User talk:LeaveSleaves/Archive 1

Thank for you warning
Hello I dont Need to be Warning on this issue I did fix it up action bus this webpage

I allready fix it Action bus it back now Next time dont warn me Good Bye from User 12200 Next Time please Dont warn me LeaveSleaves I know what im doing LeaveSleaves

i think your warning is miss understanding on this issue

Please leave me alone

I know what im doing here thank you LeaveSleaves

cya soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 04:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Metro Station albums
I have nominated metro station albums for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. mitrebox (talk) 06:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser Application
You are eligible to use AutoWikiBrowser! I have reviewed your application and a admin will add you shortly to the list! -- Par t y! Talk to me! 02:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks mate —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thescene (talk • contribs) 09:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Kolkata Knight Riders
Shah Rukh Khan had said in an interview in The Telegraph immediately after he bought the team that he wanted to name his team after his favourite television show, The Knight Riders. I will post the link to that interview by tomorrow in your talk page and in the knight riders page.CSumit (talk) 09:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)CSumit

Excerpt from the discussion on Template talk:Limited Overs Matches
LeaveSleaves, I have posted this excerpt from the discussion on Template talk:Limited Overs Matches, because I feel it is relevant to your future conduct in debates on wikipedia:

Since my last post I have further investigated cricket pages in wikipedia and have some further remarks about the issue of the ordering of teams in score summaries. It has become clear to me that the accepted format for presentation of scores, both for matches involving one innings per side and two, is to list the side batting first as the first team (rather than the home team). I refer you to the current template for use in two innings per side matches here: Template:Test match. In its talk page, the first point that is made after the presentation of the template itself is this: "Team1 should be the team batting first." (emphasis as found on the talk page). All 3 demonstrations of the template on that talk page have the team batting first as the team listed first even though in all 3 cases the team batting first is the away team. For matches with only one innings per side, I refer you to these 3 prominent examples: 2003 Cricket World Cup, 2007 Cricket World Cup and 2007 ICC World Twenty20. In the score summaries for every match on these 3 pages, the side listed first is the side which batted first.

However, in my discussions with you, you have repeatedly claimed that the formatting which I advocated, of listing the first team as the team which batted first, should be reverted because of your knowledge that this went against the accepted consensus on this issue. As I have demonstrated, the claim you made was patently untrue. In debates, I do not mind differences of opinion or even honestly mistaken beliefs. However, when someone seeks to represent that their argument is the one to be accepted because they know that the consensus supports their position, when in fact they cannot know this because the accepted consensus position is in actuality contrary to their position, this type of debate unacceptable. It wastes my time, your time, the time of other wikipedians, and leads to a lower quality wikipedia.

I recognise that you, like me, seek to improve the quality of wikipedia, and I recognise that you have made many valuable contributions to wikipedia. However, I must insist that you do not resort to these types of conterproductive debating techniques in the future.

Juwe (talk) 17:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Rahul is a Christian
COngress Zindabad. Our beloved leader and future Prime Minister of India Rahul Gandhi is a Christian. What's wrong in it. Should we not express if he belongs to a minority religion. The act of reverting is communal, anti-secular and anti-congress. It is clear attack on our christian community. Communal and anti-scular elemesnts are hindering India and crushing minorities.Jai COngress, Jai sonia....I ask explanation from you why you have reverted my edits.79.143.129.9 (talk) 22:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry
I am sorry if my comments are hurting but atleast can you accept that Robert Vadera is a christian. He is brother-in-law of Rahul. Are you Indian, if not can you give me contacts of Indian Wikipedia moderators so that I can resolve this issue with them as this article is an Indian related person.79.143.129.9 (talk) 14:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologize for reverting edits on Robert Vadra. And it's irrelevant for you to contact an Indian moderator for an article on an Indian. He/she would still tell you the same thing I told you. Stick to WP:BIO. LeaveSleaves (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

2008 IPL Article
If you don't object, I plan to copy the whole discussion between us and post it verbatim on Articles for deletion/2009 Indian Premier League. This might be informative for other editors. Juwe (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't exactly agree. AfD discussions should be far more succinct. Plus I feel we both wandered off a little in that discussion (at least I did), particularly on the multiple tournaments a year part. I'd like to start afresh, and would request you to only address the points mentioned in the AfD reason. LeaveSleaves (talk) 19:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, that is fine. I will however link to the discussion, as I think it gives the context as to how the AfD page came about. Juwe (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Oops, sorry
I was just trying to fix grammar/typing issues on the RoT page. They're now still there apparently :( 75.38.16.56 (talk) 03:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Um EXCUSE　ME???
You reverted MY edits?? And you still haven't noticed all the vandalism that the other guy did??? how incompetent! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.169.26 (talk) 03:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Adding Scheduling for TV Programming in India
Hey, not promoting any particular site, just saw this as being the best for scheduling, programming information, etc. and a lot of those sections seem to be missing such information. Do you disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.227.112.210 (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

My User Page
Thanks on your revert!

Thank you
Also, for reverting vandalism to my user page. Retired, but not forgotten. Cheers, JNW (talk) 22:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:2008 Canadian GP
Hi LeaveSleaves. I'll leave some comments on the article talk page at some stage in the near future, but I don't have enough time today. Sorry!-- Diniz  (talk)  18:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have now made some comments on the article talk page. I hope that they are useful to you!--  Diniz  (talk)  19:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi LeaveSleaves, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Acalamari 23:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. :) Just remember to only use it for reverting vandalism. Best wishes. Acalamari 01:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Can't you read
I specifically said not to revert it unless you were cluebot, I'm testing anti-vandalism techniques >< - Tyler Puetz (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Dwight D Eisenhower High School
I am writing to ask you to let me keep my edit to this school. The president is not Richard N Nixon and this is right so next time let me fix it and leave it please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playhockey162 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

ZaSu Pitts
Can you tell me, please, your reasoning behind this edit? I've looked at the link and it's legitimate -- and it certainly doesn't look like vandalism superficially, so why did you revert it? Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  04:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, these reverts of your are not undoing vandalism: cleaning up infobox, content dispute, content dispute. Although I see that the vast majority of your edits are legitimate reversion of vandalism, you might want to be a touch more careful when using automated tools to revert. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  04:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for bringing out my wrong reversions. I'll be more careful in future. LeaveSleaves (talk) 09:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)