|
User talk:LeaveSleaves/Archive 7
No, this is YOUR last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia you will be blocked. I find myself having done nothing wrong and falsely accused and warned. --Xx WiC xx 09 (talk) 18:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC) If There's a Rocket Tie Me to ItYour redirection to the album-site isn't correct out of my view, when there was already officially published the music-video of that single two weeks ago: If There's a Rocket Tie Me to It. When there is now a watcher (and AOL is no little small online-garden) who wants to know what's got to do with that song and will start a seek on Wikipedia he/she will nothing find about unless your redirection. So, where is the logic? --ElkeK 09:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ElkeK (talk • contribs) QuestionnaireHello, since you have participated in editing film articles and discussing on their talk pages in the past, do you have any interest in participating in the WikiProject Films questionnaire? Your input would be greatly appreciated! —Erik (talk • contrib) 20:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Laura Robson rollbackI've self-reverted -- I had no intention of rolling back that edit, and indeed there was nothing at all wrong with it. I must have done it by accident while looking at the diff. This is actually the second time I've found an unintended rollback in my contribs, and it may be because of the iPhone interface I sometimes use to browse recent changes; it is touch sensitive and I suppose I must have triggered the rollback without meaning to. Anyway, I apologize for the rollback, and I will try to be more careful about that in the future. Thanks for letting me know. Mike Christie (talk) 03:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC) Scrubs tagging discussed at Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)Your edits are being discussed Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)#Question. {{Notability}}-tagging these articles makes sense, but it might be helpful in your edit summaries to link the discussion in Talk:List of Scrubs episodes#Notability (or whatever Talk page is relevant to a particular edit) so other editors don't expect discussion on the Talk pages of every single article so edited. / edg ☺ ☭ 12:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC) Quick question on Portal pictureI'm wondering about File:Monza aerial photo.jpg. The copyright status seems fine, but with the link dead there is no way to verify that. It also (note right side) appears to have been taken from a book, which would make you think that a copyright may exist. Your view on a continued claim for free use in this case? Cheers, Apterygial 13:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Tortoiseshell cat editingHello, You decided to erase a link I had posted on this article two years ago on the ground that it would be advertising or promotion of a site. In fact, that site is a manner of informational and collaborative advertising-free website where more than 1,000 pictures of tortoiseshell cats have been posted by owners coming from more than 40 countries throughout the world. It had brought cat owners the additional information and sharing that Wikipedia is not supposed to provide. Hence I respectfully submit the request to have this link republished. Thank you. 82.226.215.107 (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)Philippe Tennis summariesHi there, I wondered whether you had finished working on your idea for the tennis summaries that you mentioned during the Australian Open. Tennis expert seems to be going around tagging articles with summaries because he believes they are written as fansites. 03md (talk) 13:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
what was that about?Bold textit said... that i editted something that i didnt. how do i change that?? or at least figure out how to see what i did? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.41.145.247 (talk) 19:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC) ThanksThanks for dealing with the vandalism on my user page... I seem to be attracting crazies at the moment! Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC) Hiyo wubu2? going well? at home atm bit bord relly lol. hbu? doin much —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.241.231.68 (talk) 19:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC) WoddupGreat to see you back on my watchlist. You only missed a few highly pointless discussions. Apterygial 08:38, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
External linksWhat is there to discuss? It's already the standard expectation on here. Bearcat (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
What's your problem?When I use the tool I only ever use it when there is no need for an explanation which I would give if I undid it, I will conceive though that I know what it's use is but it's not like I'm using it to harm anyone. I know you seem to dislike me but I won't go into it and I know I over-react sometimes but a warning is only needed if I'm abusing a tool in a negative manner. Chubbennaitor 16:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
2009 Formula One seasonI noticed your proposal for the highlighting of the wins column in the points table. I have looked into it, and using the 2008 table, I came up with this: Regards. Cs-wolves(talk) 18:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Something like this: We should discuss the colour though. LeaveSleaves 19:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
