User talk:Reconsider the static/Archive 1

Altered Speedy Deletion rationale: Nigel picart
Hello Reconsider the static, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (Nigel picart) under a criterion different from the one your provided, which was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific to protect the encyclopedia, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again!  So Why  07:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Byford Dolphin
I am the original source & creator of the Byford Dolphin article, with the help of FP to edit content. You've just removed an important reference also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark.T2009 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 13:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Beck
I reverted your addition to Glenn Beck because it didn't add anything to the paragraph and it wasn't soured. In all seriousness: thanks for contributing, though.Cptnono (talk) 11:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Jett
Hi, thanks for your help in patrolling the Joe Jett page, it has been subject to some bad hacking. I am trying to keep an eye on it but if more than one of us can it is helpful. Hammertime2005 (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
—Farix (t &#124; c) 13:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Vivek Kundra. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. I know you are replacing the content but please refrain from further reverts, I've requested semi-protection here Smartse (talk) 13:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't consider it to be total vandalism as WP:3RR states "edits which any well-intentioned user would immediately agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding cruel or offensive language". I think that if I give a 3RR warning to one editor it only makes sense to give it to the other as well. Thanks for bringing it up though, hopefully semi-protection should sort it out. Smartse (talk) 13:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know why you have alleged "sockpuppet" as the reason for reverting my edit on Vivek Kundra. If anything, TruPrint appears to have been created yesterday with only one contribution to Kundra's page prior to your edits. I will look into this further. As Smartse has pointed out, when in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content. Please discuss this in the talk section prior to posting these in the article.--7oceans (talk) 09:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Report at WP:AN3
Reluctantly, I've made a report at WP:AN3 in regards to the edit-warring you've done, including twice after Smartse warned you. I completely sympathize with your position (as you should see in the sockpuppet report against 7oceans) but I can't in good conscience let the edit war go unreported. We have a 3 revert rule and you've made 13 reverts in 24 hours. I'm hoping they go easy on you (less than 24 hour block, or even no block at all). But I felt the report was necessary, I hope you understand. Thank you. --  At am a  頭 17:09, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello Reconsider the static. Not only have you exceeded 3RR, you've also used rollback to undo edits by an IP to Vivek Kundra. The changes that you rolled back were not vandalism. Rollback is not to be used in edit wars. If you want to maintain your reputation, it is advisable for you to post at the 3RR noticeboard. You should promise to stop edit-warring on this article and apologize for your misuse of rollback. This might be a way to avoid sanctions. EdJohnston (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've replied at User talk:EdJohnston. EdJohnston (talk) 13:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

byford dolphin
The investigation is not a conspircay theory, try using a bit of research & get your facts straight, before you start editing.. The investigation is descriped in detail, through the bok, Nordsjødykkerne by kristin Øye Gjerde og Helge Ryggvik ISBN 978-82-8140-082-5

== Nordsjødykkerne by kristin Øye Gjerde og Helge Ryggvik ISBN 978-82-8140-082-5 == Here is a reference

Mark.T2009 reported

 * I though I should inform you, out of courtesy, that I've mentioned you at AN, but merely as one of the several editors who (like myself) has removed an unsourced, speculative paragraph from Byford Dolphin. --RexxS (talk) 21:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet report
Hello, you have been accused of being a sockpuppet of SusanLesch. So have I, as it happens. Which means that we're apparently the same person, and by leaving this notice I'm actually talking to myself. But I thought I should let you know anyway. :) --  At am a  頭 18:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Hamid Karzai
I think my edit was not vandalism. Thanks!--119.73.0.122 (talk) 00:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

That new section was created few hours ago and doesn't belong there. It belongs at Hamid_Karzai. His wife (Zeenat Quraishi) and his brother (Ahmed Wali Karzai) have their own articles. Wife and children belong in personal life sections.--119.73.0.122 (talk) 00:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice edit.
I see that the word "phrase" is redundant when the phrase itself was placed in quotes. Nice tiny tidy edits like this are often under-appreciated. Good job. User:Pedant (talk) 06:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Changes on Bokaro Steel City page
Dear User,

The edit on page: Bokaro Steel City seems a POV action. The 3 changes made by you are unexplained and seems just a propaganda to discredit the city of what it deserves. The changes have been reverted for now. Discuss the change on talk page before making changes or I would be forced to report you for Vandalism.

