User talk:MLRoach/Archive 7

question

Hey, I'm confused. I didn't think I did any testing; I only made a note that they had begun their olympic bid; went in there, added that sentence, and saved. It hasn't been removed or edited...why direct me to the welcome page and sandbox...? Mlcblj 19:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?!

I've never once vandalized a page on Wikipedia. Maybe somebody has hacked? I have no idea..I'll look into the problem. 72.65.222.91 20:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

It was back in April. I wouldn't worry about it. --Matt 20:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok. I just didn't want people thinking that I was the one vandalizing, because I wasn't. I'm still a bit curious as to what actually happened, though. 72.65.222.91 20:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Check out your IP's edit history, and you'll see some low level vandalism back in April. If you're worried about a tainted edit history, create an account and no one will notice! Administrators know that IPs aren't a great way of tracing unique users, so hopefully no one will ding you. Cheers! --Matt 20:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow, there are tons of edits under my IP address, and I haven't made any of them! Some of them are really recent..I want to know what the hell's going on. Thank you for the link to the page regarding "my" edit history. I'll probably end up creating an account. Alright, thanks for your help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.222.91 (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Other than this conversation, they were all one day back in April. I'm guessing that you are on DSL (since the IP resolves back to Verizon). Usually you don't get 1 IP forever, and so it's not a surprise to see "someone else" editing from this IP in the past. Cheers! --Matt 20:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops, my mistake. I must have been looking at the wrong page. Yeah, I'm on DSL. I just recently got this IP address, so that makes sense. I thought it was a hacker because I thought I saw more recent dates (I think I clicked the wrong link at first). At least I can be reasonably sure it wasn't a hacker now. Thank you for all of your help! 72.65.222.91 20:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I have nominated you for adminship

Your text is found here. [1]
You have been a friend that has helped to take the right path. This makes you a good person. Please accept my nomination for you. I would be honored if you accepted. Thanks and good night. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inetpup (talk • contribs) 09:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the nomination. I have, however, declined it: neither would it succeed nor would do I have the desire to be an admin. Thank you, --Matt (talk) 14:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

thanks for the USAA revert

I don't understand the procedures for stopping vandalism. "member in Poland" (entered much the same data that was submitted by robert j koenig - who had a very bad experience with USAA). Assuming it is RJK, he has been trashing the USAA entry for years, and it gets tiring fighting him. Luckily people like you have kept him under control...

THANKS!!! 207.155.4.175 (talk) 23:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem! It's such a weird situation. --Matt (talk) 01:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems "USAA member in Poland" has returned for 'second helpings'. I've reverted his/her latest set of edits, and while I'm guessing you have USAA on your watch-list, I thought I'd give you a heads-up. :-) Nsaum75 (talk) 11:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! --Matt (talk) 14:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Delta article

Matt you say it should not be used for advertising but that is exactly what Delta is doing by providing one side of the argument. Please be fair and remove advertising links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FormerDeltaCustomer (talk • contribs) 23:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. --Matt (talk) 23:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Northwest Airlines

Well, thanks for verifying. I never thought MarketWatch would be capable of introduce such a glaring error, but funny it got the number of destinations for United and Delta correct. --CSharpBeatsJava (talk) 00:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cheverus-Seal.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Cheverus-Seal.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully done... --Matt (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Carnegie Mellon University Rowing Club

Matt,

I saw that the article regarding the Carnegie Mellon University Rowing Club was deleted upon the criteria that it was not encyclopedic. The club has a rich history, and significance in Pittsburgh, and as the publicity chair representing the organization, I have been requested by university officials to create a wikipedia article lending to the history of the organization. I also understand that Wikipedia encourages that we, the users, should not write about subjects in which we have personal interest/affiliation with, however, I feel that someone from this small organization would be the only person qualified to write a credible article about the organization.

Another quick comment for you personally, I apologize for undoing and changing your edits. I'm still a little new at Wiki-writing, and I had no idea you were an administrator. I just thought you were an internet punk ;-). Please forgive my arrogance.

So I kindly request that you restore my article, and maybe offer some suggestions as to how I can make the content more Wiki friendly. Thanks for your time.

