This is an archive of past discussions with User:Slightsmile. 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.
Hello, Slightsmile, 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:
That was my thought when I sent but I was thinking since, what happens if I leave it? Maybe they will like it. Dutch German border c. late 1930's. If not they just delete it and no harm done? Slightsmile (talk) 16:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Slightsmile
I have added a description, changed the date to "1930s?1940s?" and released it under the GFDL licence. I'm not sure that it will be useful in any article, and personally I think it should probably be deleted. If you want it deleted, just let me know here - as an admin, I can delete it. Also, for this particular issue, you don't need to use the "helpme" tag - I am watching this page, so I will see if you reply on this issue! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Delete it. Thanks for the help. Just curious, I edited out the helpme with the brackets, is that what you meant about don't need to use the "helpme" tag? Much to learn. Slightsmile (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Slightsmile
I just reviewed your hook at T:DYK, and unfortunately because it is from the wiktionary it is ineligible for the main page. Don't give up there are plenty of topics that arestill out there! -Marcusmax(speak) 02:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
First article
Seitajärvi
{{helpme}}
I have an article in my sandbox. This might sound like a joke but even though I have no knowledge of that language, I used Wikitionary to get a sense of some of the phrases in Seitajärvi. Think it might pass for a stub? If so, how do I submit it? Slightsmile (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)Slightsmile
It needs sources. All articles need to show notability through multiple, independent reliable sources. Please read WP:FIRST.
Also, you should add a note on the talk page, to say where you translated it from - Template:Translated page.
To make it live, you would move it from "User:Slightsmile/Sandbox" to just "Seitajärvi". Also, I think I'd make a redirect from "Seitajarvi" to "Seitajärvi". And then you'd probably want to 'reclaim' your sandbox by editing the redirect made by the move, and removing it.
Hello Slightsmile! I'm writing about your recent edits to the page kangaroo care. You've added information about babywearing, and the recall/deaths reportedly linked to commercial slings sold in the US. Kangaroo care has very little, if anything, to do with the types of slings bought and worn by most North American women. Kangaroo care, in most settings, is done with very low-tech slings (e.g. a piece of fabric) in a hospital setting under strict medical supervision, or else it's done in a community with no access to the 'high tech' commercial slings sold in the States. I'm wondering if you would be opposed to my removing some of what you've added, and simply adding a relevant link to the article babywearing, where I'm sure the product recalls and (one assumes) lawsuits will certainly be covered in more detail. I feel that writing about baby deaths which are quite unrelated to kangaroo care on that page is somewhat irrelevant, and may colour the perspective of someone unfamiliar with this valuable treatment. If you could please reply (bere on your talk page), I'd really appreciate it! Thank you, and happy editing!! Jhfortier (talk) 04:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
I didn't actually add any text but merely wikilinked existing text. I don't really know anything about the topic so you do what you feel is right and if someone who is involved with the article minds, then they'll just revert your edit and no harm done. Cheers Slightsmile (talk) 15:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Slightsmile
{{Helpme}}
I'm doing cleaning, wikifying etc.
How do I insert a remark or tag "On who?" in an article's text?
example:
The final toll On who? was almost 30 dead and 82 wounded.
