User talk:72Dino/Archive 2

Thanks
I appreciate your comment on the Huckabee article. Having grown up in the south I have a rather intimate knowledge of Southern Baptists and many of their congregations. To this day my extended family members who are LDS "suffer" (I can't think of a kind way of saying it) at the hands of their ministers and membership. They are denied the opportunity to coach on little league teams, Baptist children are told not to play with LDS children, and the constant amount of anti-Mormonism that is discussed from the pulpit is an ongoing active problem. I bear some bitter scars from my youth living there. Forgiven, but not forgotten.

History is a favorite topic of mine. When we forget the past, we will repeat it. As a LDS the people that scare me the most are Evangelical Christians. If I have learned one thing is when a group is more emotional than spiritual, all types of things are possible. I digress; it was worth the discussion and it had served it's purpose and was time to move on. --Storm Rider (talk) 02:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Greenrico09
Well I'm not sure. If it is they are doing a better job than the last time. If you think it is then you might want to check with User:Alison as she did the checkuser on him. I've still got all the California articles watchlisted so I'll keep an eye out. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 21:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue V (January 2008)
The January 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! &mdash; Noetic  Sage  22:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

John McCain
Why did you remove the section I wrote about John McCain? You said the article was about the convention and not about him. To some extent this is true, and to others it's clearly NOT. The rules set up just before the 1972 convention are very specific, and designed to prevent anyone but the front runner to have any control over the convention. With McCain this far ahead, it's going to be another pro-forma event cheerleading the campaign. Huckabee and Romney have only three more chances to stop him, and in order to do that, they're going to have to sweep the board. Even if they do this, it's still gong to be about McCain, as he's going to have the largest chunk of delegates. stick the "chapter back in. Ericl (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I said nothing about the article being about the convention and not about McCain. You may be mistaking me for another editor.  I reverted your entry because you are forecasting by saying "John McCain will arrive in Minnesota the presumptive nominee".  He may very well do that, but none of us know that for sure so it is a violation of WP:CRYSTAL.  Unless you have a published source saying he will arrive in Minnesota as the presumptive nominee, that part should be removed.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 23:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

revert copyvio
My apologies Alan, I reverted the wrong article. Ah, the wonders of tabbed browsing. :) Gareth Chamberlain (talk) 00:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 00:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

opinion request for college articles
I have been engaged in an edit dispute for college articles. The dispute is about rather or not athletic logos are a necessity in the infobox of college articles. The infobox states that the secondary logo at the bottom can be for athletic logos, college image or emblem. The other editors insist on having athletic logos in the infobox. I have maintained that a secondary can be the college emblem and that the athletics logo is more appropriate in the athletics section. There seems to be a bias toward athletics in the disputing editor's edits. Therjerm has seemed to have this bias. absolon as well. I have reviewed many college articles on wiki, especially ones that wikiproject universities has deemed good articles. All of them do not have athletic logos in the infobox. What is the rule in this matter? thanks Scotcra1 (talk) 03:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * My first comment would be that editors should be discussing matters such as this on the article's talk page, not going back and forth in the article itself. I think it is a good topic for discussion.  Second, I am unaware of any rules regarding this (I'm not saying there aren't rules, I just am not aware of any).  As you pointed out, the Template:Infobox University indicates that the secondary logo can be for "Use for an athletics logo, corporate emblem, or similar image".  I just looked at a number of FAs and GAs on universities, and you will see most with athletics there, but not all (for example, Dartmouth and Brigham Young Universities). Some also include a logo as part of the nickname or mascot.  My opinion is that using an athletics logo is common but is not a requirement, but that is just my opinion.  Good luck, Alanraywiki (talk) 04:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Monson edits
Thanks for the nice edit summary, especially since you had to clean up my lower-case zeal. Nicely written article, too. Flowanda | Talk 13:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Warning vandals
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: You may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned.  Enigma  msg! 18:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

