User talk:Guyzero/Archive 1

Happy Editing!
No problem. :) I noticed that you are looking to be adopted by an experienced user, and if you'd like, I could "adopt" you. =) –- kungming·  2   (Talk) 01:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, then! Let us go into this world of Wikipedia together! I've changed my userbox on my userpage to reflect the "adoption" - you can place on yours. Feel free to ask me any questions you might have, and remember to "be BOLD!" Yay! (Cue the fireworks...) =D –-  kungming·  2   (Talk) 02:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

American -> English spelling conversions
Yup, you've just seen what of the most prevalent problems on the English Wikipedia, the dispute between the American and British forms of English. I got into a minor dispute over this, too, when I was new on Wikipedia (I tried to change a British spelling of a word to the American form). According to Manual_of_Style, use whatever form of English that is prevalent throughout the article. So, if it's written in a mostly British English tone, and someone suddenly changes it to American English, just restore the old version, and leave a nice note on the user's talk page about the issue. Watch out for edit wars, though! According to Three-revert rule, don't revert back too many times (unless, it's vandalism). I suggest a 2RR rule - if there's edits back and forth both ways twice, just take a deep breath and put a note on the talk page. Everything will be okay in the end! =) –- kungming·  2   (Talk) 00:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

How's everything?
Just a weekly checkup... How's everything going? =)' –- kungming·  2   (Talk) 01:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Ozomatli
Thanks for checking on Ozomatli photos. I must say I've become rather discouraged with fair use and my understanding of it. I've since researched photos for a couple artists, but otherwise resolved to only submit those I've taken myself. Regards, Dave C.talk 20:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Help request
The image, Ozomatli.jpg was removed. Please see. I have had an ongoing e-mail communication with Ozomatli's management to receive fair use permission for that specific image (I reference the image URL on wikipedia.) Can this image please be restored so that the discussion does not get confused due to broken image links? TIA, regards, guyzero | talk 08:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Articles cannot be used on Wikipedia only by permission; it must satisfy fair use regardless of permission from the group. In order for the image to be used on Wikipedia, the copyright holder must license the image for publication under a Creative Commons Share-Alike license (see ) or other free license. —Centrx→talk &bull; 08:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * If you want to dispute the deletion, you will have to list it at Deletion review, but that is solely for disputing whether or not a deletion was according to policy (i.e. not to re-argue the case for deleting or keeping). Unfortunately, it appears that the deletion was according to policy so it is unlikely that the decision would be overturned.  You might want to e-mail Ozomatli a copy of the image under discussion (or link to it online if it exists online) as a reference.  SWAdair | Talk 08:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice
Thanks for leaving that helpful note on a new user's talk page, User talk:Starofnuit. It's nice to see someone going out of his way to help another user. Cheers, -Will Beback · † · 21:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Ditto from me.


 * BTW: If you want to connect with some fellow Southern Californians, there is the Southern California WikiProject. BlankVerse 10:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * If you have any questions abou the SoCal WikiProject pr the Wikipedia in general, or want suggestions on how you can help, just holler. The Westchester, Los Angeles, California article looks reasonable good for a community article, although I'm sure that you can find things to tweak or add. BlankVerse 01:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Misunderstanding
Where do I call you ignorant in Talk:AACS encryption key controversy? I did call that other guy ignorant, but I actually tanked you for your great sourcing!. I realize I missed a space, but still, nowhere near that sentence do I call anyone ignorant... talk about grumpy! :P --Cerejota 06:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Center for American Progess report
Hi... and no sweat. I included a link to the report itself, but are you saying that the CAP section should give a short summary of what the report states? -- Gerkinstock 19:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I will synopsize the report when I have time, probably later this week. -- Gerkinstock 00:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Regarding the last sentence in my contribution to Center for American Progress: the report made no mention of universities or television, and did not address NPR. The report states that "the results are based on an analysis of the weekday broadcast totals for all nationally syndicated and local talk show hosts on the 257 news/talk stations operated by the top five commercial station owners (see page 7 of 40 in the report |report) and note that this is listed as page 3 at the bottom of the report, even though it is page 7 overall.  Thus, my citation would be the report itself, and, specifically, page 7/3.  I will add the above passage to the paragraph as my citation. -- Gerkinstock 22:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. I've been away for a while, so I apologize for the belated response.  Did you add the sixth citation to the "Conservative criticism..." section? -- Gerkinstock 03:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Mass Effect
Hey. I noticed you're an editor on the Mass Effect page. I'm an admin at the Mass Effect wiki at Wikia, and I wanted to invite you to come check it out and share your knowledge. Cheers. - JoePlay —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.128.200 (talk) 21:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Anti-Americanism in the United States
I noticed that you put a number of improvement templates on this page. I thought you might be interested to know that I have nominated it for AfD. If you click on the article, you will see the link at the top of the page. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  04:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, bugger! I'd better go have a look.  Thanks. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  05:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Mass Effect ban
Hi there, I'm from Singapore. While I don't quite care for the mention of the ban in the article, I think objectively speaking, that piece of news did make its way round globally. For the simple reason that Singapore was the first to react and remains the only known country to ban the game, albeit for the shortest of duratins. So I'm wondering what are your reasons for excluding the information -- I know you said lack of weight and notability, but objectively that does not comport. Chensiyuan (talk) 11:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I see; well I've no intention of reverting, was just curious as to your thoughts. Cheers. Chensiyuan (talk) 12:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries at all; here's to a better Mass Effect article in due time! At the moment, none of the articles on BioWare games are Good or Featured Articles, maybe Mass Effect could set a new precedent since its the latest game heh. Chensiyuan (talk) 00:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:WLA
(♠ Taifar  ious1  ♠) 02:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

re: Welcome!
Thanks, buddy. Downright hospitable, you is. --LactatingNinja (talk) 11:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Walter Reed Middle School
Thanks for the encouragement and the advice. I'm obviously new to Wikipedia and appreciate the help.--rfl man (talk) 03:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Better?
I will appreciate your comments --Shompi (talk) 02:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

La Plata HS
Hopefully now it has more structure they will understand how to do it with sources and add some better content. David D. (Talk) 21:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Removal of my edits
How do I allow people to read the interviews on Wikipedia then without violating Wikipedia's TOS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ExecBiz (talk • contribs) 18:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I replied on your talkpage, here: . regards, --guyzero | talk 18:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Spelling Errors
I'm sorry about the mistakes from my spelling errors. I was in a hurry to make a few more edits and i didn't realize what i was changing. I will attempt to be more careful in the future. Thank you. Warren oO (talk) 13:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries! Ya, its best to slow down a little and read the edit being made when using any of the automated tools. Thanks again for having an interest in correcting spelling mistakes in articles, and I see you are vandal fighting today so right on! Happy Hunting, --guyzero | talk 18:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Mass Effect
I was thinking of hanging around long enough to see it being made into a GA/FA, but it's too tiring dealing with the anon who is just going to troll. Hope you can put up with it. Chensiyuan (talk) 06:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hope you had a great trip =) Thanks for cleaning up the ME page, it's much improved. I got a feeling our dear anon would return soon enough; it's okay if he is simply rude, it's just terrible when he isn't making sense at all. Chensiyuan (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Do not put your opinion above others, treat them as your equals until they prove that they deserve otherwise
Just because you think something is not important, it doesn't mean it isn't. Instead of removing an entry on wiki, you should mark it for deletion and ask for other people's opinions because unless you have a Ph.D on the subject you are editting, chances are there will be plenty others who know better.