Slightsmile (talk) 18:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Without a non-free use rationale, it shouldn't be in the article. I haven't assessed that usage of the image other than that. As for the NPOV issue, I wasn't saying it was, but when you open your justification with "It gives an emotional sense of the Holocaust like few other pictures of that terrible time" alarm bells start ringing. The fact that something happened has little to do with whether it is being presented neutrally. J Milburn (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Copy-paste rationales completely defeat the point of having rationales in the first place. As I see it, this image is not adding anything in particular to both articles- yeah, it's emotionally charged, but that's not a reason to use it. I'm sure I could find some nice non-free images of people crying to illustrate Death of Diana, Princess of Wales, but we shouldn't be using them... J Milburn (talk) 20:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
If you know of non-free images with no rationale, tag them for deletion or let me know, and I'll do it for you. That's got nothing to do with this image. There are still useless copy-paste rationales. Do you understand what a rationale is, and why we have them? What you're doing is basically just explaining why the image is interesting/emotive; you're not actually explaining why it needs to be in the articles that it is in... J Milburn (talk) 15:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Your latest post really hit home the extent to which you don't understand the issue here. Three of those images are free- their usage does not need to meet the non-free content criteria, which is what we're talking about here. The other image is a single identifying image for infobox use, which serves mostly as a means of identification (as in, showing what the article is about, when a free image couldn't possibly) while also serving to identify the characters and the feel of the show. Hardly related even tangentially to what we're talking about... Again, please take a look at the non-free content criteria. J Milburn (talk) 21:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
If I'm honest, I could say straight off the bat. Content is assumed non-free until it is demonstrated free- you could do some digging and see what you could find; it is possible that the image is public domain (though I doubt it). This page may also be helpful. J Milburn (talk) 14:44, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
SmackBot clarify tag
SmackBot corrected a clarify tag in Scosta. This is how I incorrectly added the tag - {{Clarify| September 2010}}. But is how SmackBot corrected - {{Clarify| September 2010|date=September 2010}}.
btw - What do you think of this link for bork . Slightsmile (talk) 21:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes I know, I can't assume that parameter 1 is intended to be a date - especially as leaving it should be harmless. I could, I suppose, only do so if it is the current month year. Nice link. RichFarmbrough, 21:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC).
Someone is removing wikify tags (often the only edit) from articles that are still in bad shape and should remain on the wikify list so people like me - and you can find them and clean. I assume you've looked at the articles in question. It seems one user's idea of wikifying is to merely remove the tags. Slightsmile (talk) 04:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Man, I hate when anons come in and start randomly messing with the facts and figures. Thanks for letting me know. I slapped a six-month school block on the IP. PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Weird Philippines edits
Darned if I know whether or not the edits are valid, but this guy is definitely worth keeping the proverbial eye on. Thanks for the tip. :) PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
PS: I've just granted you rollback privileges. If you see some suspect stuff like this, you can now roll it back with a click of the mouse. Enjoy the new tool! You've certainly earned it. PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:50, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Why does the UTC clock on this talk page stay stuck at 18:55 UTC and the UTC clock on this user's page stay stuck at 18:46 UTC? Is it normal or some connection issue at my end? Is there a page where I can learn more, or pick up templates or coding? Slightsmile (talk) 19:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
The last save I made reset it to 19:18 UTC, and I'm sure this save will reset it to the current time where I'm sure it will stay locked. Slightsmile (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Simple: Wikipedia pages are cached both on the server and in your browser in order to increase speed. As such, the time will be the one of the latest cache, i.e. either when it was last edited or when it was cached again by the software. Variables on a page will have the value they had at this time and not change until re-caching happens. See mw:Help:Magic words#Variables for more details. Regards SoWhy19:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Now how do you know that? I heard there was some sort of prog that could show you that. 109...Is that a lot? On average, I mean. HalfShadow02:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh Well, it looks like it is a Huggle bug, not a Justin bug (which is to say, that it's not quite my fault.) Have you posted to Huggle's talk page? Please let me know if you see this problem in the future and I'll try to keep my eyes peeled as well... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
The IP resolves to Sylmar which is really nowhere near Paramount or Bellflower if you're familiar with the LA area. However, Paramount and Bellflower are right next to one another and Compton is a short distance west. Looks like someone in in that area logged on with a Sylmar IP and is just mucking around. I'll warn him off. Thanks again! PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Which reminds me:
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This Anti-Vandalism Barnstar is awarded to Slightsmile for tireless and diligent monitoring of anonymous edits and the damage which often accompanies them. Thank you for all your good work. PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome and it won't be your last. I'm almost ashamed to admit that I don't give these out nearly as often as I should and I have been meaning to give you one for quite some time. Really, thank you very much for all you do.PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. :)
I'll still be around, but I have a lot of personal projects ready to leave the ground. One is already launched and is going to require a lot of attention, so I won't have a lot of time to spend here. Thanks for your kind thoughts. You are a real asset to this project. PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I read your entry on the Barber paradox. You list Russell's quote in the "Philosophy of Logical Atomism". Russell seems to state that the Barber's paradox is not a valid form of his own. This point is emphasized in Russell's paradox entry to which you also refer. I tried to clarify this point just now, but you have restored your original text. Can you please let me know if you believe that the two paradoxes are the same? You can contact me directly at sanjai.narain@gmail.com.
