User talk:Catgut/Archive 2

Catapult ammo?
I'd like to know WHY you are trying to silence the truth about these chickens being used as ammuntion for catapults? The people have a RIGHT to KNOW about this kind of stuff. Sick as it may be, you can't just "pretend" its not happening!

Techno
It would be helpful to explain why you reverted my edits to the techno article. I would like to contribute to the article. I planned to come back and build on my contributions but you reverted them with no explanation. So, I do not know how to proceed in such a manner that will prevent you from reverting it again.

RE: Madison piercings
It wasn't bias. I'm sorry, but I'm very interested in body mod, and I don't like to think- and I'm sure you don't either- that WIkipedia is advocating poor piercing and jewelery choice. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.16.108 (talk) 22:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter
The February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Alycia Lane
An editor has nominated Alycia Lane, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: congratulation
Thank you for your kind message! I actually quite enjoy translating, but I'm quite busy at the moment, so I don't get to do very much of it. Thanks again... random kindness is one of the things which makes Wikipedia such a great place. Cricketgirl (talk) 12:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Vienna State Opera
Hi and thanks for your work on this. However I'm a bit concerned that we may be guilty of WP:Listcruft here. Almost every important singer of the past 100 years has worked in Vienna. Is there some way we can restrict the list to singers with a special connection to Vienna? Thanks. --Kleinzach (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. that all sounds very sensible and I look forward to working with you on the article when you have time. Best. --Kleinzach (talk) 03:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2008 Newsletter
The March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Nazi Germany
Hi. You are right. I did intend to delete the entire comment, I think I used rollback by mistake! Thanks for finding and correcting it. Greetings TINY  MARK  04:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! --Catgut (talk) 04:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

About Gisele Bündchen
Hi Catgut, you asked me about her over a week ago. For the record, I did respond, but I responded on my talk page. Thanks. Acalamari 22:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thx for the message! --Catgut (talk) 04:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What in blazes are you doing to our talkpage?!
Why are you vandalizing our talk page like that?! We are a public college and do not appreciate being labeled as cyber vandals! 66.99.216.2 (talk) 21:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not your talk page. If you'd like to have a talk page of your own, then become a registered user. It is not possible to remove earlier warnings from an IP's talk page. Thanks for your cooperation. And take a look at the edits attributed to your IP! --Catgut (talk) 21:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talkpage!CrazyChemGuy (talk) 02:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Please cease modifications to the talk page of this IP address. It achieves very little. I think you know which one I mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.24.14 (talk • contribs)
 * Thanks for your message, but this advice is unnecessary. Warning templates are not to be removed from IP talk pages, not even by an IP, as IPs do not own their talk pages. If you'd like to have a talk page completely of your own, you have to create an account. --Catgut (talk) 04:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2008 Newsletter
The April 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Good Work
Noticing your name popping up a lot at WP:AIV tonight. Keep up the great work. Trusilver 05:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the nice words, appreciate them! --Catgut (talk) 05:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
Thanks for catching the vandalism on my talk page! Pinkadelica 05:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Natascha Kampusch
I've replied at Talk:Natascha_Kampusch. Dorftrottel (criticise) 07:18, May 2, 2008
 * Thank you for notifying me. But I've said all I wanted to say, so I don't feel the urge to further participate in the discussion. --Catgut (talk) 17:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

WOW!!!
How did I vandalize the discussion on the desperate housewives episode! All I did was say that editing wikipedia is not for everyone and that some people just use wikipedia to find information! This is Unbelievable! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.86.112 (talk) 19:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, talk pages are to be used for discussing the respective article, not for commenting on Wikipedia policies etc. --Catgut (talk) 19:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

your a corrupt person who can go get his internet modem thrown off a building. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.86.112 (talk) 17:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Donny Long
Thanks for the reverts. I know who "Jeremy Steele is. He was having a goof, but he's promised to knock it off. Donnylobg, unfortunately, really IS Donny Long, and seems Hell-Bent on hiding his own comments while vandalizing the Christian XXX page.

I am in the process of finding wiki-acceptable sources for Long's REAL criminal record. I expect much revision and counter-revision then. James W. Ballantine (talk) 01:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Just a reminder that WP:BLP states that "The use of inflammatory edit summaries or vandalism-related talk-page templates should be avoided" when dealing with the subject of the article who partially blanks his biography. Considering the subject is attempting to correct or blank a contentious portion that was not properly sourced to a reliable source; this does not constitute vandalism, and your warning was inappropriate. Vinh1313 (talk) 02:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thought you'd like to know...
The IP you have recently warned (76.106.242.246), Vandalized your userpage 9 times! I reverted them just a second ago. Oh, and don't worry, he'll be blocked! See you around! Dark Zorro  20:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Sorry about the Barnstar someone formatted it wrong.