List of United States business school rankings
Thanks for reverting my error. I was looking at the wrong source. --Orlady (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and I saw your comment that this article is for MBA programs, so I agree with your change on the BW ranking. Alanraywiki (talk) 01:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Josh Romney
I have proposed this article for merger with Mitt Romney. Please refer to the discussion page for my reasoning and if you would like to make any comments. Mstuczynski (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Invite
Jccort (talk) 16:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VI (February 2008)
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! &mdash; Delivered on 19:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Roman Catholic Church

 * Thanks for the info, I use internet explorer too and I only saw one column. NancyHeise (talk) 16:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Greenfield,CA
dud, population dosent matter on the priority!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdrg93 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, population size does matter. See priority scale criteria at WP:WikiProject_Cities/Assessment.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VII (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! &mdash; Delivered on 17:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

To someone well-deserving
You seem to be doing good all over the place--keep up the good work!

Thanks!
Wow...my first barnstar...this is especially rewarding considering it comes from a high-quality editor like yourself. Thanks again! --Eustress (talk) 19:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Mormonism
Did you not read what I had on the edit note? There is in fact a reason why it was edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dynehart (talk • contribs) 01:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read your edit summary. However, the changes you made were a point of view that has already been discussed on the talk page.  Please review what has already been said on the topic on the talk page.  If you have any new information, please add it to that discussion.  In addition, it may be helpful to review the Wikipedia policy at WP:NPOV.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 01:58, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The changes I made are in no way a "point of view". Explain to me how a religion with so many disagreements with Christianity's core principles can be called Christian by anyone with a neutral point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dynehart (talk • contribs) 02:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion is more appropriate at the article's talk page rather than mine. I am moving it there.  Alanraywiki (talk) 03:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Your doing all the work—perhaps make it official :)

 * Thanks for the invitation. I added myself and will do what I can. Alanraywiki (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Noted Mormon Apologist
Please add this title.

Utah's Nickname
You asked for a source after deleting my addition to the article for Utah. I don't believe it is possible to source a nickname. If many people use it, then it becomes a colloquial phrase. I am friends with MANY Utahns (both past and present residents) and I have on many occasions heard them refer to Utah as "'Tah." In fact, I received their approval on the edit. I never claimed everyone calls it "'Tah," I just said that it is a nickname some use. I do not believe it is wrong to include Utah trivia in its wiki article.

Do you feel it is better suited for the "Miscellaneous" section? I just felt it would be most appropriate next to the official name's origin. Andysac12 (talk) 07:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * First, I want to welcome you to Wikipedia. It looks like you are a fairly new editor, so I hope will enjoy editing Wikipedia.  Something that will be helpful is reading the Five Pillars of Wikipedia to help guide your edits.  In the case of the Utah edit, the reasons I reverted it is because there needs to be a reliable source that states that the nickname 'Tah is used.  In this case, I would think the Salt Lake Tribune or Deseret News would make mention of this nickname.  If the use of that nickname has not been published, then it would fall under the Wikipedia policy of no original research and cannot be included.  As far as putting it under Miscellaneous, Wikipedia also discourages trivia sections.


 * If this nickname really is sufficiently widespread for inclusion in an encyclopedia, I'm sure a publication will have printed it. I hope you find one because I went to school in Utah for a couple of years and visit relatives there and I've never heard that nickname, so it sounds interesting.  Best of luck as you continue editing . . . Alanraywiki (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your helpful feedback. I will let you know if I come across a published mention of the nickname. As a local, colloquial phrase it may be hard to come by. Thanks again! I will check out those links. Andysac12 (talk) 04:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WPBYU Collaboration for May
This month's WP BYU Collaboration of the Month is J. Reuben Clark Law School. I look forward to working with you to improve the article. Thank you! --Eustress (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Help
I need help putting a pic in the Greenfield,CA article but idk how can u plz help me? heres the pic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Greenfield%2CCA.jpg#file Rdrgz93 (talk) 00:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The only pictures I've done are ones I've taken myself. I'm not sure how it works with pictures from other sources.  Sorry I don't know how to help you on this. Alanraywiki (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VIII (April 2008)
The April 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! &mdash; Delivered on 21:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

