User talk:Richi/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, Richi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! 

Contents

Junk e-mail

I see that you worked on this page way back in 2004, and I can see that you have a lot of knowledge about the internet. It astonishes me to find people not having a clue that junk e-mail has always been prohibited. It's like robbing banks, just because people do it doesn't mean it isn't prohibited. 199.125.109.71 07:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I have problem with the word, "prohibited" -- even if I'm wrong, there's no citation for it (the ref'ed link talks about the infamous DEC transgression on the ARPAnet). One could argue that Internet email spam was prohibited by NSFnet, but after late 1994, this too became irrelevant. I clearly remember the Glenn Fleishman paper in 1995, which talks about the commercialization of the Internet. I went hunting and found a copy. I agree that "frowned upon" is a bit wishy-washy. BTW, your re-edit now makes the sentence not quite make sense I think.
Thanks, I'll take a look. The one part in particular that I can see to change is the fact that spam will never go away, it can be controlled, but just like robbing banks it will possibly always exist (although Bill Gates famously predicted it would be gone by now, and it probably would be if even Can-Spam had been rigorously enforced). As to prohibited, the ArpaNet was the beginning of the internet. I thought that was citation enough. Did you want me to reference each ISP TOS which also prohibits junk e-mail? That would be hard to do, especially in a historical context. However, bear in mind that there is a big difference between opt-in commercialization of the internet, which is controversial on it's own right, and opt-out, which means that all multiple hundred million internet users get one free shot at your e-mail address (once a month by Can-Spam). Did you read the reference added that shows that if 1% of the 24 million US small businesses sent out one advert a year you would get 657 junk messages a day? You may have worked for or with large companies that have a company all e-mail address (sometimes even accessable from outside). While I have seen the occational tupperware/baby shower announcements that sort of thing above a few hundred employees gets real old real quick. I wanted to include the difference between a thousand users and a million users because intra-company spam is just as big a problem, though much easier to deal with, as internet spam. The hours wasted by employees on e-mail today is staggering. But that is for the e-mail article, not the junk e-mail article. 199.125.109.17 22:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Saw your request for Speedy deletion of Desipundit. Its an old site and I added it because there was no mention of it. There would be many who may like to develop the article, can we mark it as stub for others to work upon. I would be adding more links and references myself. Thanks. --Bebaak 21:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Please don't interfere with history merge dbs

With respect to Mike Magee (journalist): That was not a request for the article to be deleted. That was a request for an admin to merge the article history which was separated from the article by a cut and paste move. Please don't interfere with these housekeeping operations if you don't understand them. It is a violation of the GFDL for the article to be cut and paste moved and lose the history of who contributed to it. Please don't remove the tag again. GlassFET 15:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. Sorry I missed the history merge reason. It just looked like an inappropriate db template got stuck in there. Thirty Hail Marys ... richi 16:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Virgin Atlantic Airways

I'm afraid that not only can that not be used as a source in this case, but also that the source is not updated. One A340-300 that has just recently rejoined the fleet, G-VSUN, does not and will not have the new configuration until Summer 2008. Virgin Atlantic's own website, a more reliable source than the one you indicated, can vouch for my information. I have corrected the section and added a proper source. I hope you understand, now, thanks. NcSchu(Talk) 23:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be rude, and in fact the reason I deleted my comment was to remove the rudeness, so I'm not sure why you replied to something I retracted. Needless to say, the source I provided at least verified that there was one A340 still yet to have gotten the new config. NcSchu(Talk) 01:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Challenge-response spam filtering

Thanks Richi for the compliment. I do agree with you that callback verification would lead to more spammers forging legitimate e-mail addresses instead of just making up a fake one. But I think the use of SPF and DKIM would lead to the opposite: more spammers using fake addresses instead of forged ones. If they use a forged one from a domain that uses either SPF or DKIM these systems would expose them as counterfeits. OldCar 06:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

VAA name

Hi, I thanks for your note. I tried to contact the contributor that originally inserted the correct legal name and left a message on the VAA talk page but received no reply to either. I noticed that, while 'Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd' is the correct, legal name for VAA very few (I couldn't find any) other airline pages follow the same procedure. For consistency sake should we not keep it as 'Virgin Atlantic Airways'? RaseaC 20:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

