Wikipedia:Editor review/Shoessss

Just As It States
A review page for any and all comments on my editing. Please feel free to be candid in your remarks. Like all things in life…..I’m just a moving towards perfection…..not quite there yet.Shoessss 12:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Dann135
I would like to personally thank you for defending my article on the Needle through thumb trick. I am glad you were kind enough to defend me.

Sir Roger Casement
Don't know why you feel the need to interfere with my editing of the Casement article, there are others working hard at censoring it, as well as others seeking references for brief comments when the whole article is a mass of unreferenced comments.

What I have written and you have removed does not even verge on Wikipedia's definition of vandalism. I provided a reference for the detail about Harold Wilson in one instance. Much of the other stuff can be found in every book about Casement.

What modern day homosexuals think about his outdoor sex activities and the alternate view that they could only be fantasies should both be permissible. Acting as a policeman who knows not the subject adds no value.

One small correction but exemplary. Someone wrote he was known as Sir Roger Casement from 1905-16 when he was only knighted in 1911. His earlier decoration in 1905 did not add 'Sir' to his name and some pillock changed that back.

I hope you haven't destroyed my efforts on Montgomery Hyde which I blended with the previous brevities.

JMY
 * Hey Guy, first of all Happy New Year!. Second, I am more than willing to include your additions, but sorry to say you need cites and a more non-WP:POV. Shoessss |  Chat  16:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Simplemines
Shoesss, you want comments on your editing? Well, candidly: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! And then there's AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Along with AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Hope this helps. :)Simplemines 10:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Appreciate your input Simplemines. Your way with the English language is astonishing.  • ShoesssS Talk
 * Your envy is touching, Shoesie. I'm still waiting for the independent verification that you have more than "two brain cells in (your) head."


 * I'm also curious. You say you're married and you have kids? No, my question isn't how much you had to pay to import a bride from Russia; it's how do you spend SO much time on WP and still work. Oh, my mistake. You never did say you actually had a job.
 * Boy, those Russian brides! They'll do ANYTHING to stay in the US!

Simplemines 05:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What can I say Simplemines some of us are born with just plain old good luck. Grateful to say, I am one of them. Have a great day.  • ShoesssS Talk

I'm confused as to what happened to the dialogue...you expressed your concerns of the significance of my article and while I asked for just a bit more time to complete it with all the necessary links and spend the last 3 hours compiling stuff for a whole new article on this new era of artist representation on the internet, you go and delete eveything i have and then there's not even a record of any of the dialogue that took place. I am bewildered because of what I am trying to talk about of this new generation of musicians is based on all the same principles that wikipedia has been founded...i am bewildered and a bit pissed off that there's not even a little bit more warning...unless I am completely missing something, please explain it to me a bit further
 * Hey User: Sluggie17, as I stated on the article’s discussion page you created, I believe you have a great idea/concept for an article with regards to the overall genre as it relates to the internet with regards to musicians.  However, once again, I believe you should write the article in terms of the genre rather than using an individual who has not gained overall notability to be included in Wikipedia.  If you want help in developing the article in an overall sense, I am more than happy to give a hand and or advice.  In addition, I was not the one to delete the article; the deletion log can be found here, .  Hope this answers you questions.  Once again, any help you need just ask.  • ShoesssS Talk   22:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused about Still Pending AFD
Hi there. I'm looking back through the edits on the Still Pending article and it appears that you "resurrected" a historical AFD discussion that was subsequently overturned. I am somewhat of a newbie to all of this so please forgive my ignorance. The original AFD is here: Articles_for_deletion/Still_Pending and when I view the history on the article, this is what appears as the edit you made. It looks like someone then came in and moved your nomination to a new location. Perhaps you were unaware of the overturn of the deletion that occurred? Can you please help me to understand what has happened. I did quite a bit of research and writing for this article and it apparently meets the notability criteria since the deletion was overturned. Thank you. Stampsations 01:18, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey Stampsations, I wish I was smart enough to resurrect anything! It seems that what happened is that the slight name change in the article did not reflect the previous Afd nomination and subsequence decision.  When I nominated the new article and started the new discussion page an Administrator remembered the previous Afd and was able to pull the archives and place them on the new discussion page.  Either way, it looks like a keeper, especially with the new sources added.  Hope this explains a little bit if what went on here.  Have a great day. Shoessss 13:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you mind adding your "official" Keep to the discussion? Also, you forgot to sign your entry on the discussion page. Thanks. Stampsations 18:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


 * Hello Stampsations if you look on the article’s deletion discussion page at the bottom, you will notice that I have already added my comment regarding the situation.  You may have just overlooked as it appears as a separate item.  Once again good luck.  I f I can be of any help just ask. Shoessss 18:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I think your very bad at your job and youll edit this as well because you edit everything


 * Hello User:77.96.163.142, I read your comments on my http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Editor_review/Shoessss&action=submit page and would like to ask you if you could be more specific? I reviewed the contributions you made to several articles and must say that I still find that they could be considered vandalism.  Am I missing something? • ShoesssS Talk

please try not to distort facts and figures to make your case
this "editor" likes to quote peoples edit percentages (wrongly, I might add) as if to say that they are "too close" to an article. Can someone please point me to the section of wikipedia where it says users can't focus their effort on specific articles?

== Agree with all of the above who proclaim this editor out to lunch, finding grievances for the sake of it. Another obscurantist bent on having his own way with the rest if us and calling everyone with whom he disagrees a vandal. Get some shoes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.245.18.106 (talk • contribs).
 * Shoessss's edit here is relevant to the comment made by 66.245.18.106.--Alf melmac 08:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Editors may wish to review the edits of the ip making this comment, as I fully support Shoesss's actions there, the edit summary is spot on, the anon has previously added highly spurious analysis into This Little Piggy because the existing analysis was unverified and unsourced.--Alf melmac 12:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

==This "editor" thinks he can just erase anything he likes and then say to others "You are violating" or "you are erasing" when in gact he only wants his opinion to be heard.Spellmanloves67 (talk) 04:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
bias Osteen attacking Vostok

You
You are nasty. Stop making such nasty edits and being so horrible to people. YOU HORRIBLE OLD MAN! 78.148.94.179 (talk) 23:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment – Ah, which edit – which article – WHAT are you talking about? If you can help me out with a little more information, I would be happy to answer your question in little more depth. Thanks Shoessss |  Chat  01:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I see what we are discussing now, . Son, all I can say is, please do not embellish on the facts.  Let the facts speak for themselves.  Once you start to fabricate, exaggerate  or interject WP:POV into your argument and you are called on these points, you lose all creditability.  As I said earlier, let the facts speak for themselves, you can’t go wrong that way.  Godd luck to you. Shoessss |  Chat  03:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, let's get some shoes Niyant (talk) 20:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a very strange Editor Review page. Feels like I'm lost...  Enigma  message Review 06:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This is truly bizarre. Shoesssss, for the record, I do NOT think you are nasty. I think your contributions are intelligent and useful. Lazulilasher (talk) 23:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Editor Review
You are a good participator in AFD, even though I don't always agree with what you say. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 22:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL - Thank you. That is why it is at AFD differences of opinion. And nothing wrong with that :-) ShoesssS Talk 22:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Good rescue at Sigma Phi Lambda. Your input is welcome at Articles_for_deletion/Guacimal. Thanks, --Jmundo (talk) 07:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)