David Archuleta
The information I was provided by two (2) unrelated sources thus I hardly consider this poorly referenced. I'm sure there are more references I could establish on this subject and will do so if requested. The websites I cited are visited by many users. It's not a violation. Thank you for making Wiki a better place! :) 69.133.83.124 (talk) 01:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There are three Wikipedia policies you need to read closely:
 * Biographies of living persons. In particular, it states that "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space.  Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm"."  Wikipedia requires reliable sources, which leads me to the second policy,
 * Verifiability. The important section of this policy in this case reads "Self-published sources [i.e., blogs] should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer."  Unrelated sources is not relevant.  The fact that these are self-published blogs is important, particularly in the case of living persons.  They are not to be used.  And last,
 * Three-revert rule. You keep being reverted, but you continue to place this inappropriate material on the talk page.  You have been given sufficient warnings and now you have documentation of the multiple policies you have violated.  Please discontinue edits of this nature.  Alanraywiki (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Kolob
Alan - please note that, although I'm using an IP number today, I was reverting a vandal/tagger on the Kolob article. Thanks for your vigilance. 65.54.98.30 (talk) 00:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. Somewhere in the going back and forth with the vandal it looked like you may have accidentally reverted Book of Abraham to Book of Bryan Anderson.  No problem . . . I think it's fixed now.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 00:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: sockpuppet blocks
All accounts have been blocked and their user and user talk pages protected from new and unregistered editing. Thanks for your assistance! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 21:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for handling that! Alanraywiki (talk) 21:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Brigham Young University Collaboration for June 2008
Thanks to all those who helped out with May's collaborative project (J. Reuben Clark Law School) and other BYU-related articles. I look forward to working with you on this month's article. Go Cougars! --Eustress (talk) 16:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for catching the vandalism on my page! Joshuajohanson (talk) 23:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. Alanraywiki (talk) 23:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Brigham Young University Collaboration for July 2008
Thanks to all those who helped out with BYU-related articles this last month, and a big thank you to Wrad for helping get June's Collaboration (BYU Jerusalem Center) to GA status. I look forward to working with you on this month's article. Go BYU! --Eustress (talk) 17:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello. I noticed you undoing two edits on Scotland. The rollback option lets you undo all the edits by the most recent editor and is good for undoing vandalism (and only vandalism). Would you like me to enable the rollback option on your account? It can always be disabled - just ask me or any admin - if you decide it's something you don't want after all. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Angus. I have been meaning to ask for that to help out with the rapid-fire vandalism edits.  Please enable the rollback option on my account.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. If you have any problems with it, just give me a shout. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Thanks
It's my pleasure. Just watching out for fellow Wikipedians! —— Mr. E. Sánchez  Wanna know my story?/ Share yours with me! 22:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for your help on the Pioneer Day (Utah) reference. Cecilupkia (talk) 19:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. I appreciate your work on expanding the articles.  Alanraywiki (talk) 20:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Chino Hills Vandalism
It does not matter who is it closer to, Chino Hills is part of the Riverside-San Bernardino Metropolitan Area so there for it is a San Bernardino suburb, including Pomona, even though it is in LA county and even though it is closer to LA City instead of SB City. You need to face reality, stop edit war please, I dont like them!MountCan (talk) 22:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It has already been discussed on the article's talk page, as I noted in the edit summary. Let's discuss it there and let others weigh in.  Just because it is in that metropolitan area does not make it a suburb of San Bernardino.  Also, a content dispute is not vandalism.  Alanraywiki (talk) 22:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Welcome to my world. I'm being accused of vandalism for something I never did. Amazing. And apparently, it has something to do with this. Alan, you should see my talk page. You've got it good... --haha169 (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like fun . . . I believe that User:MountCan is a sockpuppet of banned user User:House1090, an editor with a decidedly pro-Inland Empire and San Bernardino agenda. Another editor noticed the same editing similarities and has tagged MountCan's talk page.  I requested a check user of MountCan yesterday.  Good luck and, by the way, I appreciate all the work you've done on the earthquake edit. Alanraywiki (talk) 22:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey Alanray, I started a thread at Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Please help me make some noise over there to get some admins to act on the case. Thanks, Amerique dialectics 23:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we were thinking the same thing at the same time . . . see my entry there! Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 23:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

