User talk:Enviroboy/Archive 1

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, Enviroboy, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  -- Scientizzle 19:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to the Lafontaine, Ontario page. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Dabbler 00:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I checked your record of contributions after I posted the above and I was a bit surprised, I realise that mistakes do happen and that you are not a vandal, quite the opposite in fact. Keep up the good work. Dabbler 03:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congradulations!!!

You are now recognized as a recipient of the Big Boss Award. Thank you for undoing the vandalism on my userpage. This is my way of showing thanks to dedicated wikipedians. Sorry for being so late with getting this to you. Big Boss 0 01:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user has been recognized as a Big Boss Award recipient.

Your Fast!

perhaps a little two fast. I made a page (30 (Law & Order: Criminal Intent))and before it was three minutes old you already had it slated for speedy deletion. I commend you on your reaction time, but maybe next time you should give me a little bit more time to finish writing, I'm not quite so speedy as you (= Keep up the good work! Rudy Breteler 04:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cartman's name...

is Cartman, not Carman. --Orange Mike 23:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting vandalism twice on my user page. Amos Han ^Talk 23:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My IP

Hi there, seems I am not the only one using this IP. It's a WLAN hotspot run by The Cloud at the Best Western hotel in Munich. Cheers, --213.20.156.34 19:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC) (User:jpkoester1[reply]

Kanye West

I was reverting the original blank page by 24.57.69.217 but something weird happened with navigation popups & another simultaneous edit. You can see by my edit description that I was trying to *revert* the original blank, not vandalize it. You ended up beating me to reverting my fluke blank page before I got around to fixing it. Sorry! --'oac' (old american century) | Talk 04:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to follow up with the issue. Glad we got it sorted out.  :-) --'oac' (old american century) | Talk 04:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

i will not do it again!!

cancellation

Thanks for your advices but i'm tired reading all those pages about wikipedia policies. Since days I wait for an administrator to cancel my account. I found incredible being in the impossibility to cancel an account I created. "Do I have to make vandalism in Wiki pages to finally found someone clever enough to answer to my request and cancel my account?" I asked.. I had no reply. Can you please do something for me? MDMDMDMD —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MikeMcGD (talk • contribs), 31 March 2007 (UTC).

I can try to do something but you really should just abandon your account. -Enviroboy (Talk|Contribs) 18:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Quote "MikeMcGD (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) User has vandalised many times from different accounts. After a warning, this user posted on my talk page, asking for his account to be deleted. -Enviroboy (Talk|Contribs) 18:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)" --Please tag the appropriate pages with sock templates so we can track this vandal. Leave me a note when you've done this please, or a list so I can do it myself. Nardman1 19:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Area element

Your recent edit to Area element (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. // MartinBot 02:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about that. I did not look to see that it was the creator who blanked it. I was just about to undo that when I ran into an edit conflict.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk • contribs) 02:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hehe. I was just about to put the delete tag on the article when MartinBot hit me with that warning. -Enviroboy (Talk|Contribs) 02:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

area element

I'm not too concerned whether it gets deleted, I just didn't like having half an article there. After having a look around it seemed like the article was somewhat (although not entirely imo) redundant. If it stays I will likely offer some input at a later date, in a more coordinated manner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by T boyd (talk • contribs) 05:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

CHICOTW

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week you helped edit the Chicago COTW, but did not vote. Thank you for your help! Your input in future selections would also be appreciated. This week AT&T Corporate Center has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 00:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

That page blanking on Kate hynes... appears to be valid pursuant to Speedy Delete. Double check? MojoTas 03:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's a valid candidate for speedy. That's why I put the speedy tag back on it. -Enviroboy (Talk|Contribs) 03:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HEY IM KATE

Hey im Kate, how are you? nice work your doing on Wikipedia, do you hste paris hilton xxx Paris-hilton-hater 05:31, 7 April 2007

I am certainly not a fan. I don't have to be one to recognize and undo Vandalism to Trish Stratus (diff). Please do not vandalize Wikipedia in the future. Thanks. -Enviroboy (Talk|Contribs) 04:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Ok I will try anyway are you a wrestling fan, if so, I like Torrie wilson but HATE Trish Stratus wb x

Re: My userpage.

