User talk:Part Deux

Regarding the deletion of the article: 24-Hour Knowledge Factory
User Part Duex:

I am the creator of the 24-Hour Knowledge Factory page, one listed as spam and 'akin to a Dilbert Cartoon' by you. I implore you to please check the Social Science Research Network for this global work paradigm and read over some of the many papers that deal with this new framework. Many companies including IBM have adopted and are in the trial stages of testing the efficacy of this paradigm. A link to one of the most recent research grants given to [Dr. Amar Gupta], the creator of this paradigm, is here:

http://www.eller.arizona.edu/news/2007/01/09_IBM_honors_MIS_and_Entrepreneurship_professor_Amar_Gupta.aspx

Please do some research next time before marking something as spam. I would appreciate your help in retrieving all the information that was written on that page. If you have access to it, I would appreciate it if you would please place it back in its original form and then contact me with any edits that you think would make it more appropriate for Wikipedia. Additionally, I would appreciate an apology for your rudeness. Thank you.

Behave yourself
Please do not blank my user page. Admin consensus was that my user page is just fine. Go edit an article or something.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 07:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * First, there was no such consensus; you've been asked by multiple people to change it, and WP:USERPAGE says that if that occurs, you ought to. Second, I'd like to remind you of WP:CIVIL, which you've been warned about in the past. If you have constructive criticism or a point to bring up for someone who made a change in good faith, please do. -Part Deux 14:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You're quite wrong about my userpage, among other things. Ever since I got rid of the death threats (directed towards me, mind you),   no one has posted a problem with the current version of my user page.  Keeping this lack of controversy mind, your blanking of someone else's user page can only be seen as mischievous at best, aggressive at worst. Furthermore, no one's ever warned me about civility in the past.  Maybe you're confusing me with someone else.  Once again, I'd respectfully suggest that you focus your efforts on improving articles rather than fussing over an innocuous and little-noticed user page.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your help in getting the Naty Botero page up to snuff. I appreciate it! Oh, and a p.s.--be mindful of the name of the country...it's Colombia (though I have seen a very early flag in the Quinta de Bolivar that uses the "u"). Cheers! Hwonder  talk   contribs  02:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure; actually, I had been doing a much bigger fix, but got an edit conflict with you, so I only added a few things. Part Deux 22:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Redhouse Yacht Club
Redhouse Yacht Club

The article at Redhouse Yacht Club has been substantially improved. I'm not the original author, but saw it at AfD and thought it might have some merit. A few of us have reworked the article with independent references and removed a bunch of trivia taken from the Club's website. I beleive this now meets WP standards as a subject which is noticed nationally wihtin South Africa and to some extent internationally in specialty racing circles. I'd appreciate your feedback.

Thanks

Kevin --Kevin Murray 17:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Psyopus
Restored and at afd at Articles for deletion/Psyopus. NawlinWiki 05:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

How dare you
Who the hell are you? Why the hell are you warning me? Why don't people understand that J Di Started this, so leave me alone. 1B6 09:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't even see J Di's comments; all I saw was your rude comments to Ryulong. And, I might like to point out that several regulars (including administartors) telling you you're wrong just might have a point (*cough*). And comments like I loathe you with a passion only show your inability to control yourself. Personally, I would consider myself lucky if I were you, that you haven't been blocked for incivility already. As for JDi started it, I think you ought to read up on our policies concerning blocks, and it seems a little surprising to me that you, a newbie, would presume that JDi "started it" when he, following policy, didn't block an IP, and you decided to become rude to him. Please, I ask you to stop, now. Part Deux 09:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Who in the name of god are you calling a newbie? I have been here scince the project started you (not under the same username).

secondly, and most importantly, YOU ARE NOT AN ADMIN, so dont tell me what to do. *(cough)*.

Now, please leave me alone. 1B6 09:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

fine
No, your right, I wont stand up for myself anymore, I 'll just let the whole fucking community trample all over me, ok? thanks. 1B6 09:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

hmmm
I noticed that you deleted my last message. This is inadvisable, as a talkpage is a record of your activities here on wikipedia, although they clutter up your talkpage, you should keep all your messages/warnings/disputes ect. 1B6 12:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

re: List of Swiss artists
Note that there's already Category:Swiss artists, so having such a list is redudant. Additionally, the creator,, originally created the article with a single entry, with a link to a site belonging to a "Vincent Spano". That's why I put marked the articles as spam. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 08:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, agreed it may be redundant, but that's not CSD. Anyway, give him time to work on the list, if he comes back tomorrow, and it still only has one person on it, then it's probably spam. Newbies can be pretty slow at creating new articles. Part Deux 08:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

