User talk:Cometstyles/Archive January 08

Smile (Wow....this is an "original" headline)[edit]

Tiptoety ^talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at 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.

Happy New Year![edit]

Dear friend, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Eve, and that 2008 is your best year yet! ~ Riana ⁂ 02:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you for your clear and polite explanation of why my userpage was not acceptable. Please inform ClanCC of your methods before he is reported. I am new to Wikipedia and do not know how to get things onto my userpage like most other people do, so I use copy and paste, but only wanted the checkmark icon, not the entire text. Thank you. -FranklinPierce3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklinpierce3 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but...[edit]

I don't particularly agree with your reasoning to oppose Keilana's RfA, I'm not saying that there is no reason to oppose, but the way you worded it really, really bothers me. Her reasoning[1] for setting up a recall for herself were per these.[2][3] --Charitwo ^talk 19:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know the reasons..and I read everything..my oppose is based on "right to vanish"..which I believe is ok for normal editors but not when it comes to admins since admins are given the trust by the community who elects them and if they can't handle the pressure of every crook and cranny then, I don't think they deserve to be admins at all.that confirmation to me is a farce..the guy that instigated this is being quite for one obvious reason, so that she is forced to reveal her previous ID to everyone..though its quite obvious who she really is which again makes no sense for all this drama.....--Comet styles 20:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"so that she is forced to reveal her previous ID to everyone" Please AGF Comet, both on Dihydrogen's nom and Keilana's acceptance of it. Dihydrogen was doing what he thought was right and unless I'm very much mistaken, you do not know the reason Keilana used RtV, it could well indeed be an exceptionally serious situation, so please do not criticize her for invoking the policy. — DarkFalls ^talk 21:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said the "guy that instigated this" ..meaning the person who forced her to go for reconfirmation..not me..BTW stalking only becomes a problem when a user reveals a bit more about him/herself to someone who he/she thinks they trust..bad mistake on their part ..!!..--Comet styles 22:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unified Login on April 1st[edit]

File:MrT.jpg

Mr. T pities User:Mtmelendez. :)

Barnstar![edit]

moved to userpage

Hi there: I've been working on the Angus L. Macdonald page --- but forgot to sign in before my last major addition of biographical information. I noticed that you undid my additions. I was planning to add quite a bit of information to this entry to reflect Macdonald's importance in Canadian history --- an importance that is not always fully recognized. Macdonald stood for a decentralized Canadian Confederation and thus his career has more significance than most Canadian provincial leaders. Now, I'm a bit depressed that you undid all my changes. No use working on this entry and drawing from multiple sources if my work goes for nothing. Bwark (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orion (constellation)[edit]

Hello. I wish to nominated the article Orion (constellation) to be semi-protected because of the extreme number of anonymous vandals editing that article. Considering it's a high profile article, an article children would be likely to look up, the detrimental effects of the vandalism to how Wikipedia looks as a whole, and the proportion that most edits are vandalism and reversions, I think semi-protection against anonymous users would be appropriate. Since the process requires a consensus on the article's talk page and you are one of the registered users who have reverted vandalism recently, I am writing in the hopes that you will go to the talk page and agree to the semi-protection. If we can get a convincing consensus, we can continue the process to the next step. Thanks for your time. --Bark (talk) 15:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

greetings![edit]

...any particular reason you reverted my edit to the Tale Spin page?

also, I'm a completely different person than whomever is editing "Westdale Mall" and that sort - check out my IP's "talk" page. Unfortunately, I'm at a shared network, and somebody else is doing the unsatisfactory edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.199.226.117 (talk) 17:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rena Silverman[edit]

Sorry, I reverted it myself but you got there first. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

np :) ..--Comet styles 18:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article[edit]

Yep: front page news as well (seriously!). There are a few factual errors in the article unfortunately, but it's good overall. It looks like the two recent comments about the article were left by a user who is banned here. Acalamari 21:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gwen Stefani genres[edit]

Can you please block the user vandalizing Stefani's genres?? Everyday this user does the same thing. Charmed36 (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin..but I'll get someone on it ..--Comet styles 22:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA[edit]

Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my request for adminship, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{play it cool.} 20:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Highlanders (rugby) peer review[edit]

Hey. I've been struggling to get any comments at my requested peer-review of Highlanders (rugby). I was wondering if you would be able to spend a few minutes reading through the article and adding any comments or suggestions here? Thanks. - Shudde ^talk 06:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page[edit]

Thanks a lot for removing [[4]] from my talk page. It feels good to know that fellow Wikipedians will watch your back and will defend you against attacks from vandals. You've brightened up my day, so thanks again. :-) Koert van der Veer (talk) 09:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revert while I was {inuse}[edit]

why? AndyJones (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Electronics and Communication Engineering[edit]

I was removing things that didn't make sense. I mean what is the deal with having "Notable Alumni" on that page? Some pranksters have just written their names in that section. Plus why is the "Three Year Diploma" section there? The whole page seems very random. Please let me make it better. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.18.78.2 (talk) 14:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian information of Volodymyr Nechyporuk[edit]

Hi Cometstyles,

Do you think that adding any Ukrainian information is a kind of destructive action? If the answer is also negative, I'll re-recover the reversion of 140.112.30.84 (22:20, 22 January 2008) because the article Нечипорук Володимир Павлович is still with its English version. Apologies for inconvenience.