Hope the changes you made were in good faith.

Thanks,

--Indian (talk) 02:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear user,

While I agree that use of weasel words is not acceptable, removing vast pasts of fact also render the article almost useless.

I believe a neutral and standard language can fix the concerns without ripping the article.

Regards,

--Indian (talk) 05:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear user,

Thanks for the concern to make page wiki-compliant. The page has been subject to many changes and shown active signs of acts that seem Vandalism. I have personally very recently started trying to slowly with common consent made some changes. I would appreciate if you could help the same process. Sudden changes attract unwanted IP attacks as you must have experienced over the time.

Expecting cooperation from a concerned member.

Regards, --Indian (talk) 05:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Wiki about Kapsch/Cleanup
Hi, I just saw that you marked this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapsch to be cleaned up. I would like to do that, so could you please tell me what exactly I should? best regards --Florian.schleicher (talk) 11:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:Question
Hi Reconsider the static. Yes, there is indeed a set of automated messages you can use. See WP:WARN for a full list. But tell you what, I'll let you use my vandalism-template cheatsheet. You can also use automated tools such as Huggle or Twinkle to revert vandalism as well. Hope that helps to answer your question. Kind regards,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 03:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

P-8 and BAMS
Hi, I notice you reverted someone's edit on the P-8 Poseidon page about what UAS might become the BAMS system. Although the wiki page for BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance) is rather lacking, the Global Hawk is the system that is being developed, so the edits you reverted back to are out of date. I think it would be fine to go back to what the earlier edit was. -SidewinderX (talk) 04:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks for the response! I've re-reverted your edit. Happy editing! -SidewinderX (talk) 04:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Lusatians vs. Sorbs
Why did you revert my edit on the Lusatians. A redirect to Sorbs is wrong. I am a Lusatian but no Sorb. What is your problem with this? 195.243.51.34 (talk) 10:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. But why should I contact the Person who created the redirect page? I am from Lusatia, was born in Lusatia and live in Lusatia. Well I should know that 90% of the people here consider themselve Germans - and 90% is a very low estimate. Historically it was different of course, but allready around 1400 the Germans formed the majority in the cities. The Lusatian=Sorbs case is often found, so it has to be mentioned on the disambugation page, but it is nevertheless incorrect. This incorrectnes is also found in many articles about Lusatia in the English wiki, where is always much talking about the Sorbs, but forgotten that the regions was two-national for nearly 1000 years. By the way I am proud of the "two nation"-context, but nevertheless it is important to me that Lusatians is not Sorbs. 195.243.51.34 (talk) 10:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy on The Legarde Twins
Hi Static. I overrode your db-content tag, which you applied while I was looking for some content. Look again at the article; it might be a notable subject. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work! Keep it up! Feel like turning this into a DYK? Drmies (talk) 05:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, almost at 1300. Dig up a few more things and we're good to go--I'll write a tasty hook. Isn't this more fun than pasting templates? BTW, if you don't already, consider using WP:Twinkle--just don't be too quick on the draw. ;) Drmies (talk) 06:26, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks friend.Its indeed an honor to get a barnstar from you.. :)  aru nku mar  checkmate me 12:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Prince George's County Public Schools Magnet Programs
You tagged the article I created on magnet programs in PGCPS citing it came across as an "advertisement". I'm not sure what it would be advertising. The article was created because ANOTHER person on wiki suggested that an article SPECIFICALLY for PGCPS magnet programs be created to reduce redundant content on other wiki pages directly related to Prince George's County Public Schools. The article on PGPCS magnet programs DIRECTLY LINKS to the main article for the Prince George's County Public Schools system, which is a highly detailed page which lists the magnet programs that each school offers. Maryland Pride (talk) 04:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Eagle River High School
Yes hi, why did you delete the AFJROTC portion at first at this page? I had to go back to retype it all and was not completed with it. The Rapid Man (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My appologies, as I was not finished yet and was a little preterbed at the deletion. Yes that ip was mine, I just forgot to log in :| . The Rapid Man (talk) 10:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Re Archive
How do I archive talk pages then? The Rapid Man (talk) 10:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I will figure it out, will be cautious next time before deleting anything. Thanks again. The Rapid Man (talk) 11:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Category: Usenet free posting
There must be more, Google Groups isn't a Usenet Provider. Why do you want delete Open-News-Network_e.V.--OnnoS (talk) 11:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