DJVaccar

Thank you for your attention to the problem with the bird's eye images on the Auburn City School District page. DJVaccar has been a nuisance under the name User_talk:DJvac as well (it seems without a doubt). I suggest we push to report him to WP:AN/I and possibly WP:3RR. Sinisterminister 18:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response and for reporting him. At your request, I have added my opinion to his case on WP:SSP. Sinisterminister 17:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Junk e-mail again

The entire paragraph that was added by User:Mabu2 was about e-mail as theft, which is a common topic that has been around for a long time, long before bots came along. The issue is not the limited scope of botnets being theft, but spam being theft. I apologize for you thinking of it as NPOV, and I have already requested that Mabu2 come up with a citation. However it is not appropriate to narrow the focus to botnets. The rest of the paragraph becomes meaningless. 199.125.109.69 03:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

  • (Copied here from your Talk page, in case you don't read that): Thanks for your edit. I agree it clarifies the graf. My other problem with the previous text was that it rambled around several points that were already covered in the article. It was also unsuitable for the introduction. I did see some useful points though, and it seemed best placed where I moved it to ... richi 10:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

RSD of Tar (band) using Twinkle

The article I started asserted its notability per WP:MUSIC (criterion #5). You just didn't read it carefully enough. Don't make the same mistake again or I'll have to report you for misusing Twinkle. dfg 23:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the tag because it shouldn't have been placed there to begin with; CSD a7 doesn't apply per WP:MUSIC relevant crit #5. Let this be a lesson to you that even a two-sentence starter article can assert its notability. dfg 00:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Tile64 & Tilera

A redirect will be fine. Whichever is the target will be nominated for AFD, just let me know which is redirected where. There appears to be no notability here. Carlossuarez46 01:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Zazen

Not Spam

Dear Richi,

I do not understand why you have recently removed an external link that I added. I do not understand why you viewed that link as spam.

How can free information [a Zen meditation e-course for beginners, written by a senior university professor] at a free, non-profit making, information and education website, be classified as spam?

I wish to object to your removal of a link that I think is beneficial to the readers of that page. I would like the link to be put back. What is the procedure, please?

I'm a new editor.

Kindest Regards

Havers 19:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


Dear Richi

Thank you for reversing the spam warning and explaining that you had me mixed up with someone else. Thank you very much for your apology. It was kind of you to let me know.

Thank you also for agreeing with the other editor who thought that the link justified inclusion on the zazen page.

Kindest regards,

Havers 14:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

NB, as I explained to Havers on his talk page, the above is a mischaracterization of my opinion ... richi 23:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


Dear Richi,
Not important I know, but I happen to be a her not a he. :)
Kindest regards
Havers 16:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Virgin Upper Class is First Class

People keep reverting my edits that Virgin Upper class is First Class. This IS a first class level. Please see the following articles:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/1280736.html

http://www.vacationidea.com/airlines/virgin_atlantic_first_class_travel.html

http://www.vacationidea.com/airlines/virgin_atlantic_first_class_travel.html

I have flown Upper class and it does not have DOZENS and DOZENS of seats as the person who undid my edits mentioned. Also, business class tickets do not cost $10,000 from LA to London. Please stop undoing my edits and realize I am correct. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.200.144 (talk) 05:58, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

replied to on user's talk page ... richi 11:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking the time to go through that - I considered doing it but it seemed that it might seem peevish coming from me. I don't like sockpuppetry but when one is the "victim" it seems that people somehow thing we should have a thick skin and endure it in stoic silence unless someone else out of concern for the project comes along and does the heavy lifting. Thanks for the heavy lifting! Carlossuarez46 02:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit clash

Yes, it was an edit clash. Thanks for clearing it up :) Ryan(talk/contribs) 22:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Haptics

I tried to fix broken links on the Haptics pages. This hardly seems to be vandalism (my first attempt, which I made anonymously) or spam (which I made whilst signed in as ezanelli). However, I will re-post the text portion without the links. A polite and reasonable first step I think would have been for you to send a message to me instead of deleting content that had been on-line for quite some time. Since it is impossible for me to know what is so objectionable without a message, I am hoping that if anything continues to be objectionable, you will give me some guidance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezanelli (talk • contribs) 02:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:Ezanelli ... richi 09:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Nicely done wikifying

Thanks for the job on Floppy disk. Good example how howto material can be wikified to encyclopedia format. Thanks! Santtus 13:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