Sincerely,

The revisioner, 10:22 23 January 2008 (GMT)

No its OK but not too much since this is the English Wikipedia :) ...--Comet styles 10:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cometstyles,

Thank you for reply. Yes, I realize that I'm primarily editing English articles in Wikipedia.

But listing the native name in a biography would still help, especially when on-line translators like [5] are growing.

For example, most of the contributions from Andrey Kolmogorov were written in Russian.

Best regards,

The revisioner, 13:36 23 January 2008 (GMT)

The Guitar Hero article is clearly vandalism. Hitler is listed as one of the authors! That is criteria for speedy deletion, my nomination stands. Please do not undo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbsimpson (talk • contribs) 12:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guitar Hero[edit]

Much better, I didn't see a better previous version, but the one that was up there was ridiculous. Listing "Satan/Hitler with the help of Mickey Mouse" as the developers and other junk like that. Thanks.--Cbsimpson (talk) 12:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops...[edit]

I accidentally removed the speedy tag during a revert with which I hoped to return the article to the salable version that it never had. Thanks for replacing it. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 12:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

82.109.167.130[edit]

Good to see you fighting the good fight. He's on WP:AIV now, though - it's usually better just to take a slow revert stance and revert it all an hour later, than to waste your own time and effort with a back-and-forth revert war (which also takes up space in the page history). A lot of these are just kids in their hour-long computer class. --McGeddon (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

Hey Sorry dude. I had no wrong Intentions in deleting the Sanskrit Article. I used to hear that Wikipedia reverts vandalism is less than a minute. Just wanted to check that. Thats it :-). I am really sorry for my action. Sorry Again 121.247.80.149 (talk) 12:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. · AndonicO ^Hail! 12:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grrr[edit]

I just got non-admin rollback and you beat me 2 a revert. --Pupster21 Talk To Me 13:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:P ...--Comet styles 13:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And again.. (which robbed me of an aiv report) --Pupster21 Talk To Me 13:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dairy Product[edit]

The edit I made to Dairy product was due to vandalism, and required reversion to an earlier edit due to multiple incidents of vandalism by 160.7.156.146. Not sure why you automatically reverted my reversion.Halogenated (talk) 17:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, I'am lagging badly :~( ...--Comet styles 17:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TSQUAD.[edit]

Care to join? · AndonicO ^Hail! 17:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greek and Latin Roots article[edit]

Not sure what you were doing reverting my edits, they were all correct (maybe you need to open a dictionary). Anthos is Greek for flower, and the Arcti- prefix is from Greek for “bear”, but you deleted both. You also deleted the word Archeopteryx as an example in the archeo- prefix. means “ancient wing” which fits the archeo- prefix for an example. If you trying to be dillegent fixing errors, how come you did not fix the original error of archeo, as it was listed as “archi-“. Archi in Greek means “chief” not “ancient”. I’m sure there are other errors in this article, I just stopped after the A section. --WordsExpert (talk) 23:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pleurisy edit[edit]

How does my edit constitute vandalism? Did you read my edit summary? Why should a long list of unsourced trivia be included in such a short article? 81.159.18.71 (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, hello? Is this an automated bot? You've made ten edits since my questions above, but not replied either here or at my talk page... Thanks in advance for any assistance 81.159.18.71 (talk) 11:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hey, well it seems respected editors have also added stuff to the famous cases sections, and all that article needs is more linked sources to the trivia's so removing trivia will not fix the problem, you might like to tag all trivia's with {{cn}} to clarify that it needs sources...--Comet styles 11:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But why am I being accused of vandalism when I clearly explained my reasoning in my edit summary? This place is just soooo confusing... 81.159.18.71 (talk) 11:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yup it is confusing and only the strong survive :) ..--Comet styles 11:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh oh...you better make sure that the wiki content about the FF8 characters is correct! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MoriyaMinakata (talk • contribs) 11:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it is correct so you better stop vandalising ..--Comet styles 11:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help![edit]

Can you semi-protect this page? There is so much vandalism on it, it's not funny. --Pupster21 Talk To Me 12:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help![edit]

