User talk:Ninja337

Wikistalking
STOP WIKISTALKING ME OR YOU'LL BE BANNED!! --Alexc3 (talk) 01:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC) i s f o r l o s e r s.
 * serious buisness. Seriously not wikistalking, just checking on how the pasture is for the lolcows at TOW. Ninja337 03:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * OMG I was just kidding. You always take everything I say seriously. What the hell. --Alexc3 (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Haha yeah. Actually when I saw that message I was thinking of complaining on user:MONGO's talkpage saying I had no idea who you were and you were harassing me by making false accusations. But then I remembered harassing people on wikipedia is a good thing.Ninja337 20:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * He has a complaints page, BTW. --Alexc3 (talk) 21:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Lol, you want me to do this? I'll remember next time the opprotunity comes up. Ninja337 14:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't really care either way. It's up to you, but you might anger him by accident if you decide to. The complaints page was complaints about him: User:MONGO/Complaint board. --Alexc3 (talk) 20:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No too late now, I'll do it next time and see if you get B&.Ninja337 23:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * W i k i e d i k e t

Ninja337 20:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it's for Wikipedians, i.e., people who live in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexjohnc3 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * GTFO. I don't know what made you think I'm still friendly with you after you sent me some butthurt email because you hate 4chan or America or whatever. You can talk to me, but keep your bad jokes and animu expert drama to yourself04:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Sources for Lolcat article
Thanks for your help cleaning up the Lolcat article and helping get it closer to meeting Wikipedia standards. Regarding broken links to news sources.... It seems to be standard to comment these links out, rather than deleting the source entirely, because even if the URL is no longer working then the article may still be accessed through some archiving services or at most local libraries. There is more on this at What to do when a reference link "goes dead".

Thanks, Politizer (talk) 17:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you really think that Seattle Post-Intelligencer is an unreliable source? – How do you turn this on (talk) 00:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I consider a 100 word blog post written by someone who doesn't even have a degree in journalism more of a personal journal entry than a source, and besides that the entry isn't even relevant. The "Ceiling Cat" section is completely original research bolstered up by three unrelated sources that nobody ever checks. Ninja337 (talk) 01:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)