Also, instead of immediately deleting what you think is original research, you should do the same and mark it then ask for sources. I find your lack of respect for other people's entries very disgusting, and your self-imposed adminstrative mind-set too aggressive and trigger happy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssh83 (talk • contribs)
 * I clearly explained my removal of the CNS information in both the edit description when I removed it and on the talkpage of the article. So you know, original research can be removed without discussion. In the future, the best place to talk about edits to articles is on that article's talk page so that other folks can participate. Kindly read through WP:CIVIL -- your commentary about assuming that others know better, and that I am trigger happy, etc. is not cool. --guyzero | talk 07:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on 1000
Congrats on 1000 edits! Sorry it took me so long to reply... I'm not as active on WP as I used to be... –- kungming·  2  18:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

3RR assistance
I saw your edit summary here. I also found it a pain in the...well, you know. Then I found this tool: 3RR tool. It's fairly easy to use. You still have to clean it up, and remove links to diffs that shouldn't be included in a 3RR report. When you run the tool, just cut and paste the code that's provided. I used to only do 3RR when it reached like 10RR, because the form was so difficult to use. I hope this helps for future needs. Orange Marlin Talk• Contributions 09:03, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Bush Doctrine
I made the addition because of the incredibly significant amount of press being generated on this issue and because, at the very least, there needed to be an revertable edit that wasn't "unsourced" and inflammatory. Any other day or in a perfect world, though, it would be a ho-hum deal for another article to cover. --Rahga (talk) 19:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This was a good edit - the stuff you took out indeed is not germane to the article topic. GRBerry 16:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Bush Doctrine disputes
In the face of rampant deletions from the article, it is difficult not seeing WikiProject Countering systemic bias. Therefore I must repeatedly call on understanding that I also eat, sleep and want to contribute to the quality of the article, as do you. I know there is opinions on deletionism and inclusionism with regards to articles, but it's difficult to keep contributing when the editing work is being turned into a veritable swiss cheese. I must speak out against the deletions of passages, although I recognize that passages and paragraphs, structure can always be improved. Removing widely held views and comments related to the Bush Doctrine are not improving its quality, I think. As you can gather, I am rather inclusionist - but I do also see the importance of a central point of information regarding the topic. The structure and evolving into separate articles, is of course a natural Wikipedia process when articles become VERY large. But we are not there yet, and in contributing further content to this article, I am also developing the structure further. ;-) Scierguy (talk) 19:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There is nothing that I have personally removed from the article that I did not provide a detailed explanation or query on the talk page or within the edit summaries. I'm always open to discussing any of my specific edits, but will not respond to the general complaint above except to ask you to read WP:OWN and WP:AGF. I obviously understand that all WP articles are works in progress, but that fact does not give any of us free reign to insert something with the note that it'll be made policy compliant later.  --guyzero | talk 19:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * As you can clearly witness with my contributions, I AM continuously improving the quality of the sections - and have perhaps contributed to 80% of the Bush Doctrine article - half of the introduction, structure and quotes for the overview, and the whole criticism-section. I am also expanding the development section to reflect the HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT and formation of what is publicly known as the Bush Doctrine - i.e the collection of principles, practical strategic decisions and ideology of the doctrine. Lets improve the sections together, you can surely be helpful in adding references and improving passages. As far as articles goes, there is not exactly a lack of references on the Bush Doctrine... Scierguy (talk) 19:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have repeated my frustrations over the editing process of the Bush Doctrine article. To explain these frustrations, I have a need to say what I am frustrated over. That is also why I appeal to you guys in not hindering the improvement of the article. I hope you can recognize that my interest lies solely in improving the Bush Doctrine article. I am recognizing important contributions that you are doing, and voicing my concern or frustrations on the editing process. Of course I would like there to be more opinions, so that we can show stronger consensus, and not just a small group of editors. I have nothing against you personally, and recognize your editor importance - by asking politely for consensus (we have settled on such consensus through my initiatives). Sometimes it takes time to answer on a editorial concern - we are humans, not 24h machines, doing the editing. Please disregard any of my frustrations with the editing process as being offensive. Also remember that writing on an electronic media makes it difficult to show the "good tone" that could otherwise be expressed through facial mimic and tone of voice - other human input to communication. I have become frustrated in the editing process, and I think I have been clear about that. Therefore I ask for understanding my situation as well, and the concern I have for the article and the readers of Wikipedia. I hope my motives are clear in this - and it is not something personal against you, but a problem I have been facing ever since I started expanding the article some days ago. There were numerous edit wars at the time, now thankfully reduced, and the editing process of this article has been difficult lately. Therefore it has been a concern of mine and I notified the respective Wikiprojects of the article as well as calling attention to the possible systemic bias of the editing process. There was admittedly a reason for protecting the article. I have personally found the protection much more preferrable than the complete chaos before its introduction. Gracefully yours, Scierguy (talk) 22:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment
Hello. Thanks for your comment on the Bumvertising article. The article is a very shaky inclusion at best. It is seemingly promotional. Although the sandwich board man phenomenon goes back to Dickens' time. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 01:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Heads Up
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