BTW, I searched Russell's quote in the PDF of the above essay below, but couldn't seem to find it.
I reverted your edit because you made no edit summary and so I assumed it was a bad edit. We get so much of that. Feel free to restore your edit and I won't revert it this time. Regards. Slightsmile (talk) 00:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't really know anything about the topic, just cleaning and trying to make it nicer for the readers. I see you doing good work on the article so I'll leave these decisions up to you. Slightsmile (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Cleanup is what I specialize in but I don't know anything about this church that wasn't in the article when I started. I've expanded the intro but I'm not sure the way I summarized it is accurate. RJFJR (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Adding or expanding text is something I have yet to add to my learning curve and I wouldn’t know where to begin. With the cleanup and wikify tags someone is bound to see and make the necessary fixes.
Maybe there's a tag that addresses the need for an expanded lead. If I may go off on a tangent - I disagree with some editors who accuse taggers as being Wikipedia:WikiImps. If an article needs something I can't do - that's what the tags are for. (non relevent - I read previous message too fast) Slightsmile (talk) 18:51, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I went according to the info in the Great Lakes Engineering Works article which puts that company in Ecorse. No dispute here, I thought that you mistakenly took the unexplained change as vandalism. I've reverted IP edits that I later realized were valid - it happens. Slightsmile (talk) 01:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Invitation to particpate in the December 2010 Wikification Drive
backlog 22,000+ articles
Hi there! I thought you might be interested in the December 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We're currently recruiting help to clear a massive backlog (22,000+ articles), and we need your help! Participants in the drive will receive barnstars for their contributions! If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks!
Given my present state of mind regarding educational IPs, this one is going to get the boom lowered. Damned subtle vandalism steams my fleckmans. PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm seeing this edit by an IP giving Bromine an atomic mass of 79.904. I have an old periodic table saying 79.909 +/-.002. Is that a serious difference? This IP also like to goof around so I don't mind reverting him if there's any doubt. Slightsmile (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
You are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Wikify. As agreed upon by the project, all members will be required to confirm their membership by February 1, 2010. If you are still interested in assisting with the project, please add yourself to the list at this page—this will renew your membership of WikiProject Wikify.
Hello Slightsmile. Thanks for you note. I looked at that fact too. I thought that the section that it is mentioned in was far enough away from previous mentions that it was okay to have the last name there. My reasoning being that if someone skipped to that section (as unlikely as that might seem) that having the last name there was of some value. I also took into account that previous edits by that IP are on the dodgy side. If you feel that "Pocket" could be removed without confusing things I would certainly defer to your judgment. Thanks for you courtesy and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk01:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
List of current communist states
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of current communist states. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Diannaa(Talk)03:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I've never really thought about it. It certainly isn't to the degree of Huggle and the others, but I suppose it does semi-automate reversion of edits. HalfShadow00:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christmas Don't Be Late (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Rob Sinden (talk) 09:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Belated thanks
I wanted to drop you a note of thanks for reverting the trolling on my talk page last week. With all the confusion in my online life recently (my modem crashed over the weekend) I missed your efforts when they occurred. Thanks again and your vigilance is appreciated. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk01:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Absolutely. It was the first time in years that anything like this had happened and it was a drag wondering what was going on here at WikiP. On the plus side I did catch up on my reading. Have a great rest of your week. MarnetteD | Talk02:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Re: tech question
I am really not the one to pose such questions to. I try something, and if it works, I go with it. Otherwise, I try something else. That is just the plain truth. For a more technical answer, you can go to the help desk. Sorry, I can't be more helpful. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive'00:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, there.