Vandalism 2
Thanks for catching the vandalism of the List of Fictional Astronauts. Graham1973 (talk) 13:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for the barnstar! If you ever go for RFA, I'll put in a good word for you (though I am not an admin myself). Cheers ! Dark  Zorro  15:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

he is not joined arsenal for god sake

MARIO GOMEZ IS NOT JOINED ARSENAL
this is a bad rumour please dont believe it untill its on the arsenal website —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.7.90.168 (talk) 07:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Lydia (film)
Can you please write a plot summary for this article?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 08:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I haven't seen it, nor am I in possession of any usable source, so I can't do it. Sorry! --Catgut (talk) 23:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For fixing the vandalism on my user page :) TallNapoleon (talk) 11:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! --Catgut (talk) 02:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Likewise! Booglamay (talk) 22:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! --Catgut (talk) 02:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Trying to embed image
Hi Catgut, Thanks for your note, but I'm having trouble trying to figure out how to embed images in the webpage for the 272nd Infantry Division (Germany). I would delete it but I don't know how to do that either! As for copyright issues, I don't know where to begin on this particular one - the Pferdekopf image at issue here was the WWII tactical symbol of a German infantry division - so I don't know if copyright issues even apply here. Please advise, as I've no idea as to how to go about this - Thanks much! Regards, Doug Nash —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Nash (talk • contribs) 11:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking me, but I guess you have been helped in the meantime! --Catgut (talk) 23:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverting
Are you a bot? No seriously, you keep beating me to reverts, and revert page blanks quicker than ClueBot, how do you do it? Keep up the great work. Sunderland06 (talk) 03:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, and thanks for the nice words! I don't know whether I'm really that fast or not, but in case I am, I owe it to this great tool. It's very helpful. I'd recommend it to you! --Catgut (talk) 03:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah you are very fast, and I do use huggle, its great. Sunderland06  (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I had a certain suspicion...:-)) Best regards! --Catgut (talk) 22:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

question about your use of onesource template
I was looking through Foreign relations of Italy and noticed that one section (which obviously needs more sources) has the label which you put there. On Template:Onesource it states that this is for citations in an article or section that may be "inappropriate or misinterpreted". The one source that is in the section does not seem to be misinterpreted, so I was wondering why you used that template instead of or something else similar. I have asked a related question on Wikipedia talk:Template messages and have not received any response, so maybe you could shed light on it as well. Thanks Mathman1550 (talk) 15:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Foreign relations of Italy. I've checked it again, and if I haven't overlooked anything, the template regards the section dealing with relations to Israel. There's just one source for the section, and that's the homepage of Italy's embassy in Israel. The text was merely a copy of what I found on the homepage. I don't know whether or not that has changed since February. Probably not. So I used the template in the way I thought was appropriate. Of course I may have been wrong, on the other hand the template's short text seems quite clear! But you're right, too! Well, in case you think that another template was more suitable, go for it! Best regards, --Catgut (talk) 00:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'd like to thank you for restoring my talk page!

Sorry
Little brother —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halosean (talk • contribs) 01:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Your user page
Semi-protected. :) Like the banner too. Acalamari 01:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you! --Catgut (talk) 02:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Acalamari 15:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Kunta Kinte has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. · AndonicO  Engage. 03:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ouch, sorry. :/ Aren't you on the huggle whitelist, though? This shouldn't happen... · AndonicO  Engage. 03:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I assumed you used huggle (fast reverting ;) ); this bug happened once before... hope it was just a single incident in your case, though. · AndonicO  Engage. 03:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Cheers, · AndonicO  Engage. 03:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks, always good to see that one's work is appreciated! --Catgut (talk) 01:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

GTA The Trilogy
Oh sorry for doing vandalism on GTA The Trilogy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Australiaaz (talk • contribs) 05:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. Next time you wish to propose an article's deletion, please do not remove all of its content. Because this is always considered vandalism. Good luck! --Catgut (talk) 07:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Mickey Mantle
That IP address, or whatever it was, had a goofy way of putting it, but Mantle was in fact seriously injured on a fly ball during the 1951 World Series. Coming toward center from right field, he tripped on a drain cover and messed up his knee, as center fielder DiMaggio made the catch. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This obit talks about it, among many other sources. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It happened in Game 2, and was indeed on a fly hit by Mays. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, thanks for your message and providing these sources, great work! --Catgut (talk) 01:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Gonna insert that later! Thanks again! --Catgut (talk) 01:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Go ahead. I think the IP, in a clumsy way, was trying to point out (as the obit states) how significant this injury was to Mantle's career, which was injury-prone in general. I'm not sure the article talks about that enough. The Mick overcame a lot and achieved a lot. It's an interesting coincidence that the 1951 injury came on a Mays fly, as the two men were often subject of debate as to which was the greatest player of their generation, and believe me, it's a tough call. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, don't you want to put that into the article yourself? I mean, you really know what you're talking about! I'm impressed! Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 01:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It kind of opens a can of worms, but I'll give it a try. I'll revert the reversion of the IP address comments, except I'll rewrite them in English. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Silly me, it's already in the article, under "Injuries". I missed it somehow. Hey, that was easy! :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Great! I didn't see that either! --Catgut (talk) 02:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter
The May 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow...

 * Thanks :D! Shapiros10 Wuz Here    00:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2008 Newsletter
The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk)

Sorry
The edit I made to Mike Rowe was an accident, those damn vandals come in several ip's and when I clicked revert, it reverted to another vandalism act, please understand. --- Tyler Puetz (talk) 23:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

hey
You reverted my edit. What's up with that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.223.62 (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I am new to wikipedia
Re: Lewzair I am trying to create a profile for myself and I used another profile as a template which is why I am removing the mis information I wa snot trying to vandalize anything I am trying to prevent from the wrong information being on my profile because most of the information does not pertain to me so can i edit it freely somehow? or do i have to start over? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewzair (talk • contribs) 00:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Look out, I have an upset tanker! [runs over Cat with tanker] --Tony Feld (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Doy doy doy doy --Doy-doy people (talk) 17:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Jennifer Aniston
Sorry about that - honestly thought that there was a spelling mistake. I promise not to do it again. 92.2.122.213 (talk) 11:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok! --Catgut (talk) 12:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

