User talk:132.205.44.134

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

School IP address Attention:

This IP address, 132.205.44.134, is registered to Concordia University and may be shared by multiple users of an educational institution. If the institution uses proxy servers, this IP address may in fact represent many users at many physical computers.

For this reason a message intended for one person may be received by another. Similarly an innocent user may be blocked for another user's vandalism. If you are editing from this address and are frustrated by irrelevant messages, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself. In some cases you may temporarily be unable to create an account due to efforts to fight vandalism; if so, please read our advice on this situation.

Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking - if a block is needed, administrators should consider a soft block with the template {{schoolblock|optional comment}} as the block reason.

Note: In the event of persistent vandalism from this IP address, anonymous editing may be disabled for up to 1 year at a time. Abuse reports may also be forwarded to your school administration for investigation.
School staff who want to monitor vandalism from this IP address can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

Currently, you are editing anonymously. You can continue to do so. You are not required to log in to Wikipedia to read and write articles, but not doing so will result in your IP address being shown instead of a username (yours is 132.205.44.134). There are many benefits for logging in to Wikipedia.

Please note these points:

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, ask me on my Talk page – I will answer your questions as far as I can! Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia.

from Wikipedian: --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 30 June 2005 06:07 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Legend of Zelda Categories

Note: as the following comment is left for an editor at an IP address, it is unlikely that it will reach its intended recipient. Please ignore this comment if it doesn't relate to you.

As someone who has previously voted or commented at the recent CfD discussion about the naming of Legend of Zelda categories, I thought I would let you know that I have started a new discussion in an attempt to reach a consensus. The current position of having 2 sets of categories serving the exact same purpose is unsustainable, and we need to reach a consensus on which set should be removed. If you have previously voted on this proposal, I would ask you to reconsider your vote, and ask yourself whether you are willing to give a little ground in order to reach a compromise. This is a generic message I am leaving for everyone who took part in the previous discussion. Thank you for your time. Road Wizard 14:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On garden leave

Please do not remove the factual accuracy tag without providing sources. BlueValour 02:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

There was no such tag on the page when I editted it, so I did not remove it. 132.205.44.134 02:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2-pounder gun

Hi, thanks for your response on the request for a move of the page 2-pounder gun. However, I have a sneaky feeling you were responding to the older requested move from "pom pom gun" to "2-pounder gun", as my reasons for moving it away from "2-pounder gun" to "QF 2 pounder naval gun" are similar to your reasons for opposing the move. Regards. Emoscopes Talk 11:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Category:Hypothetical dwarf planets

Your recent edit to Category:Hypothetical dwarf planets (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot4 23:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I was trying to repair damage. The category was uncategorized and had an article as text. 132.205.44.134 23:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
See User_talk:Tawkerbot4#edit_to_Category:Hypothetical_dwarf_planets

[edit] Your edit to Burning Plains

Your recent edit to Burning Plains (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 01:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I changed Burning Plains into a redirect. There was two sentences there all told, already in the redirected target. 132.205.44.134 01:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
See Places in the Inheritance trilogy
See User talk:AntiVandalBot#Burning Plains
User:Delirium has implemented this redirect for me. 132.205.45.206 01:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Double vote on Antichthon/Counter-Earth merge vote

You should be careful not to vote twice in discussions on article deletion, merges, etc. It damages the credibility of your vote. You may want to strike one of the votes out in the Antichthon/Counter-Earth merge discussion. George J. Bendo 09:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It's actually supposed to be one vote (the top Oppose), the two subpoints are the reasons I oppose it. I've made it clearer. 132.205.45.206 01:20, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Field of the Nebula

One of the references that you helpfully added to the Field of the Nebulae article identifies this as a term for the Virgo Cluster. Would you object if I turned this article into a redirect for the Virgo Cluster while inserting the name "Field of the Nebulae" into the Virgo Cluster article? (If I receive no response from you by 16 Nov 2006, I will do so anyway.) George J. Bendo 07:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Académie française

Hi!

Did you see my response to your arguments? --Espoo 10:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Astronomy background

Since you typically comment on many astronomy-related page renames, page deletions, category renames, and category deletions, I thought it would be good to learn what your background is in astronomy. Could you please give me an idea of your experience with astronomy? This may help me write my category/article move/deletion nominations better and/or build consensus for such actions (or not even attempt such actions in some situations). For information on my experience in astronomy, you can do a Google search on "George Bendo" or an author search at the ADS Abstract Service on "Bendo". Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 07:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiLove

Esurnir 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}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-- Esurnir 23:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] reminder