You're very welcome. Glad I could help! Will (aka Wimt) 00:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion of 'Boxing Rebels'

Hi,

You recently removed my Boxing Rebels entry because of a 'personal attack'. I'm not entirely sure what part of the entry you considered to be a personal attack, and I would be grateful if you could clarify this so I can edit if necessary and get the entry back up.

The only offending piece I can think of is the phrase, "Eat shit Rizzo, you wank pirates for a living". Taken out of context it may seem like a personal attack, but in the context of the forum from which it came phrases like this are in everyday usage, and are just laughed off among members. I can guarantee no offence was meant, or taken.

Please get back to me as soon as possible. Thanks.

YuriG 10:56, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thanks for being civil; many other editors would have simply thrown a brick through my window. To be clear, I did not delete the article. I nominated it for deletion; meaning that I drew an admin's attention to the article so that he/she could decide if it should be deleted (please see the article's deletion log).

The reason I tagged the article is that its purpose was seemingly to disparage its subject (in this case, fans of Boxing Rebels and the sport or club itself). The entire article (rather than just one sentence or phrase) had a very negative tone. Please see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion - Wikipedia's official speedy deletion policy. I categorized the article under criterion G10. You may also be interested in the conflict of interest and attribution guidelines.

If you would like to recreate the article, please ensure that it follows Wikipedia's policies. If this is the case, there are many pages that may be helpful to you:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Thanks. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 21:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lonnie Mack

Is there a reason for blanking all that info from the Lonnie Mack article? Murderbike 03:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know but it was the original author that did it. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 03:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cool, i'll leave it alone. cheers! Murderbike 03:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your deletion of 'Boxing Rebels'

Many thanks for your reply Enviroboy. Firstly, I should point out that I'm actually a member of the Boxing Rebels forum myself. The article was deliberately written that way, in a self-deprecating style (the 'self' in this case being the forum). Other members thought it was an excellent, funny piece of writing.

It may be hard to believe, but the article was pretty factually accurate, which given it was an entry in an encyclopedia this is surely more important than the way in which it was written. The forum is very liberal, we don't take anything too seriously, and members get told to expletive off every day, but it just gets laughed off because we know nothing is meant by it. Safe to say it's unlike any other forum of which I've been a member.

I don't blame you for tagging it, as from the outside I can see how it must have looked negative. One thing I would say is perhaps it would be a good idea (generally) to contact the author prior to deletion to at least give them a chance to explain the context in which a piece is written.

I wouldn't mind an article being removed due to it being of poor quality (which it may have been considered so by wiki) or because it is factually inaccurate, but at the moment it seems that there is little scope for flexibility regarding a person's style of writing - anything that doesn't fit within the wiki guidelines seems to get deleted with little thought as to why the person wrote it that way in the first place.

In a way I can understand this, as thousands of entries, many of them utter crap must get written every day, and to check the background behind each and every one of them would be impossible. I could write another, very straight, very dull article about Boxing Rebels, but that wouldn't fit in with the ethos of the forum itself, and I'd feel like I'd be letting the forum, and myself down. Cheers, and apologies for the long ramble.

YuriG 10:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, there certainly is not a lot of "scope for flexibility regarding a person's style of writing" in this project"; we're trying to create a sound reference work. The context in which a piece is written, is an article in an encyclopedia, giving information to persons interested in the subject matter of the article; nothing more, nothing less. The stylistic preferences of the subject are totally irrelevant. What you write in and for the forum is one thing. What you write in and for Wikipedia is another entirely. You may see what we want as "very straight, very dull" by forum standards; but it's what we need and want for this encyclopedia. (Contrast an issue of The Onion with our article on The Onion to see what I mean.) --Orange Mike 21:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep reverting a messed up entry back?