TVXQ
User:Yukihana24, to whom you have issued a final warning for vandalizing TVXQ is not vandalizing that article. The user is trying to fix a problem caused earlier today when I undid a couple of changes and in the process duplicated a bunch of data. The user's changes are totally legit and valuable. -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK ) 09:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This user posted to the article's talk page, wondering why someone kept undoing the changes she'd made to correct the article. She had no clue she was being accused of vandalism.  I have responded to her at length, explaining what was happening and suggesting she use edit summaries in the future.  Is there a way to remove the warnings from her talk page?  I know if I was in her shoes, I'd be very discouraged from editing again.  And is there any way editors can actually look to see if the changes were vandalism before issuing a vandalism warning?  Yes, she should have used an edit summary, but a quick look would have shown the edits were constructive and yet three editors, in rapid succession, all failed to see that and instead made accusations.  Thanks. :) -- hamu♥hamu  ( TALK ) 09:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Captain Confederacy says
...there ain't nuttin on the page anyways; its gonna be deleted here pdq since it satisfies the csd criteria. I don't see me as doin' any harm to a page that already been sentenced to death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.108.97.167 (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read Vandalism, and accept the fact that any behavior fitting the description is vandalism, and punishable as such. Furthermore, it is not your job to judge whether a page has "already been sentenced to death". There is no article that may be changed by you in a way contradicting our policies and principles. Thank you for your cooperation! --Catgut (talk) 23:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Syria
Thanks for the rather abrupt advice, but that was not unsourced. Please read the intro where the term "Emergency Measures" is already referenced. In addition - the term "single party state" is not referenced at all hence my removal of it. Thankyou --77.98.178.218 (talk) 00:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless I think you'd better first discuss this with other editors. At least you should have written a different kind of edit summary in order to explain your edit. --Catgut (talk) 01:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2008 Newsletter
The July 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Maurizio Iacono
Hey, with your reinstatement of the PROD tag here; people are perfectly within their rights to remove prods if they disagree with the deletion or if they've updated the article enough to counter the reason for deletion, so assuming the former and assuming good faith i've moved it to AfD. Ironholds 23:40, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Supermodel edits
If you're this convinced the term supermodel isn't neutral, then I invite you to correct the pages for models like Adriana Lima, Heidi Klum, Tyra Banks, etc. I edited a few model pages myself, but it'll take someone with more authority than me to make changes stick for those articles (to say Lima fans are ardent would be an incredible understatement). Mbinebri (talk) 23:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello, thanks for your message and your irony! See for example the history of Gisele Bündchen where the same problem arises time and again (don't know whether she has less ardent fans...). As WP:NPOV applies to all articles, I will certainly do my best to support this policy. Cheers --Catgut (talk) 23:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, it seems I've put my foot in my mouth by saying it's the Adriana Lima fans that are ardent, when in fact it's the editors of Marisa Miller's article. Oops! And thanks for the Barnstar! Mbinebri (talk) 19:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "Supermodel" is an accepted and neutral term for a prominent model, found in reference works such as the Oxford English Dictionary - It does not imply any lack of neutrality in a Wikipedia article. Using it to describe a certain person does not imply that the writer thinks that person is "super", "fabulous" or any other non-neutral term which violates NPOV. It simply indicates that the person concerned has reached a certain high status within the modelling profession. If you think such a description violates NPOV, then what about the description of a nation being a "superpower" - does that also violate NPOV????? If you think using the term "super" in the way it is used in words such as "supermodel" violates NPOV, then why not also remove all mention of the word "superpower" from the entry for the USA? - By your definition, it must also violate NPOV!! Emma white20 (talk) 00:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Whether it's in a dictionary or not, is unimportant. It is an assessment, not a profession. Though it may be mentioned in the article that Schiffer was or is or could be regarded as a supermodel, the introduction has to be absolutely pov. --Catgut (talk) 10:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections
Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter
The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections - voting now open!
Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 00:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Model vs. Supermodel
Hi Catgut, FYI due to the scope of the changes you have made to the relevant articles on WP I have initiated Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fashion.--Termer (talk) 01:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I would also like you to comment on this topic, Catgut, as a user named Tarheelz123 is going around renaming models to supermodels and ignoring my comments, which is obnoxious. The person has a history of unconstructive edits (if not vandalism) and getting a consensus on this would be helpful, although this is the kind of user that probably needs to be blocked for a week to get anything through his/her head. Mbinebri (talk) 14:09, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Lisa Snowdon
Was born Lisa Snawdon. Snawdon is her family name. She was born a Snawdon. Her parents are Snawdon's. There's not many of us left, so stop changing the page, when I fixed the information! —Preceding unsigned comment added by TiffanyDell (talk • contribs) 18:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Look here: http://en-gb.facebook.com/srch.php?nm=Snawdon - you can find her 2 sisters (both Snawdons!) and her dad (Snawdon).