Can you semi-protect this page? There is so much vandalism on it, it's not funny. --Pupster21 Talk To Me 12:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... it said it twice.... --Pupster21 Talk To Me 12:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot.. I'am NOT an admin :) ..--Comet styles 12:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot... I saw all the admin boxes on the userpage... You should have an Rfa... --Pupster21 Talk To Me 12:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Roberts (photographer)[edit]

Are you aware that the new editor who blanked the page is the person who created it? Pairadox (talk) 13:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yup, and I knew it will be deleted soon since it failed Notability ;) ..--Comet styles 13:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already gone, but the warning for the reversion rather than the page creation seemed a bit bite-y. Pairadox (talk) 13:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The warning is a simple way to remeber who created what and since it was going to be deleted, if he recreated only admins (Special:Undelete) , will know if the person had ever created anything before but with the warning on the talk page, non-admins will know if this person is recreating the article or not and warn accordingly :) ...--Comet styles 13:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see the reasoning. Usually I give 'em a welcome and a {{uw-create1}}, if it looks like they're acting in good faith. (Editors who have a deleted article on their watchlist will also see the recreation. I catch a lot of the persistent ones that way.) Pairadox (talk) 14:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

regarding the btrib92 usertalk page.[edit]

hi, sorry for not contacting you first. my name is Brad St. Ledger, i originally wrote the article, it was concerning a project that was halted half-way through production, so in hindsight i was glad it was removed. however for personal reasons i would very much like the usertalk to be deleted. i cannot afford for my name to be on the internet availabe for anyone to see. sorry for any inconvienience caused. i hope you understand where i am coming from. please email me if needs be at bradstledger@btinternet.com . thankyou very much for your time, brad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.118.65 (talk) 17:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ...[edit]

... for that revert! {{huggles}} - Alison ^❤ 18:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^_^ ....--Cometstyles 18:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Acetone Award[edit]

Slakr's Acetone Award

For excellent effort in reverting vandalism, you are hereby awarded some acetone to help scrub out the toughest of attempts at turning articles to mush. Plus, if you ever need to get nail polish off, it'll help with that too. :P

Thanks for helping out. =) --slakr^\ talk / 10:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do I have to do?[edit]

What do I have to do to get a straight answer from you? You are continuing to breach WP:Civil Mickylynch101 (talk) 11:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit of WBC page.[edit]

Please do not confuse my recent change in the WBC page as vandalism. I believe that it is both accurate and approptiate to label them as a hate group. Just wanted to clear that up.

Cheers. -Rendman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.33.109.12 (talk) 12:15, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving "Quantum of Solace (video game)" to "Bond 22 (Video game)"[edit]

I am trying to change the page back to what it was, as there is no official news saying the game will be Quantum of Solace —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.211.12 (talk) 12:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA[edit]

Thanks for your support at my request for adminship, which passed today with 42/0/0!

I would like to thank Wizardman for nominating me, Cometstyles/Archive January 08 and everyone else for their support and comments. I'll continue with contributing to the encyclopedia's content (hopefully writing an FA here and there :) and will help out with admin-related tasks which you just entrusted me with. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask!

Thanks again, —dima /talk/ 01:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

In case you delete it again, I thought i'd discuss it with you. I'm rather at a loss why you undid my edit to the Rab C. Nesbitt article. There was one sentence which could be considered speculation ("this was likely a joke"), yet the edit contained a lot more than that. Honestly, I think it would have been more constructive to merely edit out the speculation if that's the bit you had a problem with.

- C —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlycrash (talk • contribs) 11:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jaymes2[edit]

After your warning he upped the ante to include personal attacks.[6] As an involved admin my hands are tied, but if you could take appropriate action I'd be grateful. Raymond Arritt (talk) 14:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what action can a minute editor take, but he seemed to have stopped about an hour ago..maybe he realised he was wrong :) ..--Comet styles 15:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Rfa[edit]

Well, not this time anyway it seems...my effort to regain my adminship was unsuccessful, but your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 06:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia[edit]

Why vandalism? I think you reacted too fast. Faster than it should normally take to realize a vandalism, even if it were on your own house? This article is a real shame. It mirrors the propaganda of very small and tiny state. In the contrary, my corrections are absolutely harmonious with the U.N. desicions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandou (talk • contribs) 11:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, It was quite clear that it is known as Macedonia, I have never heard of the UN decision you are talking about and as far as I'am concerned, it was right that way it is..--Comet styles 11:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYROM[edit]

If you were a little more carefull, you would realize that this decision is writen in the article. However, this is a very serious matter you are taking desicions so easily, and be sure I will do my best to change it. I wish you good luck in supporting discriminatory and partial history and international politics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandou (talk • contribs) 11:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.[edit]

Thanks for reverting. ^{Kekeke, as you read this, I revert all the vandals. >:)} · AndonicO ^Hail! 14:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

High frequency instant-reverts[edit]

You really should check your sources before instantly auto-reverting contributions. In case it matters, please see [7] and [8]. The instant-revert you made on the Comparisions of Operating Systems article was unjustified. Please make sure to always comment on the reason of a revert.