Your intrusion on the editing of the Aesop pages amounts to POV and one more change from you will amount to edit war. I suggest we talk it out here. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 22:54, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed you put a lot of work on that page and not just some flyby editor so I'll walk away. You're making a mistake switching the image that's been there since 2007 for that ugly one and I thought that was a classy edit I made incorporating both images, as well as some cleaning. See you around. SlightSmile01:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Opinions can differ on Art Nouveau. I think the image is too big and I'll shrink it. But my main objection is not to Milo Winter, whose illustrations are very attractive, but to the fact that someone went through all Aesop's Fables articles (in 2007, you say) adding nothing but those. The fables have had a long history of over a couple of thousand years and I want to make illustrations reflect the many uses, ages and countries that have engaged with them. It's not just that article I've worked on. I'm going through the lot and also adding more. It's a big project and I'm probably over-protective! There is a fellow-editor in the background with whom I discuss strategy; we're agreed on a policy of variety. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 02:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
I think I can speak for the average reader. When I first stumbled on the image in The Frogs Who Desired a King, I instantly recognized from the image and caption the whole story without knowing about the fable itself. A bird wearing a crown devouring a frog with the other frogs scurrying about, they wanted a king and now they got one. It's a perennial lesson - watch what you wish for. The Art Nouveau image that you put in, even if the readers were to take 90 seconds to figure out - which they won't, they would never ever figure out that was a stork with a frog in it's mouth unless they were already familiar with the fable. It's ironic how after all that work you did fixing that article up just to diminish it in the end. If that was a driveby editor making that change I would probably dispute it. SlightSmile18:06, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
The gallery at the bottom of my userpage. I never had trouble to center the gallery before today.
I see that <gallery | align = center> still works on some articles like here, but not here. I've never seen this before, strange. Other strange things today too, every time I key something in, the line I'm editing jumps to the bottom of the edit page. Something at your end or is it my system doing goofy? SlightSmile03:38, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I had the jumpy editing window today too, and I clicked on Windows Vista "compatability view" and the jumpiness went away. It was so annoying. The "compatability view" also makes stuff line up better; for example, on WP:GOCE the tab-set is always nicely aligned in compatability mode. The Wikipedia software is undergoing some upgrades but I thought that was a few days ago already?. --Diannaa(Talk)06:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I found the compatability view button and knock on wood, no more jumpiness. But the gallery on my user page still doesn't center. Just a silly question but I want to verify, does the gallery look centered on your browser? SlightSmile20:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I am finding I have to switch to compatibility view on most (but not all) edit windows today. On the Toshiba laptop (Windows Visa) the gallery is flush to the left. Hang on and I'll look at it on the Dell (XP Professional) downstairs. --Diannaa(Talk)22:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Here is an example using wiki markup; I stole the code from the turtle table that Jack and RexxS were working on for TCO: Please see User talk:Jack Merridew. Jack is the go-to guy for coding problems; mention my name and you'll get a good price. XD --Diannaa(Talk)23:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Often do the littluns ask themselves, "What would Jack do?" You're welcome. It was fun. Now I have to bookmark this page so I can find this code again when I need it ;)) --Diannaa(Talk)01:30, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Your ignorance knows no bounds, Mr Slightsmile. Now let's take a look into what happened. An informed old boy from La Salle College read the article about his alma mater and was unimpressed by the list of old boys listed, and decided to add in some valid examples. Unlike Mr Slightsmile who has no life but sitting in front of the computer, patrolling on wikipedia daily to delete useful information contributed by other users.
Now one day, Mr Slightsmile, bored (as he perennially is), reads this random article, remarks that the supplement 'looks made up' based solely on his ignorance. Unfortunately, having spent thousands of hours trolling on wikipedia, he had the petty authority of an administrator and misused it to delete the article.
The Lasallian, patient as he was, confronted Mr Slightsmile politely with evidence (see above) that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the three eminent doctors were INDEED from La Salle. Now here comes the epic part: In addition to failing to rectify his error, and restore the integrity of the original article, Mr Slightsmile responds by saying that he has never heard of 'DCH (Lond), PDipID (HK), DFM, DOM (CUHK), MRCS (Eng), FRCP (Eire), FRACGP, FHKCP - FHKAM, FHKCP, FRCP - FRCP, FRCS, FRCOPth, FCOpth (HK), FHKAM'.