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20134302,00.html - again discusses it here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TiffanyDell (talk • contribs) 18:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, thank you for your message and the information. I guess it was the lacking source that made me eliminate this. But please do not attack other editors in the edit summary! --Catgut (talk) 23:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Winehouse
Oh my GOD, I am so glad to see someone else question the inclusion of all things inconsequential on this page. Wildhartlivie (talk) 11:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yeah, some people love to include all kinds of things. And there is a certain weakness for PR generated stuff, like some magazine's 100 most attractive and seductive aspiring redhead actresses etc. Especially in Winehouse's case I think there's some interest in keeping the talk about her alive until she has produced new recordings or is doing live concerts again. The background of all that of course is rather sad. It's about money. --Catgut (talk) 22:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Austrians
Sorry, could you again have a look at the article? I´s been changeg again. Thanks. --193.170.52.132 (talk) 22:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, thanks for notifying me! --Catgut (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Tamakwa edit
Greetings Catgut. Sorry I did not notice your warnings as I tried to edit the entry on Camp Tamakwa. I feel that the entire discussion about the accident last summer, regardless of the result or guilt or anything, should not be part of an objective discussion of Camp Tamakwa.

When I was creating the Wikipedia entry for my hobby magazine, the PinGame Journal, I was constantly corrected and edited until I submitted an objective, non judgmental discription of the magazine and I now understand and agree with that standard.

This evening, at Thanksgiving dinner, I was discussing the camp with a few guests and was informed that the parents of the child who eventually died following an incident at the camp were conducting a massive, multi level attack against the camp and its owners. First, everyone involved feels horrible for the parents of this child. There are law suits pending, the facts are far from clear, and of course emotion is very high in this case. HOWEVER this accident does not describe the camp and it is not appropreate for the parents or anyone else to use Wikipedia as one of their misguided weapons against the camp and it's inappepreate for Wikipedia to allow this misuse of its pages.

I'd be happy to discuss this further with you or others, but I deleted the entire reference because it should not be there.

I'm a little unsure how to conduct this communication, I hope I got to the right place, and will try to respond if I can figure out how. Thanks Strykerman (talk) 05:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for contacting me. In cases like this it's always always best to present your arguments using the article's talk page before changing the article itself. I'd ask you to do that, just as you've presented your arguments to me. Be sure to follow our guidelines, such as WP:NPOV or WP:VERIFY etc. Then give other users enough time to react to your proposal. Minimum would be a week. If there's no objection you can then notify others on the talk page that you have deleted the respective text. This would be the standar procedure. Of course that doesn't mean that I side with you or that I support your efforts. I am totally neutral, and only observe whether WP guidelines are being followed. In this case the problem was your deleting sourced material. This is potentially seen as vandalism, and therefore reverted respectively answered by banning a user (which could have easily happened to you). Your argument for deleting the text could be, that it doesn't fit in etc. Again, be sure to check our guidelines. Good luck, --Catgut (talk) 09:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I love this process, and from someone who has come to the brink of disaster twice, now, I think that means something. I'm reading up on NPOV etc. and will post an entry as you suggested. However, I'm a little "bothered" by the "look" of my talk page with now two histories of being "yelled at" over and over. In both cases, while I spent some time reading various guidelines, I apparently didn't "get it" till, in this case, I finally realized that the content I deleted wasn't just magically rematerializing and some human intervention was in play--hence this discussion. But the page does not reflect any fixing or changes or "getting it" ... I presume that if I had persisted, there would be another posting saying I'm now blocked from editing. But since I came to my senses, I wonder if there shouldn't be an "up side" comment with some cute logo saying something about glad you finally noticed our warnings and you are following Wikipedia procedures ... or something. I guess the absence of "block" notice is something but a positive notice would be clearer to others, especially for new users. If I saw a page like mine, I'd think ... "what is this guy trying to pull??" Thanks for your comments. Strykerman (talk) 15:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, of course you are entitled to *clean* your talk page, as you can basically do with your talk page whatever you want, i. e. deleting messages etc. (see Talk page guidelines and Talk page guidelines in particular). But be sure that quite a few now trusted users have encountered difficulties in the beginning, some were even banned. Every community has its rules, some of them unwritten and referring to social behavior. One needs time to grasp that, of course. If you get along well with others in the future, nobody will care about what has happened before. Unfortunately, if there was no permanent control of new entries or additions to existing articles, this place would very soon look like a mess. --Catgut (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all the info and guidance. I posted my views on the talk page and we'll see what happens. If it's not received well, is there an appeal process? Also, slightly off topic, I'd like to ad an external link on my PinGame Journal page to the magazine web page but I'm "gun shy" and don't want to mess up again. I see similar links on other pages but ... can you tell me if it's ok ... ??? Strykerman (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit-warring at V. S. Naipaul
Catgut, hi, my apologies if you already knew about this policy, but you seem to be breaking WP:3RR at V. S. Naipaul. I am also concerned that you are not trying to engage in discussion with the other editor. Granted, the proposed changes may or may not be unwise, but per WP:BITE, experienced editors should try to explain wiki policies to newer editors, rather than just reverting them on sight. As I looked through the article's history, it appeared that the other editor was at least trying to come up with different wording, but you've just been reverting everything without discussion. A better way to handle this, would have been to start a thread at the talkpage about why you were reverting, and direct the new editor there. That would also make it easier for other editors to review the dispute and perhaps make suggestions on how to proceed. But please stop with the reverts, thanks. --Elonka 01:25, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello Elonka, I politely disagree with you, and unfortunately I fail to understand your arguments. As you may know, WP:3RR doesn't apply when fighting vandalism, see WP:3RR (I happen to know that after roughly 13,000 edits). Inserting POV is against WP:NPOV, a WP policy. Calling somebody whose view is cited in an article an ideologue as the IP first did, and as the new user continued to do, violates NPOV as long as it is not supported by any source. Which leads me to another WP policy: WP:SOURCE. Again, ideologue is certainly not a profession or a job or a gender, this would have made me add this: . No, it was inserted intentionally to possibly denounce somebody quoted in the article. I think somebody capable of inserting this should also be capable to read and understand the messages left by me on his talkpage. Furthermore, the IP inserting ideologue was suddenly replaced by a newly registered user who also kept inserting this term. He received respective messages. These messages should have made it possible for both the IP and the newbie to learn something about WP's core policies. And the first message is always a very polite message, therefore it never violates the WP:BITE guideline. Now, after some time has passed, you may check for yourself if the user has in any way reacted to my or your messages in the meantime (until now he hasn't done so). He has eliminated a sourced quote from the article, that's the status quo. What conclusions should we draw from this? How do you want to proceed? Leave V. S. Naipaul as it is, an article that already doesn't pride itself with too may sources? Or wait for any reaction in the future, or simply accepting somebody's definition of Edward Said as an ideologue? Quite frankly, I do not share your arguments, and I'm surprised that you call my reverting of possible or actual vandalism (and deleting a sourced quote without providing any reason is vandalism after all) as edit-warring and accuse me of possibly breaking 3RR. But of course I'd be happy to continue this discussion with you, and I'm looking forward to seeing you clarify your arguments! Best wishes, --Catgut (talk) 04:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Catgut, I do understand that you've done a lot of great work on Wikipedia, and it is appreciated. :)  I also agree with you that 3RR does not apply to reverting vandalism.  However, these kind of edits cannot be called "reverting vandalism".  See WP:VANDAL.  Instead, they appear to be a content dispute.  A better way to handle things would have been, on the first or second revert, to post at the talkpage explaining why you were reverting.  And even better than that would have been to provide sources, per WP:V, to bolster your position.  You could have added some inline citations to the "Edward Said" line.  This would not only strengthen the article, but also make it easier for you to revert, since you could use much stronger edit summaries such as "reverting unsourced information" or "reverting to version that agrees with what is in the source".  Then the burden of evidence is on the other editor.  Or in other words, if there was a solid source on that line, and someone reverted to remove that source, it would be fairly straightforward for an administrator to block.  Or, if there were a source on the line, and someone changed the line to say something different than what the source did, then again, an admin has a clear path towards a block.  But when there's a completely unsourced section, and two editors who are just going back and forth reverting each other, passing 3RR, and neither one of them is bothering to explain things at the talkpage, well, on a first glance, both editors usually appear to be at fault. Please understand, I didn't just block you for 3RR, because I see that you've got a long history of good contributions.  That's why I opted for a gentle reminder rather than a block or a templated warning.  But please, in the future, try to (1) bolster your position with sources; and (2) explain things at the talkpage?  That'll make administrator jobs much easier.  :) --Elonka 06:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response! I concede that now you have some arguments I can agree with, and I'll take them into account. On the other hand I still disagree that this was just a content dispute. The IP and the user inserted something that wasn't verifiable, it was unsourced, and maybe I should have pointed this out more often, but at least once I did so. Therefore at the first glance you're right. But at the second glance, for example by checking Edward Said, it was clear to me that somebody had chosen to intentionally insert something that should have been sourced. For example, do I need to be gentle and start a discussion if somebody inserts "the fashist George W. Bush" or "the socialist Barack Obama" instead of "President George W. Bush" or "President Barack Obama" into an article where they're just quoted? And you see, neither the IP nor the new user have in any way reacted to your or my comments, nor have they started discussing their reasons on the talk page. I think that says it all. Anyway, thanks for your words. If anybody calls Bush a fashist or Obama a socialist I'll let others handle the problem! Makes my work much easier... --Catgut (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