User:POWERTOTHEPEOPLE2007

Hello there Richi/Archive 1, I have seen that you have reported User:Roosterrulez for making sock/meat puppet, I saw this user that his first edit was Giving User:Roosterrulez an award, and I'm sure this is sockpuppet so if you want to you can report this, I'm asking you to report this because I don't know who to report sockpuppet cases = l , Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 21:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism by 63.162.143.21

You left a note on User:63.162.143.21 warning about vandalism to De Lorean DMC-12. I found and reverted one edit by that user. Did you find other vandalism? That user has committed vandalism to a great many articles and I want to catalog all of the vandalism from the last month or two. Sbowers3 18:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937 film)

I did looked at IMDB before the revert. See [1] where it is Edward Collins and not Jimmy MacDonald who played Dopey. I changed it back and added a reference to the article. Oh and please don't use script rollback when it is not vandalism. I might have made a mistake (but looking at the history of adding false information to that article I doubt it) but it was not vandalism. Garion96 (talk) 06:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  • That looks better, it sure as heck wasn't that Eddie Collins, which is what your revert made it. Apologies for clicking the wrong Twinkle link—there's been so much vandalism and other stupidity on that page recently that it was basically muscle memory ... richi 08:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007

Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you. Jmlk17 22:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Link of Pyramid

Dear Richi,

Concerns: deleted link : (cur) (last) 08:53, 3 October 2007 Richi (Talk | contribs) (15,481 bytes) (Reverted 1 edit by Hugo.kennes; Rv linkspam. using TW) (undo) (cur) (last) 07:41, 3 October 2007 Hugo.kennes (Talk | contribs) (15,576 bytes) (undo)

6 month ago I asked to add the link via the talk page of pyramid, having no answer, I added it directly with the same syntax as the other links (so I added a book to Robert Lawlor in Your database without problems) ; so I guess it is the content of my cover page of my website who is the problem

perhaps I may link directly the scientific page about the structure characteristics of a pyramid (my website contains only translations out of the work of Professor Thijs, Engeneering, Belgium on the pyramidal models and the relation to astronomy ( and the mentioning of those strucure constants in the Bible))

it is important to mention that a pyramid is not only a tomb, but also a geometric mathematical model coresponding astronomical and astrophysical characteristics of our solar system

thanks for Your help kind regards Hugo.kennes 14:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Recent reversions

Richi,

You've recently reverted a number of my edits which sorted articles into more specific categories or replaced prevvious redundant categories. These edits were not vandalism and, if you'll notice the recent addition of Category:Post-apocalyptic television series, you will notice many of the edits you've reverted have removed most of the articles formerly there. 72.74.220.137 22:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Response on User talk:72.74.220.137 ... richi 22:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I assume User talk:72.74.198.133, User talk:71.184.39.125 and User talk:72.74.220.137 are the same person IRL. It's very confusing; please seriously consider creating an account for yourself. So now you've changed the definition of Category:Post-apocalyptic television series to include TV movies and pilots. But that's not appropriate given the category name, IMHO. Really, the category should have been called Post-apocalyptic television if this is what you were proposing in Wikipedia:Articles for creation ... richi 13:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Please remove the label of Vandalism

Hello, what does the word ALLEGEDLY mean? I wrote Attended Junípero Serra High School and was classmates with MLB slugger Barry Bonds, who allegedly cheated off of Greg during tests and quizzes in Spanish class.

My intentions were not deliberate. Gutfeld may or may not have been joking the numerous times he has made that claim on Red Eye. I understand it could be hear say or something to that extent, but I have a lot to learn on Wikipedia and it is your personal judgement that determines I have no character/integrity. Well that is wrong, I have no illintent when adding to the website. Please do what you have to do to remove the label of Vandal. Cobrapete 02:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

replied at User_talk:Cobrapete#October_2007 ... richi 09:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank You for your help! Cobrapete 06:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

A "vandal" retorts....

