User talk:Hellboy2hell/archive3

picture
I don't see any picture on your userpage, lol I'm almost the same age as you.--Spittlespat (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey sign my guestbook go to my userpage and click on my guestbook in the blue words!--Spittlespat (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Providentg
Why are you leaving welcome messages to editors whose only edits are vandalism, without reverting their vandalism? Corvus cornix talk  01:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

So you welcomed them before they'd done any edits at all? There are millions of users like that, you're going to be pretty busy if you do that to everybody who ever creates an account. :)  Corvus cornix  talk  02:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

re: WP:MUFC
I like the idea, especially if the task force was to expand a bit. Let's me know a bit more about the participants. ;) – LATICS   talk  02:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I like it too. Same reasons. Calebrw (talk) 17:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Copy
heh. I don't mind at all. Go right ahead! Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 18:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * btw, when making a wikilink with different text than the page name displayed, you don't have to include the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/" in the link. All you have to write is the page name. (like this: )  Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  18:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion/This is My Time Tour
Hmm, interesting. How do we proceed with this? I've never dealt with a sockpuppeter before. Rwiggum (Talk /Contrib ) 16:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I haven't too. I'll try to contact an admin. H2H (talk) 01:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Kinhal Craft
Thanks for tagging. This was a close call, but I think there's enough there to make speedy inappropriate. You could try AfD, but I suspect it's notable - just a rather inelegant start. --Dweller (talk) 15:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:DYK
Yep. It's good now. btw, the way to find out the length of an article is to copy/paste the prose portion of the article (ie. the text minus infoboxes, lists, pic captions, tables, "see also" sections, etc.) to a word processor (such as Microsoft Word) and click on the stats of the text. The stat you're looking for is the "characters (with spaces)". DYK nominated articles have to have at least 1500 characters (including spaces) to qualify (or have the prose portion expanded 5x). Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 15:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Please revisit
Please revisit Stoney Point Airfield and Articles for deletion/Stoney Point Airfield. The article has gone through expansion and additional sources have been added. Thank you!--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:MUFC
Hey man, I hope you don't mind that I added "Acting chairman" to my notes on the task force page. I just felt that, while you were inactive on the task force, we could use a figurehead leader, and since I helped set it up, I put myself forward. Hope that's OK. – PeeJay 06:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Understanding of your agreement of deletion on my article
I understand why you also agree on deleting the article I have written.

It's true, if you left my region of where I live, there will probably be noone who knows about this little sport we play around here.

However, for those of us who do, and would like to play I thought wikipedia may be a great place to explain the rules and how the game actually works.

And in this way, possibly I may have an interesting soul from other states to peek in and possibly take up the game as well.

I hope you will understand and possibly will give me a hint or two on how I may make it an official wikipedia entry.

Thank you Brotos (talk) 07:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Broom Cannon
I believe I do owe an apology to wikipedia. I did not read the rules well, and did not know that we users have a page in which we are allowed to create and sharpen up our articles.

In this way, the article seems official and then I may move it to the official wikipedia pages.

Thank you for this kind tip.

Will the deletion still continue? I would like to keep my current work still and be able to add in my later work (created on the user page) for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brotos (talk • contribs) 07:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Editor Review Thanks
Thanks for your kind words on my Editor Review. I will try and continue to live up to that impression I seem to have made on you. Thanks again and have a nice day :-)  So Why  21:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Unneeded Rudeness
Because you may be a senior member compared to me, that does not call for any rudeness.

Your last comment toward my article was quite uncalled for and plain rude. I apologized for my mistakes but even so, you continue to write negative things toward what I did.

In the future, I hope you will think before you write any comments to others.

Brotos (talk) 06:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching request status
You are very close to this threshold, so I would suggest reapplying very soon. Malinaccier (talk) 18:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 06:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (September)
-- Diniz  (talk)  18:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Starting new Diemaco merge proposal
I'm starting a new merge proposal based on my views of the termination of the last one. You are more than willing to comment again, but note that your response was in support an argument not based entirely on the facts. I will reprint my response to your message on my talk page in case you didn't notice it:
 * Besides the fact that 5 months of no consensus in my mind does not mean in my mind that a merge proposal should be removed? Or that it was 4-4, two of the opposes were based on inaccurate observations (even if "the C8 [was] a scoped Carbine" that would not be grounds for a split; the comparisons to the M1 Garand and M1 Carbine and M16 and M4 carbines were also not comparable for the reasons stated in the comments), the third oppose was based on the inaccurate assertions made in oppose comment #2, and the last one was based on the assertion that the C7 and C8 are "completely different weapons," which is also totally inaccurate.  So my response is that the merge should have gone ahead simply because the grounding of the opposition was not based on real facts, understanding, or readily comparable instances elsewhere on wikipedia.  I also took the liberty of looking at your contributions, and I don't see any history of editing military or weapons related articles in the last 1000 edits, so I'm really not sure what your level of understanding of the system is or why you felt the need to lend your vote to the oppose side.  -- Thatguy96 (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

-- Thatguy96 (talk) 15:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Quote on Guidelines
The positioning of the quote is rather...odd? Perhaps it might help a lot better if it was an essay was written as a standalone rather than a quote on top of every guideline. At the very least, the terms should be explained. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 14:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)