First and formost I am an immunologist. The definition of Histocompatability is littered with fiction. While it may be an ok introductory way to describe the phenomenon, it is no way entirely correct. We have known for a long time of histo reactions in coral and even recent research (A. Tomaso. Isolation and charecterization of a prochordate histocompatability locus. Nature 2005, 438, 454-459) that occurs without MHC homologs. Enviroboy, why do you continue to keep the public from knowing the truth? Why can't I add comments to stir the seekers of correct information to look elsewhere with more accurate information. I intentionally left the original posting up so others may decide for themselves what truth they want to believe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.91.218.130 (talk) 04:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

For my response, please see User_talk:66.91.218.130. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 06:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job

Thanks for catching the speedy tags on all those articles. I am the first author of all but one of them. They all need more detail, but obviously they are notable, good thing they each had a ref. --After Midnight ^0001 02:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While we're on the subject, you could have actually just removed the tags yourself. It's okay for a non-admin to do that, as long as it wasn't an article you created. Mangojuice^talk 17:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I didn't know that. Besides, I wanted to know if there really was a good reason for tagging them. That's why I asked the editor on his/her talk page. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 17:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey buddy

I made a simple and clean edit to the West Hempstead, New York page. I live there and i think the Jews are a major problem in the town. They vote down the school budget and they are declaring that all shops in town close on Saturdays and open on Sundays. Dont tell me what i can and cannot post. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.202.39.145 (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You posted blatantly racist comments and removed portions of an article that were very relevant. I'm not going to tell you what you can and cannot post except to say that everything must comply with Wikipedia policy, including the Neutral point of view policy. Your edits were clearly vandalism and so they were undone. Please do not vandalize this encyclopedia again. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 19:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for deleting that comment for me, I was just in the process of getting to that when I noticed you already had done it for me. Hope you're doing well! J0lt C0la 19:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Fang Aili did the same thing for me earlier so I'm just passing along the favour, I guess. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 19:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My talkpage

Thanks for undoing the vandalism on my talkpage. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 19:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) --Fang Aili ^talk 19:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT IS AN ENVIROBOY?

i need 2 know, what is an enviroboy, and am i one? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jon666 (talk • contribs) 02:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for removing the obviously bad-faithed AfD at The Record of Fallen Vampire. I've been having headaches about how to approach it, since the user is obviously not acting in good faith (having vandalized multiple pages I've created as well as my user page, and not having given any reason nor starting the actual AfD page) but I, on the other hand, was not sure if I could remove those tags myself since I was the primary contributor. -_-;

I feel more confident now, and will remove the other bad-faithed AfD tag placed by that user (also no reason stated and no actual AfD page written).

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For repeatedly reverting vandalism on pages that I work on, and for extensively combating vandalism in general. Your contributions help keep Wikipedia clean and are much appreciated. Darkbane 02:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

...for your help removing vandalism on the Ohio Wesleyan University page. Is there any quick way to monitor vandalism activities? Thank you again! LaSaltarella 06:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Felo374 and Felotest

Thanks for trying your best to reach Felo374 (talk · contribs); it's always nice to see the personal touch, especially with newbies. Hopefully being unable to edit will encourage him to read his talk page messages now. :-) Thanks, William Pietri 03:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for the revert on the Food chemistry article. I greatly appreciate it. Chris 14:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why you being such as jerk?

If my Wiki contribution is so horrible, then you need to delete these 2 pages immediately as well. BigMuscle Gay.com Both of these articles are nothing more than advertisements for PAY WEB SITES. Your repeated flagging of my article is ridiculous. You obviously have issues with gay people. SoulardGuys 16:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My reply on User talk:Soulardguys. ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 00:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal MPs

Who did i personally attack in the factual Criminal MPs article? Tri400 00:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ian McKnight

That was a good-faith edit. When I saw Ian McKnight (aids), I wondered if there was another person by the same name. So I checked Ian McKnight and I found pretty much the same article. Since we don't need two articles that say exactly the same thing, the one with the more unusual title should be redirected, or else deleted per WP:CSD rule G6. You are welcome to disagree, but please assume good faith before you throw a third-level warning my way. Best regards. 69.201.182.76 01:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:207.47.243.54

Huh. You beat me to reporting him/her! I was just about to post him/her for Slash (musician). Glad to see people cleaning up vandalism. --KNHaw ^(talk) 23:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ~Enviroboy^Talk_Contribs - 00:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]