In brief, PaX consists of one of the resource restriction exploit mitigation features; kauth(9) consists of a centralized system-wide framework controlling all permissions, configurable and expansible using dynamic modules. The later was inspired from an OS X feature of the same name. Both features are integrated in the latest stable NetBSD 4.0 release.

Thanks, 66.11.179.30 (talk) 10:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wow[edit]

this is my first time trying out being a recent change patroller and you beat me almost every time! keep up the good work.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 11:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stringer Bell[edit]

I note that you've been reverting edits to the article Stringer Bell from an IP address editor. Just to let you know as someone familiar with the article - the editors contributions were factually accurate and probably didn't warrant reverting.--Opark 77 (talk) 13:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Thompson as a candidate for Jack the Ripper.[edit]

I edited the entry on Francis Thompson giving some brief details on his possible guilt as Jack the Ripper. I am an author who as a member of London's whitechapel society has spoken at international conventions on the subject. I have been interviewed by the press on this subject and The Ripper Casebook a popular site devoted to the topic contains Thompson as a suspect. (He is currently amongst the top ten suspect out of the hundred or so named put forward) The Casebook uses my essay on Thompson as their introduction. I have had articles on this topic published in British Magazines. Anyone who studies Thompson is aware that he is linked as a modern suspect to the Ripper murders. Talk on the Wikipedia's own forum on Thompson queries the Ripper connection. I think somebody should make some cursory note in the entry for Wikipedia upon Francis Thompson that he is seen by many as Jack the Ripper.

Richard Patterson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Patterson17 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

large deletion from Jenner[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_Jenner&diff=186341934&oldid=173895869 The article in the state following that doesn't have much about him or vaccination left in it. Are you sure it is an improvement? Midgley (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

pickering[edit]

Thanks for the message, I need to update the email address and link out to a new site. Please let me know how I can do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YMCTP (talk • contribs) 11:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreasonable link removal[edit]

Hi You just removed a link I placed on a page re Alpacas for no obvious reason. This was not abusive or threatning nor against the conditions as far as I can tell. It was a link to a page I am building for the newly formed camelid society of Spain!

This is an important link as the people who are responsible are the same people that have introduced the first Alpacas into Spain... HISTORY IN THE MAKING, and you want to delete this history denying the rest of the world the knowledge, isn't that totaly the opposite of what WIKIPEDIA is about?

If, in a thousand years time, no one knows who first introduced Alpacas into Spain or where they came from it will be your fault, you will have denied mankind and the human race evolutionary important knowledge. There are others in history like you who are now infamous for things like this, evil people one and all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.44.120.63 (talk) 12:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverting on Jaws (film)[edit]

Hi! I undid one of your reverts - did you mean to revert Cluebot's edit? If you could double check that the article is correct now (provided that vandal isn't still at it...), that would be great. Thanks! StephenBuxton (talk) 17:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Vandalism[edit]

Please be more careful when reverting vandalism as you accidently reverted my original reversion and in doing so returned the vandalism. —— Ryan ^(t)^•^(c) 10:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hehe, when dial-up and broadband collide, it gets nasty..me being the dial-up ;)..--Comet styles 10:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

but my frank wren edit was factual :(

what's ur problem ?[edit]

y did u change the YC page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GuTTy-YC (talk • contribs) 11:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok i understand, but these sites are OFFICIAL

--GuTTy-YC (talk) 11:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes even if they are official, they mihgt not be allowed for example Official Forum and Official E-Team<<that is a forum, so please do not add that but the others seem ok :) ...

Dear Mr Cometstyles, on January 31st you decided it was in your interests to delete an edit I made on the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_31st. While you assume that the edit was vandalism, I assure you that 2008 is the second official "Loten Day" that has been celebrated. Loten Day was organized as a fun and unorthodox approach of raising awareness about the Church of Scientology, an orgainzation we feel very strongly about. Our movement is just getting off the ground, and your editing is quite a hinderance to its expansion. So if possible would you please let us rewrite and keep the entry. Happy Loten Day!

Sincerely, Jeffery "Jeff K" Kane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.78.200 (talk) 11:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you very much for reverting the vandalism on my userpage, much appreciated :) —— Ryan ^(t)^•^(c) 12:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you for tagging 163.153.24.40. The district has reported that the "students have been identified and will be disciplined by their principal. Also their computer access has been disabled." --NERIC-Security (talk) 16:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]