This is just a heads up, nothing more. Brothejr (talk) 02:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. For context, this is what I was reverting: cheers, --guyzero | talk 02:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

ACORN
Not a big deal, but I was wondering how you suggest I go about confirming that "Democrats champion ACORN"? Adding a cautionary "some" just in case some Democrat might be opposed to a community organization that registers mostly Democrats seems like a stretch. This seems like overdefensiveness on a NPOV issue. (Wallamoose (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC))
 * Yes, I understand where you are coming from. NPOV is a policy though, and generalizations (even if they may logically be correct) do violate it. It is best for us to be as accurate as possible. (As an aside, I doubt that ALL or even MOST democrats "champion" ACORN. Democrats and Democrat elected officials is a pretty diverse range of folks in different areas, many of which ACORN doesn't operate, etc. etc. etc.) --guyzero | talk 21:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I respect your opinion. But I would be SHOCKED to find a Democratic official at any level that is a critic of ACORN. ACORN is like manna from heaven for Democrats.  :)  (Wallamoose (talk) 22:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC))
 * Ah! But not being a critic of is not the same thing as "champion for" -- there are a million, uh, acorns(!) between those two opposing branches. =) --guyzero | talk 22:15, 10 October 2008 (UTC) thanks! I'll be here all week

If you'd like to help keep an eye on the ACORN article against a couple problem editors who have dropped in, that would be great. You've done good work there already (and I'm flattered by the barnstar). There are two editor who have been topic banned from Obama articles (which probably means they are in violation in the ACORN edits) who are tag-teaming to revert the simplifications and pro-encyclopedic changes I've made (with kind cooperation from other editors like you). These two have in the past been found to be probably sock-puppets (and definitely meat-puppets), and article disruption almost inevitably comes wherever they go. Thanks. LotLE × talk 17:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll keep an eye out. --guyzero | talk 18:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well deserved! --guyzero | talk 18:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I cut and pasted part of your post on the ACORN discussion board to my request for unprotect. If I'm out of line or the way I've cut it doesn't represent your view please let me know and I'll remove it, or you can delete it as I give you permission with regard to that portion of my request. Holla! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#.7B.7Bla.7CACORN.7D.7D(Wallamoose (talk) 18:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC))


 * Hi Walla. I removed the pasted comments as the protecting admin is engaged on the talkpage and your comments were just fine on their own. It's OK to paste people's comments, but it's general practice to provide a link so 3rd parties can verify and know context. thanks, --guyzero | talk 18:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay. No worries. And thanks for the tip. (Wallamoose (talk) 18:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC))


 * Looks like it just got unlocked. We'll see what happens.  :) (Wallamoose (talk) 18:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC))

Looks like User:300wackerdrive is back to add libelous spin to ACORN. FYI. LotLE × talk

Dolphin Square
Thank you. :) --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 09:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad to contribute, and nice to meet'cha! :-) My first 3O so feedback about my responses is much appreciated. I think I went a bit overboard on AGF in my last reply as there appears to be a COI issue here as well, but I wanted to make one more attempt at a respectful appeal of understanding while stating my second warning about unacceptable CIV vios. kind regards, --guyzero | talk 18:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

yo
Have a great time at the concert. Fo shizzle! (Wallamoose (talk) 00:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC))

