User talk:Dropal

Regarding edits made during January 1 2007 (UTC) to Ex-Vandal
Welcome to Wikipedia! We could really use your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as "Ex-Vandal") are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. ShakingSpirit talk 03:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

In any case (I know the above standardized warning is a little cold), I know you didn't mean any harm; here's my standard welcome message so you don't make a silly mistake like that again ^_^

ShakingSpirit talk 03:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok
My bad. i'll try harder.

Dropal 03:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and...
You might be interested in the userbox, which gives:

^_^ ShakingSpirit talk  03:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC) - One wonders why you would be so quick to judge another. You know nothing of me. Accusing my addition to be the work of a vandal can be considered libel. UrsusBlue, Ursusblue, and ursusblue are copyrights and I feel they have some relevance, if not to you, to others who have seen work created by me (Michael Brennan, Ursus Blue) and are curious to learn more.--UrsusBlue 23:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Frenchman Butte No. 501, Saskatchewan
Could you please explain why you tagged Frenchman Butte No. 501, Saskatchewan as nonsense? User:Zoe|(talk) 23:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Incomplete articles do not count as nonsense, and there was nothing nonsensical in the article. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It was an article about a place with over 1000 people in it, and it was easy to verify by Google. What made it nonsense? User:Zoe|(talk) 23:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar, I think. :) User:Zoe|(talk) 00:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Samuel Shullam
Hi. Why did you put the "update" template on the Samuel Shullam page? I don't see what it out of date? —Dfass 04:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Shullam lived in the 1500's. A 1906 source is perfectly "in date".  If you have more current information about him, please add. In the meantime, I will delete the template and replace it with an appropriate stub template.  Thansk.  —Dfass 04:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Ruski commie & Jewish Bolsheviks
You gave absolutely no specific reason for tagging the above first item for deletion.
 * Please do so immediately, or remove the tag as an error on your part. --Ludvikus 05:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

What does this mean?: Pure vandalism, including redirects created during cleanup of page move vandalism. --Ludvikus 05:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC) It means that you created a page with absolutly no merit to get attention, well, congratulations, it worked.Dropal 05:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you are unaware of the offensiveness of calling someone childish who may be twice your age?
 * I notice you take pride in being a reformed Ex-Vandal.
 * Perhaps some education in good manners may be in order next?
 * Are you truly unaware of your commencing the insult?
 * Or is there some other reason for your misconduct which you are not MAN enough to admit? --Ludvikus 06:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

"Arguing on the internet is less than pointless"
What do you mean? You're incoherent above! --Ludvikus 06:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you trying to piss me off? Dropal 06:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Both of you need to calm down
Both of you need to calm down and remain WP:CIVIL please. Dropal, calling someone "childish" is inappropriate. Ludvikus, saying "are you not MAN enough to admit" is inappropriate. Both of these are personal attacks and I would ask both of you to stop before this escalates further. Thanks, Gwernol 06:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I am also removing the speedy deletion notice from Ruski commie since it is not pure vandalism. However I will be replacing it with a Proposed Deletion tag since it appears to be a neologism and is unsourced. Gwernol 06:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to User talk:Anniemclaughlin
If, as your User page says, you hope to be an admin at some point, you would be well-advised not to pretend you're one now. Only an admin can block someone, and so only an admin should use the test5 template to tell them they're blocked. Certainly, telling someone they're blocked when they aren't is not only inappropriate, but it erodes confidence in the real admins when the editor discovers that she is not, in fact, blocked. Fan-1967 02:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As a general rule, always follow the warnings above. Try to stay strictly on sequence: Test1, test2, test3, test4. After test4, if they keep going, report at WP:AIV and let the admins handle from there. When other warnings are used, like warn-nonsense or such, keep count of the warnings for later ones. You may also want to review the full set of available warning templates, at WP:UTTM. -- Fan-1967 02:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Dandy (band)
Thanks for the quick response, i just couldnt find anything about this song and band, so i added it. Does it need to be fixed or is there not enough info as of yet to have an article? --Technofreak90 02:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Someone forgot the new year (hehehe)
Thanks for catching that on The World Can't Wait. I think I'll get this whole new-year thing straight by around July or so... SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Assistance Is Needed, Please
Hi,

I posted 141.154.10.193 on the WP:AIV board, but the vandalism continues. It is sneaky at best. I am reverting all the vandalism made, but I need some help.

Thanks!....SVRTVDude 21:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Biography of living persons adminship
"Biography of Living Persons Administrators ("BLP Admins") carry out a specialized, narrowly tailored administrative role within Wikipedia." Please see WP:BLPADMIN to offer your thoughts on this proposal. CyberAnth 03:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Rosemary's Sons - tag/warning
A tag has been placed on Rosemary's Sons, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gogonutz (talk • contribs) 01:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

sorry
I'm sorry, in the article it said that I might want to consider posting this on your talk page, so that's why I did it. I didn't mean any disrespect. I just wanted to play this by the rules.

Thanks
Muchas gracias —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gogonutz (talk • contribs) 01:54, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

Fender Wikiproject Proposal
Hi, I have proposed a Wikiproject for Fender related articles. If you are interested, please add you name here. Izzy007 Talk 19:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Invitation: WikiProject Autism
Greetings! You are hereby invited to WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of autism, Asperger syndrome, and Autistic culture on Wikipedia. As the project emphasizes contribution from autistic editors, it is especially interested in you, who have chosen to list yourself as a Wikipedian with Asperger syndrome. Muffinator (talk) 03:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers
Hi ,

In order to better control the quality  of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)