retiringBy. i've just had enough. Chubbennaitor 21:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC) Reminder about tennis summariesHi, could you now have a go at some of the tennis summaries (see my last post on your page) now that you have resumed editing. 03md (talk) 22:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Rahul Gandhi's religionHi I happened to visit the article on Rahul Gandhi, and was quite surprised to see his religion mentioned as Christianity. Curious to know the source, I looked for a reference. There was a link below, which didnt open. I even did a google search, and could find nothing. I notice user YellowMonkey seems to be reverting this repeatedly. I saw your post in the discussion tab. Personally, I am quite shocked at the kind of logic being provided for him being Christian. But what surprises me more, is the determination to prove it thus. It's not something that needs to be established, through illogical inference. especially something that doesnt become a fact by indirect inferences. I write this to bring to your notice, as I believe in working toward improving articles, to encyclopedic standards. And clearly stating that he is a Christian (without any reference) goes against this. I have written my opinion on the discussion tab. I expect anyone who disputes it to discuss it there. I request your participation. ThanksAJ-India (talk) 16:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC) Tennis replyWhile you have not been as active I have been working on a variety of topics, but tennis related I've created a number of templates for the various WCT and Grand Prix tennis circuit seasons if you could check the accuracy of those. However it would be good if you could apply your ideas on tennis summaries to some of the recent tournaments e.g. 2009 BNP Paribas Open which does not have a lot on it. Remember to add references from BBC, ATP etc. Thanks. 03md (talk) 12:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I have been working hard on individual year templates for the ATP Tour (e.g. Template:1990 ATP Tour, Grand Prix tennis circuit (e.g. Template:1985 Nabisco Grand Prix and WCT circuit (e.g. Template:1973 World Championship Tennis circuit as well as some WTA templates. The majority of the links on them should be accurate but I was wondering if someone with tennis knowledge check through the completed templates. Some pre-ATP era tournaments are simply recorded as "[Place name] Open" and I have also been unable to find some of the tournament sponsor names, such as the name of the San Francisco tournament known as the SAP Open. They all need to be recorded with the sponsor name if applicable. Thanks - respond here or on my talkpage. 03md 09:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
SingaporeHow are you going with 2008 Singapore Grand Prix? I realised the other day that when that reaches GA or FA the right column of the table will be 'finished' (Belgium will go to FAC after a rewrite). Apterygial 01:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
You're welcomeI didn't think you'd have a problem with the reversion. I'm overly cautious in messing with other's user talk, but sometimes the edit is too blatantly awful. If you haven't already had an opportunity to revert edits on my page, I'm sure the time will come eventually. :) Tiderolls 14:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC) DYKSorry for getting so excited at Malaysia's entry at DYK, I just love writing hooks. :) Apterygial 12:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
DYK for 2009 Malaysian Grand Prix
Shubinator (talk) 00:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC) Infobox fixesHi LeaveSleaves, I saw your comment at The Rambling Man's talk page. I'm a member of the Tennis Project and wouldn't mind helping with the infobox fixes. Is it as simple as adding the parameter to any bio infobox which doesn't have it? Do you have a system so we don't duplicate efforts? Maedin\talk 13:55, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
3RRThank you for your warning - but I'd like to point out that I didn't break the rule. I would also like to point out that none of the reverts were done with mallicousness in mind, one in particular being done due to tennis expert's inability or unwillingness to read the talk page before editing. As you are seemingly knowledgeable in this area you may be able to: is the rule still broken when the edits were constructive? Alan16 talk 08:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
The author (Transambytrial (talk · contribs)) of Borderwars requested a good faith deletion of the page by replacing the page with {{db-author}}. As the author of the only significant content on the page (all other page edits were deletion or cleanup related), I would think his request should be honored rather than reverted as vandalism. Can you review this matter? WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
VandalismHow about looking at what I changed and reading the reasoning in my edit summary, and perhaps looking at my other contributions before accusing me of vandalism? Over The Desk (talk) 19:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC) Please Y'SelfYou said in the Please Y'Self AFD page that it doesn't in any way pass WP:BAND. Please read this snippet. 1.Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable. 2. Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4] 3. Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. 4.Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3] 5. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network 6. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article.) A. They have had many reviews published about them in national newspapers, posters, etc. B. The Falkland Islands aren't classed as part of the East Midlands. C. They were nominated for many major awards in being the pioneers of skiffle. D. The newspaper coverage has gone as far as Norwich once, but I don't know when :) E. John Peel, 1984, set of Radio 1. F. Shortest Show On Earth (often)-BBC Two, 1981-1990. I hope this satisfies that yes it does not fail in any way because I have found 6 of 12. Googling it wouldn't help, because which ever way you look at it, its just another search engine. You have to have reliable sources (and I do in the form of my musician in residence and guitarist and expressive arts teacher, Mr Gill (or John Gill as the article stated))and he showed the coverage which unfortunately I was unable to get hold of. Thanks. [[Andrew RACK]] (talk) 16:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
hijust wanted to say hi i cant wait now... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.6.215 (talk) 19:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC) Thank you!
DYK for 2009 Chinese Grand Prix
∗ \ / (⁂) 12:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC) Thank you!Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my editor review page. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 17:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank You Very MuchThank you for reverting the Vandalism on my page.--Skater (talk) 13:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