What vandalism??
Seems like a recurring theme on your discussion page here you attacking innocent users. What vandalism are you talking about? 69.140.51.137 09:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * What the heck? I may have made a mistake, but was it necessary to undo my vandalism reversions:    ? Sometimes vandal fighters make mistakes, so before you go templating me back and redoing the vandalism I undid, I suggest you pay close attention. As for the user above, that user has been blocked for vandalism, and got in trouble with several administrators. Please check your facts and read up on Don't template the regulars. Part Deux 00:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Im quite fed up with people giving vandalism warnings without properly checking what they are changing. Apologies don't excuse the fact that you are trying to do edits quickly rather than properly. There is no excuse for poor edits, hasty edits, and holier than thou attitudes when making edits. How about doing your work properly before labeling people vandals and having to apologize after? Regarding the changes I made, I was simply reviewing your work and felt that the minor changes you made were not warranted or did not improve the articles you mentioned. People can judge for themselves. In no case did I revert your changes in order to have "vandalism" placed back in an article or out of spite, I simply came across them by checking your contributions. I didn't realize that only your changes were legitimate and anyone who reverts your changes is mistaken or a vandal. That doesn't seem to be an attitude thats helpful to wikipedia or social towards fellow wikipedia users.69.140.51.137 06:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm sorry. You're right, I shouldn't have done it. Sorry. Just FYI, though, per WP:BLP, you might want to include citations or for facts like this: . Some people (like myself), might mistakenly see it as vandalism. Again, sorry. Part Deux 07:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Why Are You accusing Me of Sockpuppetry
Hey! I have a question for you! Why in the Hell are you accusing me of sockpuppetry, by suspecting that I'm using User:Fil-Co as my account when in fact it's not mine. I don't even know who hat hell is User:Fil-Co.. You guys, including yourself is accusing me again!!.How dare you accused me.. When in fact it's false..Someone out there is trying to frame me and get me into trouble..I'll be reported your accusations to the head administrator. User:Ramirez72
 * Go ahead. In fact, you're evading a block right now, and the administrators have already gotten involved: . Look, I don't have anything against you, and you might have valuable stuff to add to Wikipedia, but block evasion and personal attacks are not the way to go. Please stop evading your block. Part Deux 05:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Look I don't know how the hell is User:Fil-Co, alright!!!Some-one out there is trying to frame me and get me into trouble?? And also User:Fil-co is also trying to sabotage me!!! I need your help, Why don't you believe on this?? User:Ramirez72
 * Look, if you say you're sorry and promise to stop using sockpuppets, I'll withdraw the request for checkuser. Checkusers can prove once and for all if someone is a sockpuppet or not. Part Deux 06:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry for my incivil behaviour, I wish it never happen.. But someone out there really hates my guts right now and that user:Is pretending to be me?? That unknown person is trying too sabotage me and damage my reputation as a good wiki-contributer.. For the second time who the hell is User:Fil-Co..?? User:Ramirez72


 * Ramirez72's IP address used for these messages has been blocked, for block evasion. FiLoCo is indefinitely blocked, as a likely sockpuppet.  Proto ::  ►  09:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I did not make any changes to that page. I have made only 1 change to any Wikipedia page and that was to Jetsgo Airlines. Please note that the IP address you refer to is a university wireless Internet address accessible by any one of the 16,000 people here. So your charge, at least to me, is both baseless and false.

Your Accusations
I did not make any changes to that page. I have made only 1 change to any Wikipedia page and that was to Jetsgo Airlines. Please note that the IP address you refer to is a university wireless Internet address accessible by any one of the 16,000 people here. So your charge, at least to me, is both baseless and false.
 * Ah, it appears you are on a public IP; someitmes people get messages meant for others in this case. Apologies for any inconvenience. Part Deux 15:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Nowhere near history of sculpture
So yeah, i was nowhere near history of sculpture (i hadn't even been to the page till i got this message), so yeah, blocking me from Wiki would be kinda pointless (esp considering this is a temp IP anway), so idk what is up. Could someone be hacking my IP? Otherwise, check somewhere else mate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.148.208.55 (talk) 19:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Ah, it appears you are on a public IP; someitmes people get messages meant for others in this case. Apologies for any inconvenience. Part Deux 15:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Meineke Car Care Bowl
Thanks for fixing my revert on Meineke Car Care Bowl. I'm having some issues with popups and I screwed up the revert. -- Billma 13:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Congressional Softball League
Please state a specific and actionable npov concern on the talk page of this article (and any other article where you add a npov template). Savidan 16:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah. Well, I did it in the edit summary; I thoguht that would be enough. Will do. Part Deux 16:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right. It wasn't as I first thought. Thanks for the heads-up. Part Deux 16:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:83.67.217.254
Ah, I see the situation now. In that case, I'll do a 360 on the matter, and clear the autoblock as soon as the MySQL issue gets fixed. Sorry for the confusion there. — P ilotguy go around  19:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Part Deux 19:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Indefblock of IPs
Thanks for your msg. That was a few months ago, since then I learned that $(subj) is a bad idea. Cheers. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Images
Thanks for "encouraging" me to participate to the discussion. Now, I encourage you not to delete the images and destroy my work before having a proper and courteous exchange like grownups should, without necessarily calling the headmaster.Max Thayer 07:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Max, Possibly unfree images is the perfect place to have a proper and courteous exchange, and I encourage you to engage in discussion there. You will notice that, because another user restored the images you removed, you will be able to do that now. Thanks, Iamunknown 07:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