Just a friendly reminder to use an edit summary when proposing deletion for an article. Edit summary usage is always good, but it is especially important that edit summaries are used when proposing deletion. The reason for this is that articles proposed for deletion that later have the {{prod}} tag removed should not be proposed for deletion again, but rather sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. The only easy way to check if an article was previously proposed for deletion is to look at the edit history and the edit summaries people have left before. Thanks! Oo7565 05:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Please cease your unjustified tagging of asteroid articles. Your claims that the articles aren't cited are in many cases unjustified: check the 'References' sections. Also, do not place 'unencyclopedic, recommend for deletion' tags on the articles. You seem to be of the opinion that the asteroid articles should all be deleted. That is an unsupportable position. Please stop now, or your actions would constitute Wikipedia:Vandalism. If you refer only to the 'Aspect' sections, you are correct that those sections should be removed (see Talk:2 Pallas). Please feel free to remove them, but don't flag an entire article because of a section. Michaelbusch 21:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: I was using template:unref and template:unencyclopedic which explicitly states that they can be used for sections, and I only attached them to sections, not the whole article. The sections I tagged have questionable information, so this accusation of vandalism is inflamatory and not supported. 132.205.44.134 21:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Again: stop flagging articles and just delete the unencyclopedic content. Be bold. Michaelbusch 21:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
They in no way suggest that an article should be deleted when they are attached to a section. They explicitly say that they can be applied to sections. 132.205.44.134 21:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I realize this, which is why I encouraged you to simply delete the Aspects sections. As it is, the removal is taking twice as long. Michaelbusch 21:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Then why are you suggesting that I am vandalizing when I do nothing of the sort, just tagging questionable information? 132.205.44.134 21:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Because I get annoyed when thirty articles are tagged and the solution is faster than the tagging. Michaelbusch 21:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] V tech massacre

Talk:Virginia_Tech_massacre

  • hello... sorry, but if you're talking about the Virginia tech page, you're gonna have to be more specific, that page is being edited at a rate of like 5-per-minute. tomasz. 16:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
hi, i've worked out what's going on, it wasn't you i was calling a vandal but the person whose edit i was reverting... seeing as they had copied everything on the talk page and inserted into the article again with added stupid comments. no problem with your edit at all! hope this helps. tomasz. 16:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
yeh, and look what the edit is: me removing a duplicate of the entire talk page of the article, as added by someone from your IP address. i didn't accuse you of vandalism, i identified and reverted vandalism by someone using your shared (Concordia University) IP address. tomasz. 09:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category talk:Virginia Tech massacre

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EnviroGranny (talk • contribs)

I did not vandalize anything! 132.205.44.134 15:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category_talk%3AVirginia_Tech_massacre&diff=126517978&oldid=126479893
The only difference is box order.
You are not the only one to be wrongly accused of things by EnviroGranny, who has falsely accused me of reverting an edit they had made and who now when I make a defence against the false accusation and request a retraction accuses me of talk-page vandalism. --Drappel 18:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] stop making established pages into redirects.

Stop making edits that turn good pages into redirects. Use the talk pages before doing such things. Thank you. ThuranX 22:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like you to explain that statement. Stellar disk was a dictdef that was transwikied to Wiktionary, and set for deletion, and covered teh same content as disc (galaxy). template:dict was a redirect that redirected to a redirect, and fixed the double redirect. Dark Knight was a DAB page before May 11, and I restored the DAB page, from the redirect. What established articles that were not on PROD did I turn into redirects? 132.205.44.134 22:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Easy. One, I have no way of knowing which concordia student you are. No way to tell if you're an established editor, or another incarnation of the editor who ran amuck on the varied Dark Knight titled pages, moving, redirecting and blanking them. Two, Somewhere in that muck, I mixed up the DK and DK disambig. Your changes look fine, assuming the same person reads this next time. Consider registering for an actual account. Taking crapshoots that a collegiate IP is going to go back to the same editor day after day isn't my sort of bet. ThuranX 22:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Assume Good Faith, you do not. 132.205.44.134 22:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I assume that an editor who was new, made a mess of things, and left the mess for others to clean up might also think that using an anon IP might think it's a good idea. I already said your edit was good and that I got mixed up. If you don't like it, get of Dagobah and get an account. Then people would know who you are, and AGF could be easier. Also, policy hollering makes it harder to AGF from you in the future. Good bye. ThuranX 22:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. I'm just somewhat pissed off at your initial statement, and then your blanket assumption. I suppose the blanket assumption that lead to your initial statement is what gets to me. 132.205.44.134 23:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Sarah Brown

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Sarah Brown. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. --Mschel 22:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I did not delete anything from the talk page. It was a redirect, as Sarah Brown was a redirect, before I turned it into a DAB. It would be inappropriate to leave the redirect in place, as the main article page is no longer a redirect. 132.205.44.134 22:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sarah_Brown&oldid=133688182
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASarah_Brown&diff=134179647&oldid=133688182

Note that NOTHING links to the Talk:Sarah Brown page. 132.205.44.134 23:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Talk:Sarah_Brown
I am sorry. When I opened the article page it was still a redirect. My bad. I have struck out the warning. --Mschel 00:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)