TheDarkLorg
This is Tor, TheDarkLorg. --89.179.112.231 (talk) 10:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Well... hello... whatever... --Catgut (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Milli Vanilli
You reverted my edits with no explanation. I have reverted you "Undo" as my contributions to the article are factual and true. Thankyou.
 * Well, yes... if there is an All or norhing album... Fine! --Catgut (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Q
Can I vandalize my own page? 96.232.11.55 (talk) 21:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Obviously you can, but your edits are likely to be reverted. As an anonymous IP you don't have an *own* page. And refactoring the comments of others is never allowed, not even on your own page if you are a registered user. --Catgut (talk) 21:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought my talk was my own page but I see your point. I have a problem though. Some guy mindlessly reverted my edits and gave me a warning. I left a post on his page asking him to please read what he's reverting and he reverted that too. Is there anything I can do? 96.232.11.55 (talk) 21:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean. No, actually you can't do anything. In this case it truly is this user's take page, and basically a registered user may or may not remove comments if he wants to. Of course you could try it again and post a new message. At least you can be sure that he sort of notified your message. Anyway, please do me a favor, stay away from any possible vandalism, be polite, and if you're planning to do more edits, why don't you just register yourself? It's easy, and you just have to remember your password. --Catgut (talk) 21:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer, but I think I'm going to stay far away from here if people can treat me rudely, revert my edits, and completely get away with it. 96.232.11.55 (talk) 21:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Undid revert at Talk:List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts
Hi Catgut, I undid this revert at Talk:List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts. Maybe a false positive from WP:HG? I see nothing wrong with the comment per se. It may be a result of canvassing, but if it were, we'd want the record to reflect that. best regards, Jim Butler (t) 23:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, you were totally right in doing so! I must have overlooked something, because I remember seeing the same comment a short time later and concluding that it was fine. I've already removed the erroneous warning from the IP's talk page. Thanks for notifying me, and kind regards, --Catgut (talk) 18:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For reverting vandalism to my talk page. Cheers, JNW (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure! Best, --Catgut (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * And thanks for reverting my user page. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 14:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! --Catgut (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Wrongly Accused!!
We have had big problems with connecting to the internet. Our ISP does not allow anonymous edits to Wikipedia pages (I tried a few days ago). I do not know why you are pointing the finger at us, but I assure you, neither myself nor my sister have been vandalising Wikipedia pages from this TCP/IP address, and I cannot think how this could have happened.

