User talk:Wikidan829/Archive 3

Have you seen this before?

A person turn a vandal into an editor? See This guy its my 2nd person.Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 18:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to report him about a half hour ago. As long as he's behaving after the last warning Wikidan829 18:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AKMask RFA

Are you opposing or you comenting because if you do please put Comment so I and others don't get confused,Thank you-Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 20:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was commenting on the oppose, note the indent. I'm not done checking out the candidate to vote yet. Wikidan829 20:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfAs

Yes, my mistake -- thanks for letting me know. Matthew 14:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Notice

You got Mail:)--Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 14:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it I'm staying out of this 1:)--Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 14:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crap, Sorry I only look at the diff and saw a bunch of codes, well anyway look at the words below that post(there all small) :-(Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 14:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No big deal it's easy to mess up. If you see a lot of codes and not easy-to-read content in the diff, best to scroll down and see what it actually was :) Wikidan829 14:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not until the crats close it the RFA is still there:).Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 20:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gnome Week!

	Gnomes, unite!
	Hello Wikidan829/Archive 3 you are invited to participate in Gnome Week, a mass article cleanup drive between June 21 and June 28, 2007.
	This week, backlogs will be cleared. Articles will be polished. Typos will be fixed. Bad prose will be edited. Unreferenced articles will be sourced. No article will be safe from our reach! The more people who participate, the better Wikipedia will become as a result.
	I would love it if you would participate! - Arnon Chaffin (Talk)
Edit message

Smile today!

Smile a little, smile a little, all along the road;
Every life must have its burden, every heart its load.
Why sit down in gloom and darkness with your grief to sup?
As you drink Fate's bitter tonic, smile across the cup.

Smile upon the troubled pilgrims whom you pass and meet;
Frowns are thorns, and smiles are blossoms, oft for weary feet.
Do not make the way seem harder by a sullen face;
Smile a little, smile a little, brighten up the place.

Smile upon your undone labour; not for one who grieves
O'er his task waits wealth or glory; he who smiles achieves.
Though you meet with loss and sorrow in the passing years,
Smile a little, smile a little... even through your tears!

Ella Wheeler Wilcox

Have a beautiful day, my dear Dan! :)

Love
Phaedriel
14:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, anything I can help you with, sweetie? Phaedriel - 14:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the userpage revert.--Isotope23 21:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

84.228.33.32's request on Meta

As I reflect further on his request, I keep coming back to the strong probability that he was using an open proxy when he first made his whitelisting request as 67.159.44.138 this week. See User talk:67.159.44.138 -- it's blocked on en.wikipedia but not meta. As for his comments about checking with his IT people -- it doesn't make sense that an Israeli ISP should use a U.S. registered open proxy. Also:

Current discussion about 67.159.44.13 at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies
IP address traceroutes to Chicago.
de.wikipedia entry: de:Wikipedia:Vandalismusmeldung/Archiv/2007/06/02#Benutzer:67.159.44.138 (erl.)
blog comment spammer listing

--A. B. ^(talk) 21:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting my edit

What were you thinking here? Personal attack? Do you have a sense of humor (which also wasn't a personal attack, more like concern about your judgement). Besides, editing comments on the Talk page of articles can be deleted for only a few reasons:

If you have their permission
Removing prohibited material such as libel and personal details
Removing personal attacks and incivility. Please read WP:ATTACK#Removal of text and WP:CIVIL#Removing uncivil comments before removing anything.
Unsigned comments: You are allowed to append {{unsigned}} or one of its variants to the end of someone's comment if they have failed to sign it. The form is {{subst:unsigned|USER NAME OR IP}}, which results in —The preceding unsigned comment was added by USER NAME OR IP (talk • contribs) ..
Interruptions: In some cases, it is OK to interrupt a long contribution, either by a short comment (as a reply to a minor point) or by a headline (if the contribution introduces a new topic). In that case, add "<small>Headline added to (reason) by ~~~~</small>"). In such cases, please add {{subst:interrupted|USER NAME OR IP}} before the interruption.
When a long comment has formatting errors, rendering it difficult to read. In this case, restrict the edits to formatting changes only and preserve the content as much as possible.