And the Lasallian responds:
Of course you have never heard all these postnominals. These are titles are professional qualifications obtained by doctors and it is common practice to quote them after the name. Again, if you would've moved your lazy ass to google, say, Prof. David Wong, Eye Institute HKU (as was provided in my edit), the first entry shows this page: http://www.hku.hk/eyeinst/prof_wong.htm
These are the first few lines:
Professor David S.H. Wong
Chair Professor and Director
Albert Bing Ching Young Chair Professor in Ophthalmology
Cluster Chief of Service (Ophthalmology), Hong Kong West Cluster, Hospital Authority
...
Now please, I don't mind that someone is intellectually subnormal. In fact as a doctor I regularly deal with children who are mentally retarded. But please don't take pride of it and base your actions on your bloody ignorance. It will help no one.
I just want to say that I am utterly disappointed with Wikipedia because of the existence of idiotic individuals like you and my interest in improving further articles is all gone. Way to go, Mr Slightsmile, for spreading ignorance all around the world.
I've never heard of DCH (Lond), PDipID (HK), DFM, DOM (CUHK), MRCS (Eng), FRCP (Eire), FRACGP, FHKCP - FHKAM, FHKCP, FRCP - FRCP, FRCS, FRCOPth, FCOpth (HK), FHKAM etc. If they are valid then take it to Talk:La Salle College, work it out with the other editors there as I indicated on my edit summary and there shouldn't be any problem getting consensus. Good contributions are always welcome and encouraged. Cheers. SlightSmile20:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
A doctor who works with handicapped children throwing words around like 'tard. I don't know who you are nor do I want to, but this is not the behaviour of a doctor. Like anybody I can be wrong and normally I encourage people in these situations to come back and work it out as we always need good contributors. I don't know why you didn't go to the article talk page, as you seem to have your facts in order. In your case though I think it's a good idea that you don't leave mad, just leave. Even if your facts are accurate, insults and name calling have no place on this site. Good bye and good luck. SlightSmile18:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
So, "Doctor" 147.8.120.49 at the University of Hong Kong "heard him say it himself"? That's good enough for me! What was it that Woody Allen's character in Annie Hall said about his uncle Joey Nichols? I can't remember. Anyway, don't let such people get you down, they are fairly rare here. Best, CliffC (talk) 04:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Radiculopathy spam
Hi, just letting you know that I deleted the link you rescued in Radiculopathy and in two other articles; it's really just spam and the user didn't mean it to be a reference for anything (except himself) :-). Cheers, CliffC (talk) 03:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Snap ;). @Slightsmile, one option, if you don't want to spend ages rearranging everything, is simply force the page to have a maximum width, by adding <div style="max-width: 1280px;"> to the top of the page (and adding </div> to the bottom). You can then play around with styles in the div tag to give it a border, change the max-width, background colour/image etc. However, this will leave you with some whitespace for us folks with wider screen resolutions. - Kingpin13 (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
It looks pretty much the same as before tbh, because you also need to take account of the Wikipedia interface stuff around the edge, such as the left sidebar. But honestly I wouldn't worry about it too much, I think it's more important to get those barnstars the same size and line up the service badge, although each to their own of course ;) - Kingpin13 (talk) 22:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Please stop manipulating the Iran - Iraq war page
Hi Slightsmile
A simple search on the outcomes of the Iran v Iraq war in Google will suffice and prevent you from making unnecessary changes to the page, as it is already pretty accurate. I'm sorry for my outburst also.