If anyone is able to throw any light on this matter, I should be grateful for your advice.

217.44.226.185 (talk) 14:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, of course I'm ready to help, but could this be sort of a misunderstanding? The last edits referring to this IP were registered back in May, and they were clearly vandalism (like inserting profanity etc.). Anyway, maybe there were other problems involved the nature of which I can't tell you about right now, and as those incidents are now long gone by I suppose the whole matter should be regarded resolved. Merry Xmas, --Catgut (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Questionnaire
As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Moksa
Hello. I am not a vandal. I am merely removing POV material from the Moksa article. There are no sources whatsoever! (for the material that I removed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.72.221.214 (talk) 07:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

About Heidi Klum
When you regard someone as German American, that means he is an American, not a German (in nationality). Do you know what I mean? "German American" is an "American". On the other hand, if someone both has German ancestry and German nationality, than he is a German, no matter how many citizenships he has. Kevin Kuranyi is an an example, you won't say that he is German Brazilian Panamanian. My point is, if you regard Heidi Klum as German American, than you mean she is an American, not a German. It's definitely wrong. Heidi Klum's official website named Heidi Klum GmbH. Do you know what GmbH mean? The last but not least, if Heidi Klum still has German nationality, she is absolutely not German American. German American is not both a German and an American, German American is an American in nationality. Heidi Klum still has deutsches nationality, so she is a German. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthiasyang (talk • contribs) 20:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think I understand some of your arguments, but not all of them. I agree that Klum doesn't fit into the German American category. But as she has both the German and the US citizenship, she isn't just a German or an American model, but a German-American model. She is German and American! It's not that a German citizenship would eliminate all other possible citizenships! Best regards, --Catgut (talk) 21:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Prestonpans
The five edits for which was warned concerned the removal of an infobox from  which in fact didn't belong to that page, but to. Although the editor might be at fault for not using edit summaries and not paying attention to the warnings, I don't feel that this merited a block (and an admin has already dismissed the report). I am also at fault, for the first three warnings were placed by myself. However, I think it would be courteous to remove our warnings for the user, and instead leave a friendly notice encouraging the use of edit summaries in the future. Gail (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, thanks for notifying me! --Catgut (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Just realized that the last warning hadn't been placed by you after all. I'll inform Proofreader77 too. Gail (talk) 22:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm responsible for reporting the user... Shame on me! --Catgut (talk) 22:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it, I was the first to revert, so it's mostly my fault... you just repeated the same action another "established editor" had already performed repeatedly. And apart from the warnings, no damage has been done anyway ;) Gail (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great! Anyway, it was nice to meet such a responsible and respectful editor! See you around! --Catgut (talk) 23:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Same here :) Happy editing! Gail (talk) 23:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you for the barnstar! Glad the edit was appreciated! Cheers! --Catgut (talk) 00:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Move of films with Italian titles
Please see this on WP:AN/I. (Despite the title, some of the films are Italian, not Spanish.) Ed Fitzgerald t / c 04:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello Ed Fitzgerald, thanks a lot for alerting me! Seems as if the matter is resolved by now. Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Reverting Vandalism

 * My pleasure! Thank you for your nice words! --Catgut (talk) 21:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

The reason why I was editing Andrew Brons is because he does not believe in neo-Nazism nor white supremacy.

AGH
oops, im sorry i didnt know howta get to sandbox, i got messed up! really sorry! o_O wont happen again, sorry antivandalismdude —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.235.250 (talk) 21:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK! --Catgut (talk) 21:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Ragemanchoo
Ragemanchoo is my old SN. I figured I'd clear that page since I don't use it anymore. --98.232.180.37 (talk) 09:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Possible anonymous vandal
You reverted user 74.138.69.122 on Hideo_Kojima difference link and left a caution on his/her talk page.

This anonymous poster also appears to be using 75.117.192.86 and has added spurious claims to James_Bond_novels difference link. Contributors to Beck object to his/her posts also.

Let's continue the discussion on your talk page.

Fanthrillers (talk) 21:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment. I've reverted the remaining unsourced information added by the user. --Catgut (talk) 00:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The anonymous user has signed up as Zebadayus and has reverted us again on James Bond novels and Spike Spiegel, adding further spurious information to the latter article. Fanthrillers (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As his only edits have been the addition of bogus information, I have permabanned the account as "vandalism only". I'm not on Wiki too much these days due to "real world" commitments, but if the IP keeps acting up, we can block it as well. Unfortunately we can't permaban IPs, much as I'd like to. 23skidoo (talk) 03:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thanks! --Catgut (talk) 10:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Changes Reverted
This is my own text which I initially created for www.skiwithbob.com AlpineSkiingCanada (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC).

