User talk:Behun/Archive 1

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Behun/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! . Kingturtle 06:39, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Striking of anon votes on AFD[edit]

I've just reverted your striking of an anonymous vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Truthiness. As the main AfD page says: "Your opinion will be given the most weight if you are logged in with an account that already existed when the nomination was made. Unregistered and new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their recommendations may be discounted, especially if they seem to be made in bad faith (for example, if they misrepresent their reasons)."

My understanding is that it's for the admin closing the vote to decide whether or not to discount anon votes. In this particular incident, I didn't see anything that suggested bad faith in the vote. KeithD (talk) 10:23, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I striked the vote because it was originally located in the wrong place and by an anoymous user. I understand why it was reverted and when this happens again, I will see to it that I do it right. Behun 20:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Rome Vote[edit]

A while ago you voted for Ancient Rome to get worked on by the Article improvement drive. Well, the article has been nominated by me again. If possible can you go vote for it at the improvement drive?--ZeWrestler ^Talk 14:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Behun 17:39, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose {{subst:IDRIVEtopic article}} as this week's WP:ACID winner[edit]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week {{subst:IDRIVEtopic article}} was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

AID Removed[edit]

Er... good call, it was either the bot made a mistake, or I did. I'll look into it, but I took it out of the removed and added 2 more days to it.--Steven 21:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RIT[edit]

Hi, Behun. Thanks for adding the link to the "Unofficial RIT theme song" to the Rochester Institute of Technology article, but it's really not appropriate for an encyclopedia entry. Please see Wikipedia:External links for a discussion of what sorts of things are appropriate to link to. Thanks! Powers 16:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Long Island Sound Plane Crash[edit]

Help!, other useres are trying to delete my article but I objected saying that the plane crash is notable. Please vote keep on the vote page in order to save this article. Storm05 18:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

template[edit]

Hi, if you like I can help and split out a section of the [[1]]. reg.Mion 02:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi Behun, nicely done. -:).Mion 11:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin, PA[edit]

Thanks for working on this article. Much appreciated. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can[edit]

The article Beauty and the Geek, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

Let's talk about this[edit]

Behun, good evening. I've observed your edits on the 100-Hour Plan article, and I'd like to discuss them with you. Please join me on the article's Talk page. Thanks. Dino 03:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you're wrong[edit]

At that time, Obama had South Carolina. You do not rely on one recent poll in determining who is in the lead. That is just stupid. If heavy amounts of polling are coming in, you rely on the latest 5 or 4... or if a poll is coming out only once a week or every two weeks, you rely on the whole month's... So at the time, yes, Obama had South Carolina.

In light of new polls I put up today, Hillary is in fact now holding South Carolina.

Using only one most recent poll is pure ignorance.. to put it in your own words, "that one poll could be a one time thing." Which is why we use more than one poll.

Dino 03:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to respond on my page before I archive everything, if the most recent poll or the average of the last 4 or 5, Hillary was in the lead. So he had a problem with his fuzzy math/ his user name was incorrectly listed and is Isaiah13066. Behun 19:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]