Maybe you should calm down a bit. I was scrolling through User talk:71.184.39.125's edit history (alerted as a result of the IP user's excessive category-change activity) and mistakenly thought they had deleted the warning themself. Mea culpa. However, you immediately leaping on my edit and declaring it "vandalism" is probably just as - if not more - out of order, especially in conjuction with your patronising use of a standard "Welcome" to someone who's been editing for well over a year. Nick Cooper 15:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Nick, the standard template Template:uw-tpv1 is intended for use when an editor sees a "bad practice" userpage edit but assumes good faith. It's not an accusation of vandalism. However, it is part of a set of standardised warnings, themselves part of a WP policy that is documented in WP:Vandalism. I agree these warnings may appear patronising, which is why I added explanatory text. I guess Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings or Wikipedia_talk:Vandalism might be good places to start if you want to give feedback on the warning text or policy respectively ... richi 20:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

What was recently posted on the "Kilroy was here" page was not intended to be a joke. It is the literal truth. There are two extremely lucrative bars at Indiana University with Kilroy was here as there mascot. Google it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.201.172.226 (talk) 04:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Uh, consistently ranked as one of the nation's top party schools? I don't think this has any place in an encyclopedia ... richi 10:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Good faith.

Have you ever given peach trees gatorade? They grow better, faster, and taste delicious. Prove me wrong. =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.69.190 (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Citation needed ... richi 15:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to thank you for guiding my initial (stupid (just kidding! :D)) contributions to Wikipedia. I appreciate your help. AkvoD3 17:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Employment Division v. Smith

The article contains a substantial amount of unnecessary, superfluous, pretentious citation chaff which ought to be stricken. Removing it isn't vandalism. 35.10.248.238 16:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I heartily disagree. Removing LEXIS refs, for example, doesn't seem like a great plan to me, and does seem very much like the sort of anonymous vandalism WP is plagued with. However, I'm utterly prepared to acknowledge that this was a good faith edit, that's why you got a message that assumed GF, not a "vandalism warning". I see other editors on other pages agree with me that the refs should stay—good cites are the lifeblood of a encyclopedia. I suggest you discuss your ideas over at Talk:Employment Division v. Smith, etc. ... richi 23:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
The same complaint was already raised and discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases; see archived project discussion. Postdlf 23:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I see that. The conclusion reached was daft and asinine. It makes no sense. If you're on Lexis (which is the only place a Lexis citation "matters"), you can use all the others just as well. What does that add? Exactly nothing. 35.10.248.238 20:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
As a legal outsider, it seems to me that the Wikipedia project would be better served by you adding useful information to articles, rather than pursuing an anti-consensus agenda. Your stated aims sound superficially good, but in practice they mainly seem to remove information from articles. I for one would appreciate it if you could edit in a positive manner, respecting the community's consensus ... richi 23:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The community's consensus is wrong. It is unworthy of deference. It is a byproduct of the paucity of sophisticated legal authors on this project. Nowhere in legal practice or scholarship/academia is it the practice provide so many extraneous citations.35.10.248.238 13:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Standing room on airplanes

Hi Richi! I have put a notice on the Airline seat talkpage regarding the "standing room" section you removed. Feedback would be welcome. Yours, Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

your deletion of my redirect

It is a very sad day today because you put it up for speedy deletion. It relates to what it's redirecting to but if someone is unfamiliar with the topic there is no point explaning. William Ortiz 00:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User talk:William Ortiz may be offensive or unwelcome. If you are the user, please log in under that account and proceed to make the changes. Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you.

Also, falsely calling my clearing out old junk in my talk page vandalism is against the rules at Wikipedia. I don't know what one but I'm sure it's one of them. William Ortiz 10:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Hang on, I undid the incorrect warning, almost immediately. No need to go off on one. I had mis-remembered Wikipedia:User page#Removal of comments.2C warnings—I could have sworn that policy prohibits users from deleting talk page comments, except for archiving. However, it appears that archiving is merely a "preferred" custom. If you'd like to participate in the custom, User:MiszaBot/Archive_HowTo is a good place to start. Sorry ... richi 00:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
I just pasted what was on my talk page. The stuff I removed was (1) a message from me saying nobody welcomed me. And (2) Two bot messages of stuff already deleted so there's not much point in keeping them. I struck through the thing I pasted on your page as people on wikipedia seem to like that. William Ortiz 00:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Works for me! G'nite ... richi 01:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

George Bush

Hey, your calling my edit to the George Bush article is a joke and not my edit. The stuff about India and the cat is authentic and if you have any doubts please go here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/kids/india/ to dispel all your notions about this joke. And if you still think the White House is a joke, then I can only marvel at your sense of humor. dirty but clean 05:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