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Last Straw
I made a characters page, and am working on it. Please stop reverting my edits; they're not vandalism. E.B. (talk) 21:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Derek Thompson
Catgut, user 86.133.201.32 has been constantly defaming (and defacing) Derek Thompson's page requiring many warnings and deletions from registered users. Despite the many warnings they continue to defame and has yet to be blocked. I'm struggling to understand how to go about requesting the user ip is blocked. Can you help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amt2002 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, thanks for your message! Today the user you're referring to has been blocked for 72 hours (see this). We'll see what he's going afterwards. Anyway, I'll keep an eye on him. --Catgut (talk) 22:20, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Billboard 2008
I am not vandalising any pages. What are you talking about? Billhits (talk) 22:39, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user page. --Igoldste (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! --Catgut (talk) 22:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism
Thanks for the revert :) DuncanHill (talk) 22:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! --Catgut (talk) 22:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You is in deep man
Yo! What is your problem. I was telling the world how bristol really is. We are gonna smash up El Dub soon. They have got it coming to 'em. Do not delete my comments again before i batter you. Booyakasha —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godgodgod123 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting my page. I guess that was one of the more unique pieces of vandalism I have seen in a while :-) --DFS454 (talk) 20:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Pleasure! Thanks for the cookies! --Catgut (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Question about External Links
I have been told that a bot is removing my entries to the external links sections of some of my entries. Each link sends the user to a website which contains the company's authorized history of the corporation. I think we are being deleted by mistake. Thank you. Stevenstahl22 (talk) 21:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for responding...
I see... well, that makes sense... I had to ask another person not to keep editing the page in question, as politely as I could... he hasn't edited it since... you see, he kept changing some numbers so that they were inaccurate... I had to tell him/her, in no uncertain terms, that what they were doing was harmful, and if they read a reference included on the page, they'd realize their edits were harmful... thanks for your response... I just hope I never have to actually report someone for vandalism... Magus732 (talk) 16:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

willy wonka
My Edit towards the willy wonka page was very informative


 * However, as the tour progresses, each of the first four children misbehave against Wonka's weak warnings, resulting in serious consequences. The Fat Ass Kid is sucked through a chocolate extraction pipe system and into the Fudge Room after trying to drink from a chocolate river. The Gum Chewing jailbaiter transforms into a giant blueberry after trying a problematic experimental piece of Three-Course-Dinner Gum. The Stupid Spoiled Bitch and her father are rejected as "bad eggs" and sent plummeting down a garbage chute in the Chocolate Golden Egg Sorting Room after Veruca unsuccessfully tries to get her father to buy her one of the egg-laying geese, and then attempting to take one for herself. Mike is shrunk down to only a few inches after being transmitted by "Wonkavision," a broadcasting technology that can send objects through television instead of pictures. The Oompa-Loompas sing a song after each mishap, describing that particular child's poor behavior.

Kratom
In response to your message, My "source" is first hand experience, I personally used Kraton to overcome a Hydrocodone addiction. How do I cite that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.87.209.214 (talk) 03:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your question! Please have a look at WP:SOURCE. Good luck! --Catgut (talk) 10:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism Warnings
Hi Catgut, I noticed you gave a level 1 vandalism warning to an IP and shortly after, gave a level 4 warning to User:98.30.39.29. Please be careful when reverting vandalism as even this really does not deserve a jump from level 1 warning to level 4. Regards, Fastily (talk) 04:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello, thanks for your message! I respect your view, but I disagree with you on that issue. It was clear that the IP was engaged in vandalism, and that the edits weren't accidental errors. I do think that patience is a good thing, but it is simply unwise to accept a possibly endless series of edits containing "butthole", "anal", "cum", "vagina" etc. There is a clear difference between editors inserting those terms, and others who remove content (could be accidentally or an edit war, or somebody not familiar with our regulations), insert pov terms or unsourced info etc. In the latter cases it would be ridiculous to answer a gunshot with an atomic bomb. But those IPs with visibly bad intentions simply trying to obstruct our project and make it appear trashy mustn't be tolerated or treated like royalty. If it's absolutely, they get a clear warning, and they have the chance to cooperate. If they don't it's in their own responsibility. Btw, the last warning or the reporting is not done by the same editor as the blocking, so there is a mutual control. Furthermore, I've never seen a complaint by a blocked user of having received a level 4 warning too early. I guess, these users know and understand exactly what they've done, as their hope that their vandalism would go unnoticed was proven wrong. Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 10:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

In heavines of heart
As I look out over the things having been done, I have very many sorrows in my iron heart. I have Latin teacher dying of lechtrechonodes and she is in the belief that nobody cares anymore about Sallust and I am trying to show her other wise. I see that I have erred! I will be a good person from ever more and shall not trouble anybody.

