User talk:Hbent/Archive 1

Don`t edit our page Smalkha group
Its great that you are too concern about the site, you might have enough time but don`t you think we have a right to modify our page and manage it. we are officially updating it and you have shown your skills...Please don`t do it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.64.52.221 (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Harkness Fellowship
Please could you explain why you did not consider Simon Stevens notable enough to list? ThanksGeraintlewis (talk) 10:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Columbine
Why do you not consider those alumni to be notable enough to list? --ScreaminEagle (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks. But the last one is part of a musical group that has an article. Does she count?  --ScreaminEagle (talk) 19:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Standalone OBD-II Scan Tools
Hi,

I edited your vote. I know it is not normal etiquette to edit someone else's post, but it was purely to correct a wiki link - I hope you don't mind. Regards, Springnuts (talk) 10:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh my apologies and thanks for being understanding - since it was the last edit I rolled it back. Springnuts (talk) 08:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Question why you deleted content from DePaul alumni page
Hi,

I noticed that you deleted quite a few alumni from DePaul University's alumni page. I'm curious as to why you did that. Those individuals are all DePaul alums. They were added to the listing by various editors. What's your rationale?

Kris (talk) 14:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I had not seen that Wikipedia standard before, so thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Kris (talk) 15:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Biofeedback
Thanks. I didn't see that it was two similar addresses. --GraemeL (talk) 20:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Todd Manning/"Photobucket references"
Would you mind explaining why you made this edit? What policy on Wikipedia says that we cannot use photobucket as references? If Wikipedia does say that, then I am sure that the policy is in regards to photographs at photobucket due to the fact that photographs can be doctored.

My point is that photobucket is not the reference for those references you removed from the Todd Manning article. Those references are from valid soap opera magazines; the "photobucket references" are showing scanned articles from those magazines in which validate the article's text being stated. If you were going to remove all those references, the least you could have done is format the references so that they do not need urls.

I see that you have removed "photobucket references" from other articles as well. You should first discuss stuff like this over with other editors of the articles you are removing these from. There is no telling how many valid references you have removed from articles because of this.

I have reverted your edit to the Todd Manning article. Flyer22 (talk) 04:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * As I stated on my talk page, I took this to Reliable sources/Noticeboard under the title Photobucket as a reference when photobucket is not really the reference at the same time you removed the photobucket links again but reformatted the references. I do see your point about copyvio, though. Flyer22 (talk) 05:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and thank you for taking the time to format the references accordingly this time upon your removal; I really appreciate that. Flyer22 (talk) 05:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Victor Borge Reference
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11262008/tv/starr_report_140884.htm

Electric Japan (talk) 07:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

December 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Friginator (talk) 01:19, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry. Friginator (talk) 04:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Categorizing redirects
Please see Categorizing redirects; thank you. --NE2 01:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To pick an example, Youngstown and Southern Railway is an article that exists; it's simply covered under its current name. The categories on the redirect, especially Category:Predecessors of the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad and Category:Interurban railways in the United States, wouldn't be correct on the target. --NE2 06:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The Y&S is certainly notable enough, and the target has three paragraphs on it, which is definitely properly-sourced adequate coverage. --NE2 06:31, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Notability
I don't understand your criteria for removals from List of Old Carthusians. You have taken out, for example, plenty of bishops who certainly are notable, and will get articles one day. This really isn't helpful when it comes to the older entries. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure why you removed my entry of Sir Henry Gollan from List of Old Carthusians. Could you please explain that and preferably add him back on? He is in Who's Who and I am not sure why you think he is not allowed on this list on wikipedia because I am not an experienced user of the system.User:JLWMILLER213.1.223.82 (talk) 12:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Simul-edits
We seem to be on the same wavelength here: and ! ... disco spinster   talk  19:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Me too. I was wondering why the Example image kept disappearing whenever I opened the article!  ...  disco spinster   talk  19:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Power ring
Why did you delete a reference link?--Marhawkman (talk) 08:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I read it. What does it have to do with using it as a reference?--Marhawkman (talk) 05:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't remeber any specific prohibition against it.--Marhawkman (talk) 06:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I see why you'd think it would count, but the image itself could be considered to fall under fair-use, and thus not a copy Vio.--Marhawkman (talk) 09:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

nationmaster
Thanks for deleting the source I added to Romantic fantasy. At the time I contributed to that article I didn't know yet that nationmaster is a Wikipedia mirror. Debresser (talk) 19:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

SP demos
Demos typically don't meet the notability guidelines at WP:NALBUMS. As the page for the SP demos was recently deleted for not meeting notability criteria, there's no reason to list them in the discography age. Also, demo tapes aren't cosidered official releases (they are a means for helping artists acquire the ability to make official releases), which is what discographies are intended for. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Those FLs are the exceptions rather than the rule. Most Featured Lists do not include demos, purposefully excluding them. In regards to non-album tracks that have appeared on random compilations, those have still been officially released, hence their inclusion. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Conflict news
Hello! The article The Klan (Belgian band) is attacked again. Greetings Raoniz (talk) 02:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Mechanicallyseparatedchicken.jpg
Hi, can you explain me something about the picture that someone removed from this page? [|Mechanically_separated_meat]Can you remember where it came from? Who was the author? Psl, it's very important for me This is the image http://www.fooducate.com/blog/wp-content/media/Mechanically%20Separated%20Chicken —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talentosprecato (talk • contribs) 21:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

3DTV
To Hben

We are students at the Tal Institute in Jerusalem Israel, currently studying Management and Marketing Technology. In the curriculum, we are participating in a course called "Technological Forecasting". In this course we are researching the technology and marketability of Stereoscopic Vision (three-dimensional TV without glasses). We would greatly appreciate if you could help us by answering several questions on the subject (we saw your contributionto the relevant article):

• Do you think that Stereoscopic Vision technology is viable and worthwhile? • What are the chances of this technology penetrating today's market, and the chances for future success? • Who are the competitors? Are there substitutes technologies? • What are the advantages and disadvantages of existing Stereoscopic Vision technology? • With which market segments will this technology make the greatest inroads? And finally, we would appreciate if you can share with us some of your ideas and general thoughts about the future of this technology.

We greatly appreciate and thank you in advance for your time and any assistance you may offer.

Orley, Shira, Oreal, and Efrat. Third year students at Tal Institute, Jerusalem, Israel Management and Marketing Technology — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.151.41.122 (talk) 20:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Mark Deutrom
IAR does not apply at this article, but WP:BLP does. Please re-add the material when (and only when) you can find WP:RS to WP:V. GiantSnowman 19:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

:)
Apologies for reverting your edit, I realized immediately afterwards that the DDR can't handle foreign characters. Feel free to trout me for my stupid mistake :) ~ Anastasia (talk) 19:15, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:TWINKLE
Just saw that you posted a request for rollback and mentioning that you were doing reverts the old fashioned way...Twinkle gives you placebo rollback, which works the exact same except you can only do it on a diff, rather than by the edit itself. It also allows you to report users, tag articles, nominate articles for deletion, among a bunch of useful things. You can read all about it, the features, as well as the responsibility here; WP:TWINKLE. Note that acquiring rollback also allows you to use editing tools like WP:STIKI and WP:HUGGLE, which are extremely efficient possible vandalism patrolling tools.Tutelary (talk) 21:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Your rollback request
Hi Hbent, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism, spam and blatantly unconstructive edits; using it to revert any other type of edit - such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with - can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, as some admins do not give a warning if they become aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, use a manual edit summary instead of using the rollback tool. For practice, you may wish to review New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 09:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)