In that case, please do not add unsourced or original content to Wikipedia. I have modified my entry to your talk page accordingly ... richi 12:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey thanks for that response, just wanted to let you know that I'm no vandal intent on defacing pages. And yeah, I'd try to stick to what the policy of Wikipedia delineates as far as possible in the future. Good day. dirty but clean 04:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Please don't delete ad-hoc

I'm at my wits end why you have been deleting all my edits without even a moment's thought to the veracity of what I've posted. If only you could be a little less zealous you would see that all my edits have a factual and a rational basis and are definitely not my personal opinion. The same applies to Shahrukh Khan's article. If you were of the same nationality you woulda known that his Asoka got him nothing but brickbats and that his Paheli was indeed trashed by every critic. (By the way I'm a big SRK fan). Thanks for the patience. dirty but clean 12:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually trying very hard to educate you about the types of content that are unacceptable in Wikipedia. Please see your talk page for links to policies and other articles that should help clarify. However, if you continue to behave in a way that this community sees as unacceptable, you risk being blocked ... richi 12:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Kendle

The Kendle page has been entirely deleted, now where do I get to contest its deletion? Kendle's article should be kept: please do let me know how to do the needful, the article can be rewritten, but no way deleted. Thanks. dirty but clean 04:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I think I already answered your question at User talk:Sriram sh#Copyright problems, particularly the final sentence ... richi 19:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Sneakernet

Please explain the rationale behind this reversion. What is "Ot."? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

About External Link from Very High Speed Digital Subscriber Line 2‎

Just Removed my external link fron that page, i only serve new news for vdsl2 there, As a few days ago i had adsense ads and you removed my link because of that, i removed the ads from my news blog. Bur still one link you have in Vdsl2 page in other part, linking to http://www.vdsl2.ca/ and that site contains many adsense ads. You removed my link before becaouse of adsense ads, i removed my ads and added the link again, why you still remove my link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toygunm (talk • contribs) 08:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Please discuss this at Talk:Very High Speed Digital Subscriber Line 2, not here. AFAICS, there are several editors who have taken exception to the links you've added, so it's not a great use of your time to convince just me. I recommend you seek consensus on such potentially-controversial edits ... richi 17:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your warning —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toygunm (talk • contribs) 07:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Martin Lewis comment

My bad. I had logged off without realizing so when I edited the comment it came from an IP. It was me. Good job catching it so quickly! 23skidoo 21:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

ICON and Spock

I just modified "internet' to "Internet" (in the "Spock" disambiguation page) which is the more conventional way of spelling and which is followed universally. And I don't get why ICON (company) must be deleted although I don't want to contest the deletion. Thanks for the hearing. dirty but clean 01:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

  • No, that's not the only edit you made, if it were, there'd be no problem. You also changed the punctuation so that it was inconsistent with all the other bullets. See diff ... richi 11:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • If you don't understand the deletion rationale, please review the links in the notice I posted to your talk page. If it's still not clear, feel free to let me know which part you don't understand and I'll be happy to advise ... richi 11:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry for that inadvertent mistake, would be careful with future edits. And thanks for enlightening me regarding new article criteria. I think I got a hang of it and would try to adhere to the guidelines. Thanks. dirty but clean 12:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I'm sorry for that. However careful I'm , some errors do creep in. Thanks for forbearing :). dirty but clean 04:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I'm sorry again, just didn't strike me at all. Did a really bad edit this time around. But please don't think of blocking me, was done in good faith; no malice there... Thanks. dirty but clean 13:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Jesus the Man

Hi, I noticed that a search for "Jesus the Man" redirects to the article on the "Historicity of Jesus". In fact there's a book, a NY times bestseller called by the same name - Jesus the Man. Can I start an article on it or will this also qualify as a speedy deletion article? dirty but clean 03:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

If you're having a hard time telling bold from reckless, you could try starting the article in your user space. Follow this link to open a new page, and get typing. Once your draft article cites enough reliable sources (such as book reviews) to meet verifiability policy, you can run it past someone for an opinion. --Damian Yerrick (serious | business) 04:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for having made the necessary modifications! Yeah I wasn't too sure about the technique though figured someone would, sooner or later, make the right modification. My apologies. dirty but clean 14:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Christ

Pardon me, I just thought it was simply a wrong usage of English. dirty but clean 17:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Smac and others

I'm really perplexed as to why you're constantly undermining my edits done in good faith. Your tone of reproach and confrontation has really got me to a point where I fear with mortal dread any editing. I don't know what you call spam, but the link that I posted (in the Smac article) was genuine and all I did wrong was to get the formatting wrong. That would not qualify as spam if I'm not mistaken.