However I have friends with same concerns but different sufferings who may have learned differently. I hope they will be good, but two things are not the same: learning by hearsay and by experience 128.197.244.207 (talk) 13:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank You
I just wanted to thank you for reverting some vandalism on my talk page. Thanks,  Genius  101 Guestbook  21:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, it was a pleasure. Thanks for your message! --Catgut (talk) 21:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

More thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. It's appreciated! Keep up the good work. BR, d99figge  22:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message and the appreciation! --Catgut (talk) 22:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Sorry for vandalising those articles. I accept the warning. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, and I admire it for that. It is no place to air personal views, it's just sometimes I feel helpless and frustrated at the state of affairs in my country, so I rant about it on here. I now realise that's prolly not very effective, given that my edits are usually reverted within minutes, so i'm gonna rant my frustrations somewhere else in future. Cheers 79.75.248.40 (talk) 22:19, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, thanks for your honest message. I may say that while completely understanding your feelings and your rage, I and my fellow editors must revert biased edits in order to keep this a reliable and serious place. I respect your honest apology, and thank you for your civilized manner in putting this conflict aside. Best wishes, --Catgut (talk) 22:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep no worries. I guess i might take up blogging or something. regards 79.75.248.40 (talk) 22:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
For reverting the vandalism on my userpage!-- Giants27 : Chat  22:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure, you're welcome! Thanks for the message! --Catgut (talk) 22:37, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

The same from me--many thanks, JNW (talk) 22:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for telling me, you*'re welcome! --Catgut (talk) 14:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

trying to move this page. the name should be in english and not in spanish. SenorDonGuapo (talk) 21:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

An award for your efforts

 * Hey, thanks so much for the recognition, that's cool! Although I always try to put quality above speed, and take great care in avoiding errors or biting newbies. But sometimes speed is a strange category. Take a look at this: Somehow the user managed to fool us for about 90 minutes before he was finally blocked! He received warning after warning, but nothing happened, so he went on and on. Anyway, thank you for the nice words, and I hope I'll soon be able provide you with some nice barnstar! Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 21:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Headline text
this time hundred percent his win —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.226.105 (talk) 06:41, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Abstractionism at V.S. Naipaul
What on EARTH is going on at V.S. Naipaul? If someone wants to replace the abstraction "postcolonial theorist" with the much more commonly accepted term "political activist" when it comes to describing the profession of well-known ideologue Edward Said, why the persistent reversions? I am pleased to finally see that we've settled on a concrete profession ("pianist"). Thank god for that. But goodness. Enough is enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigwikiguy (talk • contribs) 06:38, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

re Bigsaidlover
I would advise you that I have indef blocked the alternate accounts - including the above - of this editor, and have in the meanwhile unblocked the main account as they have given an undertaking not to edit other peoples posts. I am sure you will let me know if they do not keep to their word. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Your decision to unblock the user's main account is fair, and I fully support it. I'll let you know if anything happens that would contradict the user's promise, but for the moment I believe in the user's willingness not to engage in any further disruptive actions. Thanks a lot for your efforts, Mark! Best regards, --Catgut (talk) 23:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much
A few days ago I was not aware that they existed, and now I have two. If your screen has a pink tinge to it, it is because I am blushing. Cheers, LessHeard vanU (talk) 10:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for being a little late, I somehow forgot to reply...! Anyway, you truly deserved it! Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 23:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

 * Hey Abce2, you're welcome! Thank you for the barnstar! Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 22:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the destorying of vandalism on my talk page. I really have no idea why people do that stuff. --Abce2 (talk) 00:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome again! Well, don't worry, it would be worse if you actually had an idea why people do that stuff... Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 00:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

'nother thanks
Thanks for fixing the weird vandalism on my user page. You'd think there'd be better ways to vandalize something. TravisAF (talk) 01:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Catgut >:(
Look, Catgut. All the people don't care about adult stuff if they have kids or they're too little for that. It's like the human rights about not allowed to have adult themes. (Cabutchikas (talk))
 * Hello, thank you for your message. Unfortunately I have to disappoint you, as Wikipedia is not censored for ethical, private, religious or other personal reasons (see the link for more information on the subject). Thank you for your cooperation. --Catgut (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Userpage Barnstar

 * My pleasure! Thanks a lot for the barnstar, I truly appreciate it! Cheers, --Catgut (talk) 20:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you get paid for this?
I was wondering if you get paid for being an internet cop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.68.252 (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course I get paid for this. About a million bucks per hour. --Catgut (talk) 11:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

vandal page
i vandalised a vandal page, so why are you threatening me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.255.209 (talk) 22:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello, it's not your vandalbox, and certainly not open to all sorts of profanities! --Catgut (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * i posted a picture... of something i thought the page owner would find funny. it actually says to vandalise there. 217.42.255.209 (talk) 22:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but it also says: "Keep all images to 500px or smaller." --Catgut (talk) 22:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for removing vandalism from my talk page! -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome, thanks for being polite! --Catgut (talk) 01:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Warning
Please do not try to remove messages on other user's talk pages as you did to User talk:Jeremyalexander. Yes, he hadn't received a friendlier suggestion to use the sandbox first but even WP:AGF there is enough evidence to believe that he is intentionally making disruptive edits to Wikipedia.-- The Legendary   Sky Attacker  21:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that there's maybe some lack of experience on your side, as you've only joined Wikipedia in March. If you take a look at the respective page it should be obvious that your warning was replaced by my warning, maybe due to a technical error which is not totally uncommon. Of course you could have asked me about it as it should be clear by looking at my userpage that I'm an experienced user, not a vandal, that I haven't been given the rollback rights for nothing, and that I really don't need to be informed about not removing messages on other users' talk pages. Instead you chose to issue a *warning*, not even saying Hello or maybe asking me about the matter. Honestly, I consider your message quite unfriendly. --Catgut (talk) 21:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't intending to be unfriendly. I just wanted you to be aware. Also, my account may have been created in March but I have edited in the past as an IP, so I have been around for a while now.-- The Legendary   Sky Attacker  21:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully, I haven't offended.-- The Legendary   Sky Attacker  21:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)