Nick —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicksmarto (talk • contribs) 04:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't delete the article. You can see the deletion article to see who did. It was deleted due to not asserting its notability - not my nomination, and certainly not my decision - I don't believe such an article would be inappropriate. If you're conscientious of the conflict of interest guidelines, I'll watch the article and try to help the article stay neutral (and formatted well)! Cheers, and no hard feelings, I was trying to help it be included without being over the top. --Matt (talk) 04:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response! Is there any way I can obtain the text from that article back so that it can be modified to be reposted. I can't seem to find a way to temporarily undo the edit or other means of getting the script back. Should I contact the admin who deleted it? If you can restore it for me, or simply list the text here (dunno if you have that ability), I will make sure to add some notability to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicksmarto (talk • contribs) 04:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, so I can't do that - you can ask the admin who did it (User talk:Toddst1), he should be willing to put the article somewhere in a sandbox for you. There's some group of admins who's willing to do it if he's not able/unresponsive/etc, I just don't remember the link. Hope that helps, I wasn't trying to hate on Crew, just didn't think it needed as much airtime in the main Carnegie Mellon article as you initially gave it. --Matt (talk) 05:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Delta safety video

[2] The video hasn't aired on any flights as of writing but it already got many views (where did you find the number of views? Was that in the news story?). And the real reason why I made the section is because CNN put the people who made the video up for interview. In other words, news coverage by third parties. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

On the YouTube page, it shows the number of views under the video. I'm a bit of an anti-recentism editor, I'm against adding events that will fade to obscurity within a year being in Wikipedia articles. It's interesting this made it to CNN, but will it be notable in a year? Cheers --Matt (talk) 21:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, that could be an interesting question for debate (whether including in an article this counts as "recentism"). It seems that CNN isn't the only one - I found this from the Atlanta newspaper [3], this from Yahoo [4], and this from an Atlanta TV station [5] - I don't think this needs its own article but I wouldn't mind having a paragraph about it on the Delta article. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead and start a discussion on Talk:Delta Air Lines - I may be in the minority on this, but I just don't think it's notable. More of a human interest piece. --Matt (talk) 23:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

See Talk:Delta_Air_Lines#Press_coverage_of_2008_Delta_safety_video WhisperToMe (talk) 23:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! --Matt (talk) 23:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:Please assume good faith

It is common for users to assume themselves to be in a morale position to reprimand others on behavorial issues when they are directly involved in the dispute at hand and could not give a satisfactory answer in content disputes. I thank you for your remindeers nonetheless.--Huaiwei (talk) 20:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

There's no interpretation needed. You routinely comment on other editors instead of the content and letting the arguments speak for themselves. That's at the heart of WP:NPA. --Matt (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

And I believe you have just done what you are preaching against?--Huaiwei (talk) 20:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely not. ... stating "Your statement is a personal attack..." is not itself a personal attack. - Wikipedia:NPA#Initial options --Matt (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:500 qatari riyal back.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:500 qatari riyal back.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:500 qatari riyal front.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:500 qatari riyal front.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

my accounts

Matt, you are right and very smart, I have numerous acconts, Tajtheman, Steelcity95, Tsks9520,steelersrule, wikilover00, and wikifan6365, and also two ip addresses, the one i am using and another one. I still don't know ho I have two ip addresses. Also thanks for the comment on my talk page. That means a lot. Cheers 71.240.3.176 (talk) 11:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm just here to notify that you have a question at User talk:71.240.3.176. Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 23:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Blue links

blue links

The reason I undid your change is because you linked to a non existent article. Please fix the link to point at the actual US Airways Group article, and not the non existent US Airways Group, Inc article. Thanks --Matt (talk) 00:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Response

Response: If UAL includes 'Corporation', US Airways Group should include 'Inc'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CSharpBeatsJava (talk • contribs) 01:02, May 1, 2008

US Airline Pilots Association article - Solicitation for input

Hello. I'm soliciting opinions regarding the controversy surrounding the formation of the US Airline Pilots Association. Please see Talk:US Airline Pilots Association#Controversy and add you opinion. -- Tcncv (talk) 00:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the title. I'm encouraged that the first follow-up edit wasn't a total undo (grin). I welcome any further suggestions of contributions you would like to make. -- Tcncv (talk) 04:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Will do - I'm impressed with your work and dedication on this. I will look into it more later - I tend to fix little things piece by piece as I notice them instead of doing big edits. --Matt (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Great. Writing was never my strong point, but it seemed that nobody else wanted the job. -- Tcncv (talk) 04:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Any objections if I remove the POV flag from the article? -- Tcncv (talk) 22:41, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't object - I think you've done a bang up job! --Matt (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi protect user page

As a general rule, protection is only for regular vandalism. I'm not sure that once a month of less would be within the guidelines. The guidelines are here. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I know it doesn't fit the regular vandalism guidelines, but this is persistent harassment, not random vandalism. --Matt (talk) 00:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)