Finally, please be aware that I'm a very humble "non-techie" guy and mistakes are gonna be dime-a-dozen in my edits in terms of formatting. Instead of adopting a condescending attitude, you may let me know of any factual errors that I may inadvertently make. I'm a big fan of Wikipedia and would never dream of any defacement. Thanks and expecting your healthy cooperation. dirty but clean (talk) 07:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Formatting errors can be fixed, and we all have to learn, often from our mistakes, but it's not acceptable to post spam links on Wikipedia. In this case, you linked to a site run by the Ion Channel Media Group. Take a look at my edits to see a much better link to the paper. Not only is this unpolluted by advertising, but it is the full text, not just an abstract. Please also take note of the English spelling policy.
I'm sorry you find the warning templates confrontational. I didn't write them. By my count, you've received more than 15 warnings of various types over the past year. Editors have been indefinitely banned for less ... richi (talk) 12:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

"Limited" vs. "Ltd"

Thanks for your comments, I changed the first time the company name is used to the legal name, which for Virgin Atlantic is Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited. But that is the official name of the company as registered with Companies House. I dont have a problem with using Ltd elsewhere but we we should mention the legal name properly at least once. A quick look at the companies house website indicates that companies can use Limited or Ltd as they are the same thing, and indeed some companies are listed as Foo Ltd and not Foo Limited in the website. But not Virgin Atlantic Airways !

Dont want to make a big fuss but we should be accurate in our usage and I accept your point about common usage but basically Limited and Ltd are the same thing not all our readers may understand that. Also of interest is that normal UK usage is without the fullstop Ltd not Ltd. MilborneOne (talk) 14:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Cheers!

Thanks for the backup on my discussion with Moonradar concerning his article on the Cyber Knights Templar builds of PGP.

I was running out of ways to tell him that it was not up to Wikipedia Standards, until you commented your support. It seems that the article was created again, under the same name, and was promptly deleted again by another admin.

Thanks again, --Tommosimmo (talk) 21:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)--

Jacob Davis Productions

Thanks for your comment. I'm new to Wikipedia and this is my first article. I entered a few footnotes, but I'm not sure if that would suffice as a reference. Thanks again for your feedback.

Vandalism in Alberto Crane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Crane (4th September edit)

I'm not a Vandal! I just don't know how to properly format a page. I just put a reference so someone more skilled can verify and change the incorrect information. I edited my contribute so it's more easy to check. I'm NOT a vandal, please check before offending.

Re Disruptive Edits

I was NOT intentionally placing "disruptive edits" at all. I had found two known spammers. I and others used to get all manner of sickening matter from them, some of it of a sexually explicit nature. I tagged the spam as it was comming in, and found out that it was www.etightstrings.com and www.casalemedia.com that has been sending the sickening matter. Next time you get spam, see who or what is sending it. More than likely, it would be these two websites that are sending it. Now, how do I place these two external links ? Really, I did not intend to do any disruptive editing. 65.163.112.28 (talk) 02:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I really appreciate your assisstance. 65.163.112.28 (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not the place to report spammers. I suggest you try spamcop.net: it has a very useful tool to parse spam and figure out whom to complain to ... richi (talk) 11:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008 (response to nonsequitur)

Your comments do not match my actions. It was NOT a POV commentary. The Concorde was already used as an example of a white elephant IN the white elephant article even before I created the Wikilink! Thus, you should be criticizing the original author that inserted the Concorde into this section: White_elephant#Examples_of_alleged_white_elephants. --Inetpup (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

You're quite right, the linked article does explain why you added it. Sorry. However, I stand by my belief that the naked wikilink to White elephant needs explanation and probably reference(s) -- without it, it does appear POV ... richi (talk) 23:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Who says premium economy is usually booked in W?

Do you ever fly on premium economy? *A carriers commonly use W as heavily discounted economy booking class. NZ uses U,E,O for premium economy only, not W.