He's a sock? That's unexpected. This is the second time this week I've been pursued by a sock for something I haven't done before. Kind of odd. They're different people though...I think... --haha169 (talk) 23:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * He's not a sock of a current account. MountCan started up a few days after his last sock, User:Salcan was blocked for scrambling Salvadoran namespaces.. Checkuser confirmed the relationship between those accounts, and said it was likely that the operator was also behind the various accounts assoicated with House1090.  Amerique dialectics  00:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello Alanray: This discussion might interest you: Administrators'_noticeboard. Best, Amerique dialectics 21:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Brigham Young University Collaboration for August 2008
Thanks to all those who helped out with BYU-related articles this last month, and a big thank you to Wrad for helping make some big strides on July's Collaboration (BYU Hawaii). I look forward to working with you on this month's article. Go BYU! --Eustress (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Chino Hills quake
Hello there! Thanks for the correction, hadn't picked that up I suppose. Anyway, I'm preparing this for GAC right now so I'm wondering if you've got any suggestions, other corrections, etc. Cliff smith (talk) 15:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll take another look today at the entire article with an eye towards good article status. By the way, you did a great job on the article.  You certainly put in a lot of excellent work in content and citations.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 16:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Really? (a grin cracks his face) Thanks! Really appreciate it. Cliff smith (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Mormanism and Christianity
Why did you change my revision to Religion in the United States? Although Mormons have some of the highest morals and ethics of any religion, Mormonism is technically not a denomination of Christianity. You see, Mormons believe that the Bible is the word of God, but they also believe that the Book of Mormon is a section of the cannon. Christianity does not believe this to be the case, as Christians don't believe the Book of Mormon was inspired by God. To say Mormonism is Christianity is like saying that Christianity is Judaism, as both religions believe the old Testament is inspired, but Judaism teaches that the New Testamant is not the word of God. Have you ever wondered why Mormon Temples never display a Cross, the symbol for Christianity, or represent them self with a fish, another Christian symbol? I would appreciate it if you would reinstate my revisions. Thanks. Me.gusta.destrozar 19:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason I reverted your edit is because you changed what the source, the CIA Fact Book, stated. Mormons, that is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, are indeed Christians.  However, I was reverting your change of a citation.  Alanraywiki (talk) 19:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Nimbley
Hello there! Well, it's certain from these two edits alone that that ip is our friend Nimbley. I was most disappointed that the sock case just closed abruptly without somekind of formal recognition or escalation. I'll be brutally honest here - I think Nimbley is a child with cognative impairment or some other kind of behavoiral problems; I don't think we're dealing with someone you can negotiate with on a normal level, and I still believe that a range block is the only way forwards here. It would only need to be a few months worth, perhaps until he goes back to school in Sept/Oct.

Even if I block this IP, a new sock or address will just appear and I feel I'm we're fighting a loosing battle without backing from someone experienced in ips and range blocks. What are your own thoughts? --Jza84 | Talk  19:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Nimbley appears unable or unwilling to learn about proper Wikipedia editing, along with poor judgment on most of his edits. I would attribute some of this to his age and maturity level.  Nevertheless, Wikipedia should be a serious project, so it may not be appropriate for everyone to edit if they cannot follow some very basic rules.  The whack-a-mole approach has not been working.  We have been spending too much time on Nimbley's vandalism that could have been spent improving the encyclopedia.  I think at this point something more drastic needs to be done, perhaps as you suggested some kind of range block.  Maybe that would allow him to find a new hobby more appropriate for him.  Thank you for your thoughts, Alanraywiki (talk) 15:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: San Onofre State Beach
and

Re: Trestles
Subject: Toll Road Controversy.

