleting my edits on the topic,I will too return the favor.Thank you.
Reverting anon harasser's edit on my talk page
- Not a problem, though I personally think I deserve a barnstar as well...I've reverted vandalism many, many times, but nobody thanks me! T_T. DaL33T (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
You must have misunderstood my alterations to the page. I was simply giving a more factual representation of the educational establishment, as well as writing details of forthcoming events. How is this vandalism?
Removed speedy deletion tag: New wikipedia
Hi DaL33T! Firstly, thanks for helping out in CSD areas. I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on New wikipedia- because: the page is not nonsense - there is meaningful content. If you have any questions or other message, please contact me. Thanks Kingpin13 (talk) 15:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- I was just in the process of remarking this for deletion under A7, and it may also meet G11, and A1. But the page is not nonsense. Please study WP:PN and WP:CSD. Nonsense refers to a random string of characters/words. Which this page was not. But keep up the new page patrol! I saw a good tag from you a few seconds before. Just make sure you don't bite newbs. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 15:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Can I have that?
- You can get all the templates here. The one you're after is here. Be warned, that YOU SHOULD ONLY USE THIS WHEN IT IS REALLY NECESSARY. BTW, every anti-vandal template comes included with Twinkle, an anti-vandalism plug-in that I use. You can get that as well, and I'd strongly recommend it. DaL33T (talk) 15:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
did you know rastafarian herb because they clever
Please do not misuse CSD G7
You have been paged because a user has reported a high level of vandalism and you are listed as a contact.
Pardon me, but I do not understand why you reverted my changes. Unfortunately the article makes wrong statement, which I corrected. There are a lot of states in Germany, where a student wishing to attend a Gymnasium does not need a Lehrerempfehlung. Also it is not true a Gymnasium enrolls "gifted" students. Also the Gesamtschule is not the fourt type of school but one of two types of school in the states of Hamburg and Berlin.--Greatgreenwhale (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greatgreenwhale (talk • contribs)
- Sorry, I was tired when I was reverting it. I was doing a lot of reverting that time. DaL33T (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Please stop reverting the IP on their talk page. They are permitted to remove any and all warnings. See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#User talk pages, Wikipedia:User page#Removal of comments, warnings and Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments. Thanks. something lame from CBW 12:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Accusations of vandalism
Thank you for taking an active interest in the Glenmere mansion page and the edit warring that has been going on there. However, you posted a vandalism warning on the IP user's page. According to WP:VANDAL, "edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism". You may wish to retract that warning, as well as your request that he prove that he's the owner of the mansion, as being owner would not give him usable authority here (that he claims he's owner already gives him a conflict of interest.) - Nat Gertler (talk) 14:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Death (metal band)
- I s'pose, but it's still against the rules to do that... DaL33T (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Dude, the entire section has been tagged as having unsourced "facts" for three months. If nobody has been able to find a reliable source in that time, then they probably don't exist. Just curious, did you even bother to look at the article before slapping a warning on me with an automated tool? --18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- You're supposed to put a note on the talk page before you do that. But you are right, I was a bit hasty in reverting that. I happened to be reverting a lot of vandalism at the time. DaL33T (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I declined the speedy deletion as I found G-hits for this. I think it would take an AFD to sift the potential sourcing and determine what notability there is, if any. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 21:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
This was not reverting vandalism. My previous edit was reverting vandalism by the user Sinharib, whose edits have consistently been identified by all involved at Assyria as vandalism and fringe POV pushing. I'm not sure how you "identified" my edit as vandalism, but you were wrong. Sorry, but you should be a bit more careful about "identifying" vandalism. Cheers. (Taivo (talk) 04:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC))
- I apologise for that. I was reverting quite abit of vandalism at the time, and I automatically push the Rollback (Vandalism) button (I use twinkle in my vandal-fighting) most of the time. That, and it's 12:20am here. Once again, I apologise, and good morning- er, night. DaL33T (talk) 04:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Edit of Road Fighter page
DaL33T, I've deleted the critical reception section because the information presented there was in my opinion, unconstructive and basically irrelevant. It contained nothing but a link to meanmachinesmag 's review of the NES port (giving it a 9% rating), while the page is generally about the game.
Lady Gaga PROD
Hi, I have removed your PROD template on the duplicate article. If you agreed with the IP that the article was indeed a duplicate why didn't you undo your edit and restore to a redirect? Also, why did you call a non-malicious redirect "vandalism"? Using Twinkle is not an excuse. It is merely a tool to assist in the mechanics of the process, you are still expected to consider carefully each action before making it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:14, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Return of Mittens
Hi. I just wanted to ask about your revert at User:Return of Mittens. This user, who has been blocked since January 2010, has fraudulently placed some of the highest service stars on his page — a page which, incidentally, has been dormant for over a year. Allowing this blocked person and this long-dormant page to continue displaying service recognition that many, many other Wikipedians have worked hard to achieve makes a mockery of the service awards.
Obviously, one's user page is generally left alone by other editors. In this instance, leaving these fraudulent claims to stand does a disservice to those who've earned these stars. If you've ever been in military service, I'm sure you'd understand. --Tenebrae (talk) 13:06, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit
As you may know, the Counter-Vandalism unit is inactive. So for reviving the WikiProject, we will need to sort out the members. So if you are active, please put your username at the bottom of the list at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit#Sort out the members.
You are receiving this message as a current member of the CVU.