Yes, several times a year. You're correct that the NZ cite was wrong, I misread it. Thanks for spotting that. It's hard to find cites for which Class of Service Codes are used for each airline. Can you fill in any gaps? It would be a useful addition to the article to add this to the list of airlines, perhaps converting it to a table. Suggest we take discussion to Talk:Premium economy ... richi (talk) 22:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Ismx24

I noticed that you undid this user's blanking of his talk page. I believe he was blanking it to get rid of warning templates for content deletion and whatnot. While I certainly agree that doing so is bad form, especially when the underlying warnings are valid (and I know they were, I issued at least one of them), users are allowed to remove content from their own talk pages. The current guidelines on that are here. I believe there have been proposals to alter this to prevent users from being able to delete warning templates, but they've always failed. It is, however, evidence that the user has read the warning.

Thanks! Gromlakh (talk) 14:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I thought I had read that users should not do that, unless they archive. But I guess I must have dreamed that ... richi (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Remote Neural Monitoring

An article that you have been involved in editing, Remote Neural Monitoring, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remote Neural Monitoring. Thank you. Amit (talk) 15:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Apparent reply to vandalism warning

I havent even seen that page, let alone edit it and i am the only user of this IP address. 87.114.20.251 (talk) 13:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page ... richi (talk) 15:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:IFD

I reverted your recent edit to the IFD page. I think you were trying to post an IFD nomination, but you accidentally blanked the page since it's so large -- that can happen with some browsers. Just thought I'd let you know so you can renominate that image. -- Kéiryn talk 11:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Kéiryn#IFD_blanking ... richi (talk) 11:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Open Relay Page Dispute

I haven't added any false facts to the open relay page.

I have also tried to work things out with Wrs1864, but he has refused to talk things over.

He keeps reverting to an old version of the page that shows only one side of the open relay issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deananderson (talk • contribs) 16:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Trevithick

Hi, I've been observing the goings on at Richard Trevithick. I can't actually see in Wikipedia:UKNATIONALS#Changing_an_exisiting_UK_nationality the text ascribed to it in the hidden note. I did quote fully the relevant section on the article's talk page a while ago. DuncanHill (talk) 00:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply in Talk:Richard Trevithick ... richi (talk) 00:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks DuncanHill (talk) 00:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

What?

What did I do?The Wikipedian vandal (talk) 23:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

...asks the user who was blocked indefinitely, for doing it again ... richi (talk) 00:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

E-mail spam

It is important to note that Can-spam spurned in particular the much tougher California law that was due to go into effect the next month, and had the effect of making spam legal, instead of making it illegal. If you can find a way of expressing that be my guest. Adding the words I did were simply a succinct way of doing that. 199.125.109.130 (talk) 02:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

disambig a talk page (Talk:Prince William of Wales)

Is it against the rules to disambig a talk page. All I did was correct the link "Queen Anne" to "Anne of Great Britain". I thought this was acceptable. I apologize if I broke any rules. It was not meant as vandalism (something I never would willing do or have ever done). Should I revert the change? --YUL89YYZ (talk) 07:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Varicella Vaccine

The "pox party" had its uses, in an historical context. However today, when parents who have access to modern vaccines choose to refuse said vaccines and then deliberately infect their children (potentially leading to seriuos illness or death), most neutral observers would correctly call it "child abuse". I can find no current, legitimate medical sources that endorse a "pox party". If you can, let's discuss on the page's Discussion page.SONORAMA (talk) 01:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't disagree with your POV, but it is just that: a POV. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a manual for social services staff. However, if you can find citations where observer express this POV, it would be appropriate for an encyclopedia to note these views ... richi (talk) 10:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

DVB-T: I didn't

here's the source: http://www.dvb.org/about_dvb/dvb_worldwide/republic_of_cape_verde/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dablue (talk • contribs) 11:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I humbly beg your pardon. I see that User:Cantalamessa incorrectly reverted your edit. I have re-instated it ... richi (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Troubles making it stick

Hi Richi, My user name is michellewho. I have been having a hard time figuring out how to place things on Wikipedia without being thrown off. Thanks for trying to help me out! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michellewho (talk • contribs) 18:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Another Richi

You might want to ask a steward to usurp http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Richi - the owner is a spammer with no useful contributions. Guy (Help!) 21:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Spartan959 (talk) 21:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC) who are you??

To Another Richi...