If you think that was a personal attack or incivility, and after reading WP:ATTACK#Removal of text and WP:CIVIL#Removing uncivil comments, I'd have to see proof. It was humor. Very light humor at that. Orangemarlin 22:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

references

relax; my "rampage" consists of removing the blatantly unreferenced portions. dab (𒁳) 14:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to Riana

Our dear friend has surrendered her bit until her exams are over, dear Dan - so I took the liberty of dealing with that gentleman myself :) Have a beautiful day! Love, Phaedriel - 15:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes matie, sorry I couldn't deal... however, seems like enough people have my talkpage watchlisted for me to avoid doing any real work ;) Riana ⁂ 04:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dan

Thanks very much for wishing me happy birthday! I had a great day - well, it could have been better, I spent all day studying for an exam! But let's concentrate on the positives, hmmm? :) My friends got me a great cake, a lot like this one, and since you've been so kind, I saved you a piece. Hope you enjoy it, and the rest of your day :) Riana (talk) 10:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Am once again open for hire, if you need anyone whacked ;)

What, you think we just do stuff for free? Cough up! ;) Riana (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiTip #1

Don't drink and edit. I'm making it a point to not do this at the moment. ;) Wikidan829 05:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jinxmchue

I was able to verify through off-wiki private message that the ip editor is really him. BTW, love that rc readout on your user page, very cool. - Crockspot 18:43, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salvia

OK then address the other issues in this page as stated, or did you read the thread before entering your comment? In addition to the anomolies that have been highlighted I am adding these: there are citations provided from a webpage that is a commercial distributor of Salvia. The sections entitled Ingestion, After effects, and Controversy are also dubious relative to the criticisms that were leveled at the You Tube entry. Also, the Erowid study being cited (Baggot) was based on questionnaire response, it was not a scientifically based qualitative study, it was a personal interest study based on quantitative analysis. This Salvia Divinorum entry is currently not of encyclopedic quality: it's a drug users "how to" guide that is being controlled by a commercial interest and a bunch of drug geeks.

Censor

I hope this incident doesn't happen too often. Before you make such a change anywhere on Wikipedia again, please read WP:CENSOR. Thanks Wikidan829 15:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Profanity. Tcrow777 talk 23:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah? From the link you sent me it said. "In original Wikipedia content, a profanity should either appear in its full form or not at all; words should never be bowdlerized by replacing letters in the word with dashes, asterisks, or other symbols.". Ouch. Wikidan829 00:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh

I think you misinterpreted the statement. This is talking about article space. You cannot edit someone else's text on their own user page or talk page, unless it is a personal attack or violates some huge policy. If you do, that is vandalism. I'm kindly asking you to drop it and leave it alone. It's only likely to get you in trouble. Wikidan829 00:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this before editing someone else's wording in non-article space. Wikidan829 01:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CIVIL#Removing_uncivil_comments. Tcrow777 talk 01:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I give up, goodbye. Tcrow777 talk 01:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sig

Haha, so it's not just me. Thanks! hmwith talk 12:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and now the new guideline in preferences makes one unable to go above 255 characters, so I think 255 is sort of the new limit. I mean, if it's over 255, one can't have it. If it is, it can pass... or so I feel. hmwith talk 13:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SPA

Got 'em all. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.--Isotope23 13:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! :)

Thank you for all that you have done!
How much love resides therein!
All one's gifts are never gone:
Not seen, perhaps, but stored within.
Kindness is an inner sun.

Your unspent heart a message sends
Of grace and sacrifice hard-won
Upon which happiness depends!

Thank you so much, dear Dan! :)

Love,
Phaedriel
18:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Virgo - the first zodiac sign?

With reference to this edit - sorry, but I thought that Aries comes first because it's always mentioned first in the astrology pane of the papers and such? And doesn't Aries rule the first house in the natural zodiac? It's not a question of my being confused due to Virgo not being the sign that starts off the calendar year, because the Sun's always in Capricorn every January 1st, and we all know Capricorn to not be the first sign.

So to avoid such confusion, perhaps it's better to remove the claim that Virgo is the first sign? Or do you study astrology? If so, please kindly share with me the basis for this claim on my talk page; I'm always happy to learn more. --Starry maiden Gazer 13:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

Thanks for your note. We're in communication with admins about this issue. Baseball Bugs 13:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Long levi has been blocked, following a checkuser that confirmed he was a sockpuppet of User:Tecmobowl. Baseball Bugs 22:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Egads! That's a quick way to get shitlisted from this place. Wikidan829 13:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Especially since it's the second time he's done it. I expect many will be on the lookout for him if he tries for "strike three". Baseball Bugs 16:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*badum dum* ;) Wikidan829 19:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. If he comes back again, they'll drum him out. Baseball Bugs 19:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]