AFC
Thanks, although I'm not new to wikipedia I have only been there on AFC for a week or so, I am familiar with the noability guidelines but I openly admit I may have made a few mistakes in the past. Regards - Telly  addict  20:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Trance
Hello, i noticed ur commentary on the talk page of Trance. I marked-up the bulk of the article and appreciate it isn't orderly...but I was hoping to incite other editors to help craft the article. I utilised the definition as a starting point as many people STILL have very impassioned responses to the usage of 'trance' as a legitimate archterm for numerous related phenomena. This is similar to the tract that Charles Tart, Hoffman and other authors have taken. I would appreciate your assistance if you wish to help edit the article.

Cheers

B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 06:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
'Sorry about the template I put on Yankee go home, I guess I was too fast. My apologies once again'. Radio_Orange 14:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No no no, don't worry about it. You were doing correctly. Part Deux 14:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Now That's What I Call Music! 25 (U.S. series)
The latest version still spoke of the album as future. It starts off by saying: "Now That's What I Call Music! 25 or Now 25 is a music compilation that will be released in July 2007. The album will be the 25th edition of the U.S. Now! series." So I guess it probably is not released yet. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-18 18:33Z 
 * Thanks. After doing a search, it appears this is correct. Part Deux 18:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

User page
I noticed that you recreated your user page. If you want the history undeleted, just leave me a message and I'll take care of it. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks. Actually I was going for a deleted history. Long story. Thanks anyway, though. Part Deux 17:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Your message
I've responded at User talk:69.117.20.128. --Mel Etitis ( Talk ) 20:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

AFC rejecting
Sorry, the script I'm using was out of date. Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 14:54, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Can you tell me what script that is? I'd like to use it - I recently had to remove most scripts from my monobooks because they stopped working. I can't even use Lupin's antivandal script anymore, and I have to revert manually. Part Deux 14:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Add this to monobook.js:

and this to your Mypage/monobook.css: That should work. Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 15:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Graph toughness
You recently left a prod on graph toughness claiming that the subject was original research. The article as you prodded it contained a reference: Toughness in Graphs, Bauer, Broersma & Schmeichel which, if you had looked up, you would have discovered to be a survey citing 162 published research papers on the subject of graph toughness. It was not my stub (I had edited the article previously, but only to sort its stub category) and if it were mine I'd like to think I'd have left the subject's notability and sources a little more clearly stated (as I have now done) but I think you could have taken the courtesy to investigate the sources a little more carefully before leaving such prods. —David Eppstein 03:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Google provided under 10 hits. This tells me it was a new concept at best, barely touched on in the mathematical world. The paper you cited was providing a new theory, and it was quoting other research papers, who quite possibly didn't mention the concept themselves, but were a basis for the new theory. No, I did do my research. Part Deux 18:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It may have told you that it was a new concept, but if so that only means that you badly misinterpreted the search results, and your phrasing in present tense indicates to me that you still don't understand how mistaken your prod was. First, for a technical concept such as this, Google scholar or better MathSciNet would have been a more appropriate choice. Second, examination of the results should have told you that "graph toughness" was too specific a phrase — even the brief snippets shown by Google for your search more often use other permutations of those words. "Tough graph" instead would have given you 848 hits, most of them I think relevant. Third, you were given a good secondary source, but you still haven't convinced me that you actually looked at anything more than its title. If you had read the source, you would have discovered that many of the papers it cites are in fact about toughness, and that the concept was introduced in 1973, hardly new. —David Eppstein 23:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Voegeli Juste-Constant
You prodded this article but didn't say why so I removed the tag. If you still think it should be deleted then please use the AfD. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 09:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if you can re-prod or not. You might want to ask at WP:PROD. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes
Sorry, I was not aware/misunderstood the rule. I will attempt to find free use images. Thanks. Mattfranko81 18:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mattfranko81 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Return of a spamlinker
Hello Part Deux. I just thought that I would give you a heads up that a spamlinker that you have warned before has returned. On Mar 20-21 you left this message on the user in questions talk page after removing a whole batch of spamlinks that the editor had added to various articles. The user left a reply of sorts later on and today resumed adding external links the users website. I have already removed them but I'm not sure what warning to add to their talk page so I thought that I would let you know that the user is active again so that you can help keep an eye on things if you are so inclined. Thanks for your time and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 17:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Peegs.com
Another editor has added the  template to the article Peegs.com, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 21:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Matutina (disambiguation)


The article Matutina (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A disambig page with only one entry thats the same title and another seemingly unrelated (and redlinked) entry

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 12:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Rivals listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Rivals. Since you had some involvement with the Rivals redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. feminist (talk) 04:32, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Chuck Currie for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chuck Currie is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Chuck Currie until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 23:04, 14 January 2019 (UTC)