User talk:Th4n3r

Talkback
NativeForeigner Talk 19:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

My Style
I'm not sure what the official "name" for my style would be. I draw the line-art with pencil and ink, then I scan in and color the line-art using Adobe Photoshop.--Mr Fink (talk) 19:07, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * In Photoshop, I like to try and create textures by using different brushes and filter-work.--Mr Fink (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. :) Th4n3r (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Bayes theorem part of Monty Hall Problem
The sentences and the style which you objected to are removed/corrected. Do you have further comments? Please give specific indications on the Monty Hall problem Talk page if you think there are still issues. Richard Gill (talk) 12:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Stars and stripes?
I see you awarded me a barnstar!

The trouble is, I think you may have awarded the wrong one. You might have been looking for "carefully researched article" barnstar.

The trouble with being snarky is when you really don't know the subject or background, and there's that awful sound of an "oops". So let's be specific. Perhaps after a 9 year editing background, about 1/2 of that in NPOV page related areas, and having been a core author of our current NPOV policy approach/style itself in the distant past (not an easy page to get consensus on a rewrite), I suddenly decided to go to bat - for a dissolved company that hasn't existed since 2004, in an article that conveys in the clearest possible way, that its important years were those between 1960 and 1996, and in an article that effectively stops coverage after those dates since there wasn't much to say?

I'm not sure your logic, but if it makes you happy then power to you. But maybe consider next time, that


 * If you don't know about something; and
 * You weren't involved in any discussion or positive contribution; and
 * You don't bother to research the something; and
 * The uninvolved reviewers who did check agree it's appropriate;

then you might want to think how it makes you look, when you try to find a bandwagon and jump on it with snarkiness. It doesn't make you look good at all. It makes you look like someone whose approach to other editors is less, not more, trustworthy and level headed.

I see you have a good few months editing, and a good number of edits. We need good editors, but the next person you BITE may not be experienced and may get upset, and not allow for the error. You might drive people off the project. I'm sure on reflection if your point was serious, you could have said it more seriously and directly to me. Can we have less of this, in future? Thanks. FT2 (Talk 23:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Award
The description of me as a typical American in the award, if correct, would disclose improper personal information. Please comply with Wikipedia terms and conditions regarding user privacy.Patroit22 (talk) 13:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Not personal information, it's more likely it's a reference to the assumed misspelling of your username as "Patriot" since that's typically associated with America. In any case, you haven't been "outed" as an American, since you haven't admitted to being one. Thanks ツ Jenova  20  (email) 14:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Jenova- Here is an indent for you and your friends. Outed as an American is an abnormal use of this term. The primary us is related to coming out of the closet. Peace.Patroit22 (talk) 00:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I left the e off use.Patroit22 (talk) 00:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to argue with you over the use of the word "outing" Patroit. Some of us have improvements to Wikipedia to make. You might like to try it too rather than crying out for attention at multiple pages. Thanks ツ Jenova  20  (email) 10:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I am trying to improve Wikipedia but seem to be facing bullying barriers.Patroit22 (talk) 12:39, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You have set up the barriers by pushing a POV on two articles and then trolling on multiple pages of editors who disagreed with you. If you want to edit, then edit. If you want to push a POV or get on a soapbox then you will find many more barriers appear. Thanks ツ Jenova  20  (email) 14:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Trolling accusations are serious if unfounded . I have only responded and never initiated comments. I do not plan to edit in such a hostile climate  and comments such as this are a reason. Please consider  using care in giving unsolicited advice to further an obvious POV  posting agenda.Patroit22 (talk) 19:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
If you make an edit like this again, I'll thank you indefinitely. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

July 2015
Guiyu is found in China. That is why I reverted you, because you were deleting valid information.--Mr Fink (talk) 17:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Why did you edited my user page?
Hello pal, on September 4th you edited my user page changing my English level from four, to two, and writing in the edit summary "stop lying". I don't have a clue on what you were thinking. I don't know you, and you don't know me, so I don't know how you can know my level in English. I'm going to ask you to refrain from editing my user page, it's rude, unpolite and you don't have any reason to do it, if you like you can edit your own user page. --Dennis6492 (talk) 00:26, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Red caviar


A tag has been placed on Red caviar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Madmoons (talk) 16:41, 7 May 2018 (UTC)