User talk:1234r00t/Archive 8

Hello Vegetarian dude.
Hello, I was wondering if you could adopt me on wikipedia, to know how to use it properly, not just for saving my ass on hwk. Could you? Hugs.
 * ✅- just so you know, when you post on a talk page you should sign comments with ~ .  Mr. R00t    Talk  22:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Adoption
I am a boy who would like to learn how to use Wikipedia properly. I've always attempted to contribute but I can never seem to get it right. Could you mentor me please? -Damon ;) 00:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggestions
Hello, user: Mr. R00t i had been trying to contact you in order for you to check a section i had wrote about the celebration of the mexican independence in the northern states of Mexico such as coahuila, zacatecs, san luis and others. So i will be glad if you check it and suggest me what should i change. Thanks C.E.Q. (talk) 18:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, what is the article?  Mr. R00t    Talk  00:13, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Office 2007 Page
I have fully made the Office 2007 comparison sheet extensive and had made it look much better. It shows two charts of information in one and I made sure that all of the information is accurate and correct by looking at the previous chart. I used the formatting from the Office 2010 comparison chart. I would like it if that edit could be left, as I have made both 2007 and the 2010 office pages great by adding more information and fixing false information. Thank you. Elliot Thomas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.87.224.103 (talk) 00:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahh, apologies. I was only looking at a single diff which showed a very large piece of information being deleted. It did not show any other edits. What's more, it hit an edit filter which marked it as "Probable Vandalism". Sorry for the misunderstanding,  Mr. R00t    Talk  00:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, thank you for fixing. - Elliot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.87.224.103 (talk) 01:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi!
Great userpage and userboxes!!! I think I'm going to borrow a few of the UBX's. Best, Rob R OBERT M FROM LI  TALK/CNTRB 01:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Go ahead. You don't even have to give attribution for the Userboxen.  Mr. R00t    Talk  01:13, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know... just like being polite - and noticed similar interests (hence grabbing some of the UBX's) :-) Rob R OBERT M FROM LI  TALK/CNTRB 02:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. I didn't see your signature and assumed you were a new-ish user instead of an experienced one.  Mr. R00t    Talk  02:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion contested: Chase Fleisch
FYI, I've restored the deletion request on Chase Fleisch, because it is a clear candidate under A7 because the claims are outrageous, incredulous and supported squarely by the fact that they are not sourced. Further, instead of templating regulars with messages that are clearly at the time completely moot, which messages are designed to instruct new users, and declining deletion on articles which so obviously warrant deletion under asserted or under other valid grounds you should instead correct the tag yourself, such as with a BLP PROD. If you have any questions or require any assistance, please don't hesitate to drop them on my talk page. Cheers! :-)    Thorncrag    02:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right, sorry.  Mr. R00t    Talk  02:51, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Mentor
hi, thank you for snding me a message, yes i will like you to help me with my writting in English. Right now we are working on chosing a topic for our final project and writte it in Wikipedia, any ideas. MontseSalin (talk) 03:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I saw your message at User talk:Alpha Quadrant. A company is a great idea! Just let me know what your writing about so that I can watch it and help you out.  Mr. R00t    Talk  23:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello Again.
Hello, I was wondering that you could help me with an assignment my english teacher left to us. We have to search an article and look what's wrong in it to correct it, but i can't find anything that i could barely use. I checked the gorillaz article and it seems alright, but it's missing all tour dates, a dvd that came out wich is a documental and more webpage references. Could i use that or not? Thank you and regards! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goochinaski (talk • contribs) 00:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * All of those are good ideas! Personally I'd go with the Gorilla article as I find them fascinating. All I can really say is choose whatever interests you and make sure you cite sources. Cheers, ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 00:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edits to Bull shark
excuse me, why did you revert my edit? I provided references to the information. Do people now go about and delete as they wish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.234.8.19 (talk) 01:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A few tips:
 * Always provide an edit summary
 * In your second edit, you removed relevant terms and linking (apex predator) preventing others from being able to do further research on that portion of the premise at hand. This, though I know it wasn't your intent, dumbs down and damages the article. Had the linking not been provided, an explanation of the term (apex predator) or inclusion of the link to the term (which was there) would have been a better method. Since the term was already linked to the page on apex predators, it (IMHO) probably should have been left alone.
 * In your third edit, you already provided a statement above and a source to support it. The extra statement was probably not necessary; and though that may not be reason enough to disclude it, the statement could have either used some rewording or a better method of including it.
 * The tool MrRoot used reverts all edits - not just the unconstructive one (#2). I'm sure he'll explain his rationale for the revert and the message he left you when he has time. Hope that gets you started though on some ideas on how to re-contribute the information in a better fashion. Best, Robert R OBERT M FROM LI  TALK/CNTRB 02:05, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Robert. Basically I reverted for the reasons he said above. I also saw in edit #2 that you didn't add a source or use an edit summary. Both of these are usually things that make you look up from your keyboard and revert. ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 19:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

AGF
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ANowlin talk 00:57, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'm aware of that and have already reviewed such policies. Please refrain from template'ing the regulars. I realize that I've made some mistakes recently and have actually been thinking of requesting my rollback permissions removed or at least re-evaluated. ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 03:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's a level of self-honesty and self-restraint that's very refreshing to see (much respect for that). With that in mind, I'd hope you refrain from making such a request and instead use the knowledge gained more effectively. :-) R OBERT M FROM LI  TALK/CNTRB 03:51, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Robert :D ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 03:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Your revert on Bomb must have been a mistake...
I reverted your revert on Bomb. Given your normally reasonable editing patterns, I can only expect that your revert was some kind of mistake.

