User talk:Crud3w4re

User talk:Crud3w4re/Archive 1

Conversation about you
User_talk:Pinkville.

Hope we have resolved our differences, happy wikiediting, and if you need any help, please let me know.

I also Refactoring talk pages your archived talk page, for easier reading.

In regards to some of your posts on your talk page: In my own experience, long irrelevant messages, [even if what you are saying is dead-on true], rarely get read. Worse, those long, off topic messages garner no sympathy from fellow wikipedians. Travb (talk) 13:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Free advice
Please keep in mind the analogy:

"You get more bees with honey than vinegar."

...I personally know it can be infurating when people mess with your user page. The smart, veteran wikiuser watches every word he/she says on wikipedia, and quickly learns that words are cheap, and are much less costly than protracted edit wars are.

You could have phrased your response to Pinkville very diplomatically, and he would have gone away and left you alone. (But In my experience, the best response is no response). Instead, with your virulent, angry words, you have got him upset. When people get upset, they act irrationally, and tend to lash out at those people who make them upset.

Instead of saying you got an "okay" from an admin to delete all your comments, you could have said:

I am sorry, I am a new user at wikipedia. I apologize if I am breaking the rules. User:XXX, an admin, told me that it was okay to delete the warnings on my user page. (link to message from admin) Maybe he is wrong, I am sorry if I broke any rules. Have a great day, thanks for all of your hard work. I would hate to be an admin because you have to deal with nasty wikiusers who don't know the rules as well as you do. Keep up the good work.

Remember, words cost you nothing, and they are much cheaper than the alternative: edit wars and eventually being booted. There is no shame in kissing other wikipedians asses to avoid contention and edit wars. Be a crafty and sly "POV diplomat", not a ignorant and bumbling "POV warrior". Travb (talk) 13:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Borisyeltsin.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Borisyeltsin.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a openly distributed image. Crud3w4re 09:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein Article
Crudwire, how many accounts are you using to edit the Saddam Hussein page? Caper13 01:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

You should also be aware of the WP:3RR policy on Wikipedia. Edit warring through reversion could cause you to be blocked from editing. Caper13 01:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Only this one, and I'm below the 3RR policy, so take your POV elsewhere. Maybe other people see the facts? You're the only only with a vast POV agenda in that article. Crud3w4re 04:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You got me. I am the only one. :) Be warned. Usage of multiple accounts is easily exposed via checkuser and is grounds for a user being banned. (again) Caper13 04:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm tired of your baseless idle threats, I guess you never read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assume_good_faith. If you have nothing constructive to say, goodbye. Crud3w4re 05:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeltsin
Hi there! I reverted because of pending copyright concerns. Nice picture, though... Camptown 01:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

lol yeah Crud3w4re 04:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Review
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Wyatt Riot 04:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You seem to assume bad faith, that's not very becoming of a Wikipedia user! I was adding an informative photo, how can you therefore assume that I'm using this site as a directory? Senseless accusations. Crud3w4re 04:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I added the spam template for this edit. It was not an "informative photo" and was very much spam. Wyatt Riot 11:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope. I saw it as a relevant link. Go away. Crud3w4re 17:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I must back Wyatt Riot on this issue, right now, without really investigating the website I don't see why that link was related with the topic. But perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps that website contained a subsection about review wich could be relevant. If not, even if the website is "good", there is no valid reason to add that link in that article ("inappropriate"). -- Esurnir 17:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was a good review site. The site has changed since then, so not anymore. Crud3w4re 06:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Micronations
I would be willing to help you on your micronation project Sloveniaiscool 23:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Adoption Offer
Hi there,

I would be happy to adopt you, I think you may have been waiting for an offer for a while - sorry. I can help out with technical or procedural issues - if interested leave a message on my talk page. Cheers Lethaniol 15:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay Adoption complete. Am able to answer any questions you have - technical or policy orientated. And if you want me to have at a look at any edits that would be cool to. Look forward to hearing from you. Cheers Lethaniol 22:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

"Lost your chances"
Could you please explain what you mean by saying that we lost the chance to ban Flameviper? You said it's because we didn't find his threats until after he agreed to a mentor. However, his threats to Elaragirl clearly came after the offer of mentorship. See Special:Contributions/Flameviper. The mentorship was refused at 19:05 and (possibly) agreed to at 19:19. The threats occurred at 19:22 and 19:31. It's quite obvious he was disruptive after the agreement, so how did we "lose the chance" to "ban" him as you stated at WP:AN? Metros232 02:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)