I am Michelle. I have authorized access to a number of audio interviews that are a valid media source for firsthand information on a number of celebrities noted in Wikipedia. The interviews have factual information that can reinforce and add to the content of wikipedia. Could you explain usurp? Links have been placed on Wikipedia before with no problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.35.195 (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Well Richi thanks for taking the time to help me out. I really meant to enhance wikipedia with these autobiographical interviews not spam them. One more question...I have noticed that Internet Movie database has many links on the biography pages...is this because they are in print? The interviews I have carry information like they do but in audio form. what is the differnce? Michellewho (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Consenus

Is there any way of validating my interview web site as a biographical source for wikipedia? Like the IMDB site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michellewho (talk • contribs) 14:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Superdrug

I've reviewed your 30 March reversion to three edits to the Superdrug page, and can't see anything wrong with those edits. (However, as I'm not 100% certain, I haven't re-reverted.)

One thing strikes me in particular; since the poster of those edits is a customer of UK ISP three.co.uk (as am I, as can be seen from my IP address), and since Three and Superdrug are both owned by the same parent company, you appear to have jumped to the conclusion that those edits were done by a staff member of Superdrug. But Three are a public ISP, open to anyone who can pay £10 a month (plus £100 for the USB modem, if they haven't got a good enough credit rating to take out a contract), hence "it ain't necessarily so". -- 217.171.129.74 (talk) 00:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

An edit that begins with the words, "They are a challenging brand" and continues in a similar, WP:POV vein is unlikely to have consensus as encyclopedic content. I'm perfectly well aware of 3 -- that's not the issue, although WP:COI is a possible issue ... richi (hello) 14:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

A small edit...

Hi, Did you really think my comment on the roid page was supportive to vandalisim? All I was saying is that Uncle Joe has them, and he finds them quite painful. If I understand correctly, this is an encyclopedia, which is full of information about everybody. I feel people should know what it is like to have roids for example. If the doctor told you that you are getting them, wouldn't you want to research to find out more about them... if other people have them and what it is like, so you can know? Now, I am not attacking you in any way. Thanks Richi,

24.131.211.51 (talk) 17:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC) Dr. Science

Troll has been warned again ... richi (hello) 00:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reply to a small edit..

Hi,

Sorry to get you upset, I didn't mean to do so. Actually, I have been thinking in retrospect,
 and I guess my edit to the roid page was a bit un needed. And also, I have been outside recently. 
That is some nice weather we are having, wouldn't you say? Anyhow, thanks    Dr. Science

24.131.211.51 (talk) 17:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC) Dr. Science

Thanks

Hi,

I see you sent me a notice for signing up to Wikipedia. Thanks. It looks good. I am thinking of signing up. It seems like a good idea. Anyhow, thanks again,   Dr. Science

24.131.211.51 (talk) 13:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Dr. Science

Backscatter (e-mail)

If you like "boundary" better than "border" just say so, no need to revert the whole change. --217.184.142.6 (talk) 00:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

That wasn't my point: see the edit summary. However, it seems I misread what you wrote. So I copyedited it to hopefully make it clearer ... richi (hello) 00:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of Signed VERP so far, and I read almost all IETF mailing lists related to e-Mail for about four years, odd. I'll add it to the E-mail Auth Category, just in case. --217.184.142.6 (talk) 01:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Youngjoon Shin

You may be interested in this discussion. PC78 (talk) 18:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You gave the wrong warning

I checked the reference and he is right on the information. So your accusation of him doing vandalism is false.--Appletrees (talk) 22:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


Happy First Day of Spring!

Happy First Day of Spring!

AfD nomination of Signed VERP

An article that you have been involved in editing, Signed VERP, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Signed VERP. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Wrs1864 (talk) 12:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

edit war

I have been voicing my concerns on the talk page and never had any replies. Bobisbob (talk) 17:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but that doesn't justify going against consensus and 3rr ... richi (hello) 17:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

You made a mistake to spread 3RR violation template but soon reverted it earlier today. You also gave a wrong warning now, so I let you know your mistake. Your recent reverting and spreading wrong template again to my talk page make me hard to have a good faith on you. Did you even read the sentence that you reverted? That is a personal attack against another user, so I was not fully joyful over the barnstar that the visitor gave me. Please refrain yourself before templating to established editors.--Appletrees (talk) 17:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Editing posts?

hi Richi,

You posted on my page here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisca123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisca123 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)