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Supression
What the hell is your deal? I have my right to a opinion on the talk page! BarackBlows (talk) 08:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * When I glanced at your username and the edit, I somehow thought you were saying the page was locked because we were Barack's liberal lovers and wanted to blow him. I do admit, he's SOOOOOO CUTE, but I think I misread your note. thanks, --guyzero | talk 08:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
We're all in it together. At first I didn't like your change, but it definitely now sounds better than "person of African descent," so I see why you did it! :) Softlavender (talk) 08:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Obama's religon
Dear Guyzero, I was sure that my corrective edit will result in a revert and I will not seek to dispute it at all. Just wanted to let you know that according to Islamic doctrine (Jurisprudence) which is equivalent to both Christian Theology and Canon Law of the Church, a person who is born from a moslem man, regardless whether his father was practicing Islam or not is considered moslem and it is a matter of fact for the Islamic religion and not subject for a different interpretation or justification from any source. Even if the born child is to convert to Christianity or another religion, even if he becomes the Pope of Rome, he is still considered a moslem in the eyes of the Islamic religion. This is not my opinion or an opinion, unfortunately it is the fact of the matter. Any person born of a moslem man, i.e. from a moslem seed is and will always be moslem inspite of anything else. I know it sounds strange and perhaps stupid for you, but the laws that governs the Islamic religion are not subject for change or different or modern interpretation. It is not like the western culture where christianity florished, where a person is free to choose what he/she believes in and can do whatever he/she wants in regards to his/her religious orientation. Believe me when I tell you, if it wasn't for the high office that Mr. Obama has been elected for and the weight and importance of the country he represents, the entire Islamic Mullah and Sheikhs would have declared him an apostate to the Islamic religion and believe me, as soon as Mr. Obama would do or say what would upset the Islamic world and particularily the Arab world, he would face such an accusation with further repercussions too. As I said at the begining, I will not revert what you have reverted and I will not continue in a futile discussion because i will not prevail, but remember what I wrote when things start to happen the way I have just stated to you. I come from such a world, I lived in such a culture and I know what the people's mentality are in that corner of the world and more importantly, I know the jurisprudance laws of Islam. Go check it out from a moslem person who is well versed in his religion's laws. There is no choices in the faith in Islam, there is no choice of religious orientation, even if the moslem is not practicing his/her religion, he/she has no choice of religious orientation, if the born moslem changes his/her religion, he/she is an apostate and is deemed dead, since is blood is halal (ok to spill) as he/she brought disgrace to Allah by doing so. Orthopraxia (talk) 21:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Orthopraxia. Thank you for explaining this to me. I do not think the practice of this consideration is "strange" or "stupid" at all. I also appreciate the repercussions and greater picture that you describe with regards to the perception of Obama by moslems. Again, thank you for sharing this with me. In terms of policy (V, RS, BLP, etc.) Obama self-identifies as UCC and has also stated that he has never been moslem (despite the fact that Jurisprudence may say otherwise), which is why we don't account for this situation in the BLP. kind regards, --guyzero | talk 02:16, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

3RR Violation by PatrickFlaherty
User user:PatrickFlaherty is reverting a sourced post. He is also violating the 3RR for Raila_Odinga —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.209.144.211 (talk) 22:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You want to go to AN3 then. --guyzero | talk 00:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Art
First off, I apologize for the spam. You are receiving this message because you have indicated that you are in Southern California or interested in Southern California topics (either via category or WikiProject).

I would like to invite you to the Los Angeles edition of Wikipedia Loves Art, a photography scavenger hunt to be held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) on Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 1:00 to 7:00 PM. All photos are intended for use in Wikipedia articles or on Wikimedia Commons. There will be a prize available for the person who gets the most photos on the list.

If you don't like art, why not come just to meet your fellow Wikipedians. Apparently, we haven't had a meetup in this area since June 2006!

If you are interested in attending, please add your name to Wikipedia Loves Art. Please make a note if you are traveling to the area (train or plane) and need transportation, which can probably be arranged via carpool, but we need time to coordinate. Lodging is as of right now out of scope, but we could discuss that if enough people are interested.

Thank you and I hope to see you there!  howcheng  {chat} 23:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)