Revisionist Anglo Saxon? It's not about if your information is accurate or not. It's too much detail for the infobox. If your facts are correct then add it to an existing section or start a new section in the article. I'm glad to see your apology - no one is going to take you seriously when you use words like dickhead. Add your content in the article the way I said but if other editors object then you'll have to discuss it on the talk page. That's how it works here. Best. SlightSmile04:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey there, just got your message on my talk page. I agree that the warning on vandalism was a bit rough, but was mostly due to the name calling and really disruptive edditing and attitude. Most (if not all) information he tried to add in the infobox is already in the article, so would make no sense adding it again. The problem I have with him is trying to remove contect and adding POV content, that should stay out. Tks. Uirauna (talk) 21:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
lipid bilayer section creation
Hi, I noticed that on Feb 12 you performed some formatting revisions on the article lipid bilayer. In particular, you added a section break that removed a few paragraphs from the intro and put them in a newly created "properties" section. Originally, the intro I had written was much shorter, but when I discussed it with user TimVickers, he advised that the intro should summarize the whole article and, since this is a rather long article, the intro would consequently be longer than normal as well. I don't think that information really doesn't belong its own section since it is all repitition of facts found elsewhere in the article (as an intro should be). I was going to go ahead and put it back as it was, but I wanted to get your insight first to see if you have a different opinion or another approach you would recommend. MDougM (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Rollback of changes on IBM Mainframe page regarding IEHLIST
The examples for IEHLIST are incorrect. Rolling back to examples with obvious errors in a page is silly. This was my first attempt at fixing errors in a Wiki page and will be my last. Regards, B. Murphy
Thanks for pointing that out. Go ahead and do the corrections again and I won't revert. It's important to provide an explanation when you do edits otherwise it's hard to tell if it's a serious edit. Also, optional, if it happens to be a long explaination then make a note on the article's talk page. I hope you'll continue to do constructive edits here. All the best. SlightSmile20:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
The IPs since April for sure. Images I only noticed yesterday, I tried several so there's little doubt. If other users can watchlist these then it's something at my end. My system here does need some updating, so until I get around to that I guess I'll just have to live with it. Thanks. SlightSmile15:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Slightsmile. I checked it out also, and everything works fine for me as well. Mostly I use the Toshiba laptop with Firefox, but downstairs I use a Dell with Firefox. --Diannaa(Talk)15:35, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Well I'm the guy it happened to .. would you like me to post my name as well? what is a reliable source? .. and I'm not trying to be sarcastic here at all — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royal333 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Why are you so hung up on the fact that Felix Dzerzhinsky was part jewish, and keep deleting that section. If you were really interested in details you would have notice that his family's coat of arms is different in the Polish and the English pages. So why is that not an issue for you. Maybe there is no clear consensus on that fact either? Go and check up on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.248.15 (talk) 02:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Am I hung up? You've been edit warring about this since April and before that with the Polish Navy article. I'm surprised the community is putting up with this combative behaviour. SlightSmile02:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately there is an effort to try and remove some uncomfortable facts about historical figures... let's see...Mr. Felix Dzerzhinsky who spoke Yiddish and had a fiancee Julia Goldman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.248.15 (talk) 02:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I think so. It seems whenever (established) scientists, theorists etc - including skeptics do the math, it comes out to multiple universes. In 2003, a Stanford theorist came up with 100 billion billion (not a typo - twice billion) universes. Interesting stuff. SlightSmile00:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Why did you revert back this article? "According to the Islamic faith, this valley Majdoo by the mount will be the battlefield of the final battle" There is not such a relief Armageddon in İslam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.9.51.174 (talk) 21:40, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
You blanked a whole section with no edit summary what so ever. Also the lack spacing between words was sloppy and indicative of a non serious edit. I see that you made a comment on the article's talk page. When you added the citation tags, a good edit summary would have been "per talk page". Help the editors know what you're doing when you make edits to the articles. Another thing, when you post on talk pages please sign your edit with four "~" (~~~~) at the end of your text. Cheers. SlightSmile22:57, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Slightsmile,
I thought I reverted that! you must have just beat me to it. In case you didn't bother to GoogleTrans, it appeared to be a Spanish 'love spam' chain letter. I expected it to be elsewhere too, but only the one article. Strange! Happy Reverting! - 220.101talk\Contribs01:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Yeah that one had "revert me" written all over it. I've been scooped my share of times. Nice to meet you, I've seen you around for a while now. I still comfuse your user name as an IP sometimes.SlightSmile01:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Oops, you are an IP. I saw the user boxes and service badge on your page. I'm sure you get asked all the time so ... anyways you'd have a lot more fun with an account. You know the benefits and all that. SlightSmile02:26, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Slightsmile. You have new messages at Cwenger's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