If it wasn't a mistake, you would have decided that my two edits were objectionable in LESS THAN ONE MINUTE. Surely you usually give such things more thought than that. Also, you didn't give edit comments explaining your reasons for revert, something experienced editors like yourself usually do, unless the edit is made by mistake. You also sent some kind of warning to my (IP) talk page calling my edits "non constructive" when a half of a second's glance would see that they were not. Again, most editors only do this kind of thing by mistake.

My first edit was clearly a copy edit correcting an obviously awkward construction. In the second edit, I took the time to check the reference and found it and the whole sentence to be inapplicable. The second edit could be legitimately argued, but you didn't make any argument in your edit comments, leaving the impression of mere impetuousness on your part. That may not be the case, but it sure looks that way when edit comments are blank and when a "knee jerk" reaction is made so quickly.

But, I'm sure it was a mistake. :-)

108.7.7.6 (talk) 04:06, 14 October 2010 (UTC) :A) I could give you another warning for incivility FYI. When using an automated browser to patrol edits you don't have the option to enter an edit summary. All I saw was that you removed a reference. This is not a good idea except if you have consensus on the talk page, which you didn't have.  Mr. R00t    Talk  23:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC) I apologize for my inappropriate behavior. Comments below are correct. My sincere apologies. ♫  Mr. R00t    Talk ♫ 04:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've removed the warning on the talk page. Also, there's nothing to warn about, especially regarding civility, as 108.7.7.6 messaged you in good faith asking you to clarify your revert. On the other hand, stating that you will issue another warning in unnecessarily bitey, so I wouldn't recommend you doing so in the future. Regarding using the automated tool, it is important to note that the user is still responsible for checking the edit to see if it is indeed vandalism. While mistakes might be made, it's important to fix them as soon as someone points them out. Now, the edit itself had a clear edit summary that explained why the reference was removed, so it should not have been reverted so quickly. And finally, any editor may edit the article, so no consensus is required to make such uncontroversial edits to an article. "All I saw was that you removed a reference. This is not a good idea except if you have consensus on the talk page, which you didn't have." doesn't make any sense at all, since consensus is not required for making such improvements to an article. If you have any questions or need any help, feel free to message me. Netalarm talk 04:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Netalarm, I wasn't being bitey. He made a possibly controversial edit which should have reached consensus on the talk page. Removing references is not a good idea unless the reference is a) incorrect (shown through discussion on the talk page) b) not conforming to one of our policies (also through consensus on talk page). Basically you should have consensus except for removing link spam. ♫  Mr. R00t    Talk ♫ 19:11, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Netalarm is right in every aspect. You were bitey.  You warned an IP user for vandalism for removing a source, IN GOOD FAITH.  WP:AGF.  They reverted you, and politely explained, assumed good faith on your part.  You retort with a threat of issuing a warning for incivility.  If an explaning why a revert was reverted constitutes incivility, then someone needs to warn every single user on Wikipedia.  The Only person here who is not being civil is you.
 * Your "a)" and "b)" above are PARTIALLY correct. Those only apply if there is a dispute.  WP:BOLD.
 * Best bet, applogize, forget about it, and move on. Continue, and I'll give you a well deserved incivility warning, or maybe just leave it up to the folks at WP:AN/I.  Cool it, NOW.  ANowlin  talk 00:54, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ANowlin, please remain calm. YELLING is not appreciated in the least bit. Please see HYPOCRISY. Telling me to "Cool it NOW" is not in the least bit constructive. Telling me that you've noticed that I haven't been AGF calmly is much more constructive. ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 16:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Editor review removed
I've removed your request for an editor review from the main page, as your last request was made less than a month ago. In order to ensure that everyone that requests a review be reviewed in a timely manner, requests made within 3 months of each other may be removed. Of course, you are more than welcome to display the editor review request templates on your user page (Editor_review) to let other users know of your request. Netalarm talk 22:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 22:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Update on Mexico City students
My students are now working a number of different articles in groups. These are Street marketing, PyMEs in Mexico, The Eyes of My Princess, Diagnostic Enterprise Method, El Tepeyac National Park, Alpura (company), Bernardo Quintana Arrioja and User:Oscarbrum/Epitafio De Un Asesino

Any and all help is appreciated.Thelmadatter (talk) 22:15, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I've been wondering about that. Thanks for the list. ♫  Mr. R00t   Talk ♫ 22:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

thank you
Thanks for your helpful tips regarding my question to reinstate my deleted page. I appreciate it! LeaveDogLights (talk) 17:53, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:20, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

group work about Sports Marketing in Mexico
Hello, my and another class mate are writing an article about "Marketing in Mexico". It would be nice, since you seem to have some experience in the Wikipedia Worls, if you could go the next days through it to help us to correct the different details and to give us your opinion about it...thank you in advance for your help, Lr.dinghi (talk) 05:23, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Online ambassador interest
Thank you for the interest in being an online ambassador, please fill out the Application questionaire and e-mail it to Sage. We will get back to you soon about your application. Thank you! Sadads (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll do that.  Mr. R00t    Talk  20:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)