Apologies if I offended. I am actually Irish/Catholic and found most of the "facts" to be inaccuarte and misleading. The best way for people to learn is to question EVERY "turn". If the article is re-written, not only will you learn even more but others as well. And it's not really YOUR information that's bias, it's your sources information. I found most of it to be ridiculing the Church. The article seemed more about making the claim that Catholic's religous freedoms and beliefs aren't to be upheld by the constitution of America i.e. The Presidency, ergo The Church has no "real" claim against the Health care reform... and also like I mentioned about the Irish did not migrate willingly to the States ( at least not at first ) but were taken as slaves and even remained slaves after slavery was abolished and was even more harsh than the African Slave trade ( which was happening at the same time as well )
Again, I wasn't trying to be a vandal and I apologize if you don't agree with my actions. And maybe it was a bit hasty to rid of the entire article. I shall be more considerate next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Text Books Lie (talk • contribs) 15:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's okay, it's okay. It's just that, for edits like that, you should probably discuss such matters at the talk page. I understand now. DaL33T (talk) 16:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Don't stick templates on my talk page telling me not to revert without an editnote and then quote my editnote. Makes you look like someone who posts templates without knowing what they say. Kevin McE (talk) 14:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Regarding "politically motivated" comment
I did not include your username to the people I absolutely accuse of bias. The users I am talking about are User:Jingiby, User:Future Perfect at Sunrise, User:Taivo and User:Kwamikagami. I have been very clear in this. Cheers. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- The editor posted a message explicitly asking for restoration. It's one or two sections above. DaL33T (talk) 15:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I was never given a non-last warning before...
Also, it seems like now I can't edit the article OR the talk...
- My apologies. I guess I was too harsh. Also, that's strange that you're unable to do that...you aren't blocked, obviously, otherwise you wouldn't be talking to me right now. You'd have to ask an admin about that, because I don't know.
- No need to apologize, but that's okay. Just don't do it again. DaL33T (talk) 20:46, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- Very much welcome, and I apologize for this late reply (Damn Regents exams...) DaL33T (talk) 18:42, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I am sick of it. I am an old woman, and I am seeing all the headway that females made in the 1970s going backwards. Sexist attitudes are spinning out of control. The BBC recognises that a casual comment that likens a black sportsman to a child's toy is bad form. But they are incapable of recognising that likening a young white female to a Barbie Doll is equally bad form.
I don't know what is happening to the attitudes of the young. Even homosexual people (despite legislation) are suffering from far greater discrimination than they were forty years ago. It is sickening! When people write captions of that sort, I wonder what happened to all the education programs that we set in place and all the books we wrote, placards we carried, and governments we picketted. Amandajm (talk) 13:08, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Unless the editor is ninety-nine and senile, they should know better. That attitude affects round-about 50% of people on this planet. Think about it in female terms.
- This is a person, presumably male, who needs to draw a distinction between a guitarist (think man) and a guitarist who doesn't have testicles.
- That attitude discriminates against 50% of humanity.
- If this editor gets a rude shock from my message, then they desperately need it, regardless of whether the writer is 13 or 50.
- Sexism is not appropriate on Wikipedia or anywhere else.
- And I am sorry to say that it is regaining ground, rapidly. Amandajm (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- It is also not appropriate to make personal attacks, regardless of your convictions. DaL33T (talk) 13:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I saw that you quickly reverted my edit about Higglytown Heroes. I was one of the first editors who updated the episode guide through its original run and kept it up. I recently checked up on the page after a couple of years and noted that there was a bit of vandalism in the episode guide that was not reverted. (Roseanne Barr as Twinkle's mom? influx of British Harry Potter actresses?) I was merely cleaning up the episode guide taking out any extraneous and incorrect actors attributed to certain episodes. If you do not believe me, please check out IMDB, TV.com or other episode guides to see that this is a valid edit and not just vandalism. I have seen this type of thing happen on Wikipedia pages for children's TV shows. I will revert the edit, but if there is anything else, please let me know on my talk page.126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2014 (UTC)samusek2
- I apologize for my mistake. Also, sorry for any rude remarks I may have made the warning I sent you. Feel free to restore your changes. DaL33T (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Nomination of Sunwing Airlines Flight 772 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sunwing Airlines Flight 772 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunwing Airlines Flight 772 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Petebutt (talk) 04:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Fields Medal page
Hello there,I'm that user who's been the victim of editing the Fields Medal page(i.e.I got blocked with charge of Vandalism.).I've got two question:1)When the current protected status of that page ends,Does the page current contents remain in place or they are replaced with the old version? 2)I've prepared a new and somehow comprehensive table about Fields medalists.I posted this table on the discussion section of the Fields Medal page,and I request for comments about this(If You come there and see my that table I will be really glad,and don't forget to put your comment about it down there!;-)),but so far,just one person did so.Is it normal? 3)Should I submit a request for edit to replace the new table with current one?Or should I wait for reaching a consensus?Thank You. Rezameyqani (talk) 07:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I have left you a full explanation on the Leonardo da Vinci talk page. Basically, terms like "most famous" are not peacock terms if they are true beyond question.
Secondly, it isn't usual to leave a "Welcome to Wikipedia" message on the page of a person who has been editting for eight years and has contributed many thousands of words. Amandajm (talk) 12:54, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
DNC 2016 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect DNC 2016. Since you had some involvement with the DNC 2016 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Compassionate727 (talk) 22:31, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)