For UUU!!!
 ARUNKUMAR P.R has given you a LOLipop! This horrible pun and delicious candy promotes WikiLove and tells the world how low you will stoop for the sake of humor. Spread WikiLove by giving someone else a lollipop, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the unrelenting joy of lollipops by adding {{subst:Lollipop}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Take a break, Have a Lollipop!!! arun talk  04:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Lettter Bomb (Song)
I've declined the speedy tag you placed on Lettter Bomb (Song). The reason I declined it is because the artist of the song in question is Circle Jerks. Please note that articles about songs are only speedy deletable if their artist have no article on Wikipedia. For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I've re-directed the article to the album page because it still fails the notability criteria of WP:MUSIC. - Reconsider !  10:10, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me, it has nothing to do with the deletion process. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

in re: Campus Pride
While I'm sure everyone does appreciate your great zeal in vigorously patrolling wikipedia for possible junk articles, call me eccentric but I personally feel it shows more courtesy not to mention common sense to wait until someone actually finishes up entering the initial data on a new article before slapping a plethora boxes on it and/or trying to have it speedily deleted. Especially when this means you have just blown away all the editing work the OP has just done. . . . sigh. Thanks ever so CyntWorkStuff (talk) 02:39, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Undoubtedly you are unaware of this but when you edit and save over an open article that someone else is also in the process of editing you "blow-away" all the edits they had previously made. I'm going back now to fetch them and recreate them. Additionally this article is related to an existing article (it is actually the parent group of same) so I am updating both as I go and I must also upload and properly cite the Logo, etc., etc. etc. CyntWorkStuff (talk) 02:53, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * When someone is editing an article and a 2nd person comes in and makes and saves other edits, then the 1st set of edits are "blow-away" when the 1st person tries to save. This is to protect the integrity of the article because intervening changes have been made.  You've made a very minor faux pas. It's been explained to you. It is over, please cease and desist with the silliness and lets both move along in a pleasant and productive fashion.   CyntWorkStuff (talk) 03:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Heh
I saw a welcome template you put on someone's talk page... it ended with "Happy editing! Reconsider". It was kind of funny.  fetch  comms  ☛ 03:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Just when it's a little slow ;)  fetch  comms  ☛ 04:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
The Grim  Reaper  11:23, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Got your message at my talk. Actually, you are partly incorrect. Please look at the recent edit history of the talk page for the article: you will see that the user is the same person as the IP who made multiple blankings before logging in. (Made comment as IP, then logged in and signed.) In other words, he is continuing to blank after you warned him. --Tryptofish (talk) 02:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for the revert on my talk page. You may want to look at the comments I left at the SPI. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 10:28, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Jane Skinner
There is a discussion section open, and talk on the talk page about the sentence. Your comments are welcome. I restored the sentence for now. Thanks. -Pecoc (talk) 02:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Paper Plus Group
Hi, Regarding your nomination then 'un-nomination' of Paper Plus Group, I have no problem with you nominating it if you feel like it is not notable enough for wikipedia. Do you feel that way? I always try and produce quality work for wikipedia and love to hear feedback, Thanks! Kiwiteen123 (talk) 08:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Category Headers
That was a fast edit! Thanks though, it looks like it is common practice to not include a header for categories, and I removed it from the other places (3 others) that I also added it to when I was adding the web hosting category to them. Out of curiosity though, is there a page that actually specifies this as a best practice? I'm not contesting your change in any way (shown by the subsequent changes I made) I am simply curious to read more about it if it's documented somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by T007mav (talk • contribs) 09:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

 * Good question! Have a vacation! Call your mum, or other loved ones! Or, you know, go get pissed senseless like the rest of us. :) — what a crazy random happenstance  11:03, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Langley Flying School
An article that you have been involved in editing, Langley Flying School, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 02:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)