User talk:Renameduser024/Archive/1

SAGLFH.
Thanks for reminding me. It's like a parade! PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 17:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

ANI
First of all, congrats on running to ANI instead of dealing with it privately and properly (and then subsequently not notifying me on the ANI posting!). You can see I responded on my talk page, yet you've gone to ANI instead of discussing it. Second of all, what are you playing at? I've not edited the page since your request for me not to. Whilst I may have disagreed with your argument vocally on my talk page, I didn't actually go back and make the same reversion.

The very first edit to change it to a redirect is NOT classed as a revert....do you know why? Because there's nothing to revert! That was the very first edit of its kind. Your very first edit on the page was the first true revert, so you started the cycle. Please learn the actual policies and please deal with these things in a dignified manner, instead of hiding behind admins.  Paralympiakos  (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Logitech MX Revolution
Hello there! I considered keeping the article (although I didn't check the talkpage and wasn't aware of the AfD before you pointed it out to me), but all the articles I merged had one thing in common; few or no references. The ones that had any external refs mostly linked to the product page at logitech.com, so I thought it better to merge them all. On this particular mouse I kept a reference to it being released in connection with Logitechs 25th anniversary as well as for the scrolling wheel. Most of the remaining article was more or less just product specs wrapped in a lot of words. Bjelleklang -  talk 15:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Articles for Creation
Please be a bit more careful when denying articles using the automatic software. I was forced to create an article that you denied here: User_talk:Old_Bedan, which was a well sourced and well written article about a British television show, which you denied, saying it was an unremarkable film. I consider you a good Wikipedian, and a friend, but Wikipedia is desperately short on new editors and this sort of thing can scare them off.--Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 05:13, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sue I am curious how you can even warrant scolding me over not creating this article. Of the 5 sources, all 5 are TV Guides. This show airs on Loaded TV in the middle of the night with the pilot airing less than a month ago. Lets let consensus decide. Mike (talk) 15:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I am sorry if you took that as a "scolding". There was nothing like that intended in my note to you. You are an awesome Wikipedian. Hey did you just put it up for AfD? I guess if you think that strongly about it... --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Helmet removal
Thanks, Mike. All help gratefully accepted. These projects become surprisingly tiring. I wrote the bare bones on a 5 hour flight to play SanDiego State having loaded my references first. A couple of weeks later, we did have a neck injury at Eastern Washington. Have a good New Year. Mdscottis (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Article for Creation 'Stop the Spread'
Hi Mike. Thanks for reviewing the article 'Stop the Spread'. You say that despite being about a public awareness campaign that the article is 'still an advertisement'. Does this mean the article's topic is not suitable for Wikipedia at all or that I would need to provide more independent sources to prove notability? There are examples of Wiki articles on public initiatives that have been published (e.g. the article on the 'Stop the Spread' HIV initiative in Florida) so I'm wondering why they have been accepted? Would appreciate some advice here. RoisinM18 09:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoisinM18 (talk • contribs)

Articles for Creation 'Apptegic'
Good morning Mike. I appreciate you taking the time to work on the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Apptegic article. I'm trying to improve it up to Wikipedia's standards and I can't find any help from the live chat. Are there any specific changes you would recommend I make to the article to make it up to standard. I did my best to write it similarly to other startup entries and I cited 3 different 3rd party source.

Thanks Mrryanconnors (talk) 14:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Your Comment & NAC
Hi Sue. The reason I deleted your comment on my talk page (and had to delete it again!) is because I did not believe it had any weight or backing to it and after seeing you delete (and not respond to) numerous comments about NAC (including one from an admin who warned you to stop) I did not think it deserved a response. That being said I am asking you again to stop NAC closures for the time being. It almost appears you have increased the number of NAC you have performed after being asked to stop. You were given advise by another editor who received a topic ban from NAC because of the same attitude and actions, you are an in fact a good editor Sue, but you only like policy when it applies to others, not yourself. Mike (talk) 12:56, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * No need to be rude. That is exactly the sort of thing that I addressed to you in the comments you deleted. First of all, the comments that you deleted off of your talk page had nothing to do with my NACs, those comments were a sincere attempt on my part to help you, I don't know what else to say about that at all, they speak for themselves....Second, I should warn you that reverting an NAC is against policy unless you are an admin, so please do not revert any of my closures again. You have done so twice. I didn't report them before, because I was hoping that I could reach out to you. That has passed. A "third strike" and I will have no choice but to report your rule violations...Finally third, I have bent over backwards trying to understand you and befreind you. In fact I have never tried so hard to make nice with somebody in my life. You need to decide if you wish to communicate with me or not. it's completely up to you. Please do not muddy my talk page again as long as you are deleting the comments that I make to yours. It's a double standard, and quite rude, and if you do it again I will simply move the conversation here to your talk page. I'm not angry, but you need an eye opener. I will be watching this page if you want to talk. Be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)