User talk:Markco1/archive-001

WP Shipwrecks
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Markco1 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Visit User:Esoltas/WikiProject Shipwrecks/Votes please. Evan(Salad dressing is the milk of the infidel!) 18:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I hope you don't mind, but I moved your remarks on the shipwreck page to the section at the bottom KAM 16:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletions
(copied from my talk) Don't worry about it -- it's always a judgment call whether to userfy or just delete. Either is appropriate, and I don't think you made a mistake. --Ginkgo 100 talk 04:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

2006 Wikipedia CD Selection
Hi, You put a cat tag on the page so I thought I'd mention... Articles_for_deletion/2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection. The current marginal majority to move the page to Wikipedia space. This makes some sense but practically far fewer people will ever see the any of the various CD releases if we always put them in project place (the internal search on Wikipedia excludes project pages). I think once they are in public and in the media there is enough notability now to put in main space...but you are welcome to disagree totally of course. --BozMo talk 12:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Your edit was http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3A2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection&diff=91228441&oldid=91109777 and is still on the displaced edit history. Useless? No!... forgetful, maybe --BozMo talk 13:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Why???
 Stefan 15:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, no problem! Stefan 15:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Boston articles
Hi, great article on the Channel (night club)! I think I also remember a local group called The Young Snakes playing thre, and anohter group, possibly local, called CApitol3 19:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Editing my comment
Why did you do this? Even if it were a typo, you're really not supposed to edit other peoples' comments. -Amarkov blahedits 05:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: your message
Marcko: my sincere apologies, there was an edit conflict or a bug in VP2

Thanks for pointing it out. -- Bezking   01:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Two things
One: My edit was made in good faith and was not an act of vandalism. I reverted it because it was vandalized earlier. It has been reverted again. Two: Please don't double post on my page.

Thanks. Random user123 02:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Pikachu
Sorry about that. I saw the vandalism that Jeske Couriano was going to revert, and went to revert it myself. By mistake I reverted his edit. Cheers, --  T H  L  R  02:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, no problem. --  T H  L  R  02:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Middle East
We got it Verifiied. BTW was metioned in Rolling stone. ;) Markco1 19:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey Mark. I actually yanked that tag myself when the article became so saturated with verification of its notability that the presence of the tag absurd.

In a related note, I am about to alter one of your edits and I hope you'll agree with my reasons. The Amazing Crowns aren't really relevant to the article, but rather are used as a means to mention WBCN Rock & Roll Rumble and slip in the Rolling Stone's nod to The Middle East as "exalted". I am about to try to do the same thing with less distracting info about this obscure Prov punkabilly duo.

Likewise, although I have respect for Almighty Bob, the Trenchcoat Mafia mention seems only tangentally related to the club and the link provided goes to Church of the Subgenius web site rather than a news article or something that will elucidate the reader about the club's connection with either Bob or Columbine. After a bit of online research, I may drop this paragraph entirely; again, I hope you'll understand if I do.

(John) Contributions/HouseOfScandal HouseOfScandal HouseOfScandal 10:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, remember a couple days ago I was bitching 'cause my Shreve, Crump & Low article didn't make it to "Do you know?" Well, since its there now; I guess I should STFU. Contributions/HouseOfScandal HouseOfScandal HouseOfScandal 11:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Nancy Pelosi
I see you conducted a poll on the talk page but this page is way to active for me to watchlist so I didn't notice. Please see my response. --Dgies 07:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Slpashot Digital Warfare.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Slpashot Digital Warfare.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 18:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Bartleby the Scrivener
Why did you revert my edits for this article? Most of the changes consisted of footnoting and/or correcting the assertions I wrote into the "analysis" section a few weeks earlier, in an attempt to be a more responsible contributer. I also added a "fact" tag to some original research that had been appended to this section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ilyaunfois (talk • contribs) 22:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC).