User talk:Richwales/Archives/2012-06

Joseph Smith
Note the similarity in user names in those recent edits. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 03:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads-up. A brand new account, whose only two edits were indisputably vandalism, needed to be indef-blocked ASAP.  —  Rich wales 03:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nguyen v. INS
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Re Afroyim v. Rusk peer review
Thanks - I am glad my comments are helpful. If it is OK with you, I will copy your comments to the PR itself and reply to them there (I think it is helpful to keep all such comments together in one location). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree. By all means, please go ahead.  —  Rich wales 15:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Done and replied, thanks Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:08, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bronyetransportyor
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bronyetransportyor. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Washington v. Texas
Hey Rich, when you get a chance, would you have a look at Washington v. Texas and see what I can expand on (or any missing information I overlooked)? I would appreciate any advice or suggestions you could provide. Best, Lord Roem (talk) 07:06, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

DTTR
Please do not template me again, especially in defence of an obvious sock. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 20:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * For the time being, we shall have to agree to disagree here. I left comparable edit-warring warnings both on your talk page and also on the other editor's talk page; even though I know you have been around for some time, I still felt it was necessary for me to act evenhandedly in this situation in order to avoid any accusations of bias.


 * As for your belief that I am defending an obvious sock, I do think I understand why you feel this way. However, until the SPI case which you lodged has been decided, this other editor's contributions are (IMO) entitled to be considered on their own merits, and your dispute with him is still in the realm of a content dispute, and not (at least, not yet) something entitled to exemption from EW/3RR as a sock-reversion or vandalism-reversion action.


 * Even if the other editor is determined to be a sock, I would still propose that the material in question is sufficiently plausible (in the abstract, on the surface, and regardless of who is proposing it) that the best course of action would be to deal with it on its own merits and not summarily revert and re-revert it. —  Rich wales 21:10, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not sure why you are mentioning the material. This material is not the reason I left my brief message on your talk. The reason I left the message is your heavy-handed templating. You must know by now that I am well aware of 3RR, so the 3RR message was useless and redundant. To give me something that is useless and redundant in templated form makes it even worse. As far as the material it looks like WP:PRIMARY, UNDUE and WP:OR but I couldn't care less if it is included or not. If you like it so much please feel free to restore it. The issue here is not really the material; it is the enabling of disruptive socks of Justice Forever to edit the article and flood the talk page with long screeds followed by incessant edit-warring like they have been doing for years. The ducks are flying in formation on that article and its talkpage. It is up to you to assist them or not. But don't do it by being discourteous and insulting to the regulars. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 21:30, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)