You are quite correct that the news reporter said both several "cities" and "politicians." My thought is that the reporter is in error in that this is redundant. Politicians are on city counsels (and in other posts), hence it was my thought that selecting "politicians" was a more accurate reflection of what the reporter was reporting, rather than the redundancy probably proffered to the reporter (by proponents of the Toll Road I suspect - don't get me wrong, both sides of a controversy work hard to manipulate the press) that "cites" somehow spoke independently of the politicians. Based on the poll (also added to the article), 66% of the voters oppose a toll road through San Onofre at Trestles, and since cities are made up of those same voters (rather than just politicians), I am unclear that “cities” favor the toll road going through San Onofre.

The TCA quotes the part of the poll that states people support ("want!") a toll road (at least 52% of them), but those same people surveyed (in the second part of the poll), oppose the toll road going through San Onofre State Park (by 66%). So, the TCA constantly puts out part one of the survery touting how the people want “the” (rather than “a”) toll road, and the opponents contantly put out part two of the survery that people oppose “the” toll road, generally ignoring the fact that it really that they only oppose the toll road going through the state park (the opponents doing all they can to gather up not only the people opposed to the toll road going though the State Park, but also to get support from the 48% that oppose any toll road -- the opponents not being any more naive than the proponents in manipulating words to garner support).

But if you feel it is more accurate to state that cities support the toll road, please go ahead and make that the edit, but I stand firm in my belief that to use both is what one does to persuade readers, rather than provide a more neutral (and IMO, accurate) account. I still believe “politicians” is the better choice since some are not city representatives, but rather, represecnt disctricts in Orange County, or San Franscisco, or even Central California.

Thank you for considering my point. LexVacPac3 (talk) 05:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I do understand your point, but the San Diego Union-Tribune is a reliable source and we should stick to what they say rather than our interpretation of what they meant to say or should have said. This entire section already is too large for the article.  I am just trying to keep the article neutral.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 05:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Inalnd Empire
There is 2 cities because thier is one for each county —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.141.166 (talk) 20:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * But it is one region, so the number of counties does not matter. Just one city belongs in the infobox. Alanraywiki (talk) 20:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Earthquake template
I was mass-reverting the edits by a sock of, and went perhaps too far. Like many problem users, he also does some good things now and then. I'll restore those templates. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 01:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Museums in California - Regions Help Appreciated
Thank you for making any needed changes in the regions listing for List of museums in California. It's such a big state and the regions on the California Wiki template are not always the best for trying to help people figure out where things are. Since I am not from California, I appreciate anything that would make it easier for people to find the museums by area. Jllm06 (talk) 14:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I can help out at least in the Southern California regions. Great job, by the way.  You've done a lot of work to get all this information.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 14:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Latter Day Saints
Seems this article is really just an elaborate category, particularly if you are going to distinguish between current and former Latter Day Saints. If Rosanne Barr isn't LDS, because she is "former" then you need to also move all the criminals, because they all have been excommunicated. But that defeats the purpose of the article, which is to show how people are related to Mormonism. I say delete both articles and just have it be a category page. Bytebear (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually tried making this into categories last year, but that process was reverted. Check out the talk page.  I was always under the impression after looking at the lead that this list was for current members and the other article for former members.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 20:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine, but criminals convicted of felonies are automatically excommunicated, so that section should be paired down or removed It can be moved to the former Mormon article.  I will read through the comments, but this looks a lot like a self made category, which is silly since we have a method for categorizing things already. Bytebear (talk) 03:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Art Center College of Design
Thanks for catching the inappropriate paragraph; it wasn't my intention to revert it back into the article. Oops. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

please look again Skis Rossignol
in response to Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Alanraywiki (talk) 15:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC) This text is not copied and pasted, based on the article it is however rewritten in my own words. I have changed back and hope the article will stay that way
 * It looked verbatim before. I will review again and if it is subtantially different (i.e., more than changing a word or two), I will revert myself.  Alanraywiki (talk) 15:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I reviewed your changes to the article again. A few words were changed in the first couple of paragraphs, but the rest was a direct copy, including phrases like "our" alpine boot range and "uncontested world leader".  You need to make a lot more changes for this not to be a copyright violation.  The entire section should be in your own words.  A source other than the company web site would also be helpful.  There should be plenty of sources to support the championship claims. Alanraywiki (talk) 15:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)