User talk:Vendettax/Archive 1
WelcomeI notice you have added the WikiProject Kentucky userbox to your user page, but have not added your name to our Membership Department. Adding your name there helps members of our project keep track of each other, so please add your name there if you have a chance. I understand from your talk page comment that you want to get involved with a project. We'd love to have you at WikiProject Kentucky. I'm among the most active members right now, so feel free to bounce ideas off me any time. Among our other reasonably active members are Soldan, Seicer, Stevietheman, and Dale Arnett. The best way to get involved is find something you know a lot about (or are really interested in) and start editing. Are you in Kentucky? What part? You could get started with articles related to that. Or you could look for something you know a lot about in our "Close to Good" or requested articles lists. Recently, I've done major work on the William Goebel article (promoted to good article last month) and the List of counties in Kentucky (promoted to featured list this weekend.) The key to getting these recognitions is pretty simple: Cite your sources. Any editor can clean up bad prose, but usually only the author of the text can cite the source the information comes from. Hope this is helpful. Let me know if you have more questions, or if you have a particular interest to start on. Acdixon 20:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC) Disputes resolutionI was impressed by your Talk:Neil Clark (journalist)#Disputes (point-by-point) approach to an extremely unpleasant situation. Great work there. — Athænara ✉ 08:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC) How interesting that you're related to Harry M. Caudill. Are you from Letcher County, Kentucky? It's one of my favorite places. Badagnani 00:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC) MySpace Secret Showsi dont know if you care but the notability of myspace secret shows was proven and in a matter of days it'll be back up. And about myspace secret stand up its intergrated into the new article. Just telling you since you want to delete both entries. Too bad huh?65.11.27.42 19:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
All right sorry it is confirmed now and in a new location with much much more check it out and see if you like it and could you help me add pictures to the (sorry idk wat they are called) information boxes MySpace EventsMartini833 03:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi i added some stuff which i would like you to rewrite in your style. And could you leave the picture i promise theyll look better when MySpace Secret Stand Up gets more shows. Martini833 03:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Comedor Escolar ProjectNo problem. It seemed better in this case to put the two together and get one slightly bigger article. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Awesome!Thanks for showing me around =) Blissyb has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Blissyb 20:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC) List of MySpace Eventswas made to MySpace Events shorter. i reposted it and it was deleted again. I put it in the deletion review. What do you think?
Re: CivilityThank you for the compliment! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC) MySpace Events AfDwhy was MySpace Events deleted? Martini833 19:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
well im sorry but i guess were not friends Martini833 23:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC) i take that back it was just tht ur last comment was a bit strong Martini833 00:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC) ThanksIts really nice to be appreciated. :) 11:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Thanks!
Thanks (re: CVG->VG)Hi Vendettax. Thanks for retagging CVG->VG in a number of articles. I just thought I'd stop by to provide a pointer back to the discussion about the move. (I went and looked it up to make sure the retagging was legit--you know, just to be safe.) --Alan Au 21:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Ya WelcomeUr very welcome..that's actually one of my favorite pages so I try to keep it unvandalized..=]Push It Baby!! ..Dats Muh Song!!..=] (Tay) 23:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC) PleaseeeeeCan u sign my autograph book pleaseeeeeeee?..=]Push It Baby!! ..Dats Muh Song!!..=] (Tay) 01:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC) Don't fix redirects that aren't brokenI noticed this edit of yours recently and reverted it. It's courtesy not to alter other's comments, especially those from long ago. You might also want to read Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. Pagrashtak 05:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I had a few thoughts regarding both comments, and think it is easier to represent myself here rather than copy-and-paste. First, let me say that I am fully aware of the policy on fixing redirects. I was offered the job of fixing these links by another editor who knew that I liked repetitive tasks and maintenance work (to clarify and respond to the "tedious and unnecessary" comment: I do not find these edits tedious. They actually help me relieve stress, if you can believe that). The redirect only exists because incorrect terminology was used in an article name, and a consensus was reached by the project to change it several months ago. It appeared to me that the people involved did not have enough help at the time, and this never was finished. I was happy to jump in and start fixing these links, and worked on the first 1400 or so entirely by hand. I then began using a script (that falls under "Assisted bot" per the policy). Before doing so, I familiarized myself with the bot policy, and determined that this does not require authorization, since I'm approving each edit before it is saved and not leaving it unattended. I have a very slow computer (200mhz) and found it to be much easier for me to work from a command prompt rather than a full web browser. The removal of the browser is really the only difference, and even after I determined how to use the script, I did a large number of the edits by hand, just for fun. As I mentioned on Pagrashtak's talk page, I fail to see the harm that my edits are causing other editors. If anything, they benefit the project by removing links to a page name that was widely considered incorrect. What if, in the future, someone decides to be bold (again) and restructure it separately into both "video game" and "computer game"? This would contradict the point I'm trying to make in regards to decided-upon terminology, but it is still a fair example. That restructuring would be impeded by eight thousand outdated links to a page naming both "computer and video games". This type of fix is specifically condoned in the policy that I was referred to about fixing redirects. I was also told by multiple editors that this particular task should be completed, and should not cause any harm whatsoever. I am not using this as an excuse, but simply pointing out that there is no strict consensus against what I've been doing to help, if so many others do not share the views expressed here today. To be perfectly honest, I resent both the implications posted that I am either unfamiliar with the rules ("read the policy") or have some personal motive, such as "bloating my edit count". Both are false. Quite frankly, I couldn't care less about my edit count - I find it a poor indicator of someone's quality, dedication, and intentions. The only place on Wikipedia that I see the desire for an impressive edit count is during an RfA, which I have no intention of participating in anytime soon. Rest assured that if I do participate in one in the far future, I will personally discount any of my own edits that are of questionable importance. Before attempting to work on this issue, I wikified hundreds of articles in the Wikify project, and received no complaints about that, which is a similar task meant to "make things right". If anyone is for some reason interested in my other work, this can be referenced via my Toolbox. I am not pointing fingers, only trying to express that the views posted come off as unusually critical when you consider what they are about. I've got the best of intentions here, and I was only trying to do what I could to help the project as a whole. Since my attempts at this have obviously disturbed some editors (even though I respectfully disagree with that view and the points made in it) I will no longer be working on this task. I hope you have a nice day. *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 13:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Re: Db templatesI think something is broken; they are not displaying correctly (for example, the "reason" from a plain 'db' has disappeared), along with the pink box and top half of the template on all of the others. I noticed that you were the last editor on the template page here. I'm sorry if you were already aware of this; I simply thought it couldn't hurt to mention it. *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 06:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Re:Revertingthanks for the reminder ill be more careful in the future..=] me + ma sis luv us sum Pretty Ricky!(wat waz dat?) 00:58, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Chelsea photoIt seems unlikly you would have seen it somewhere else before unless someone took the picture from wiki and is using it elsewhere. it's a photo of my friend Stephanie who lives in CT. Lyo 16:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC) CoeckHi Vendettax, Browsing on the internet, I'm currently looking for information about Armand Coeck. I need some info about him for the brochure of a concert program. Seems you've marked the wiki article about Armand Coeck as spam. I checked the link of the editor you've mentioned, but didn't found any info. Can I still read that text somewhere? Thx, Ludwig First EditHappy First Edit DayFROM YOUR FRIEND: ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Party on Vendettax!Best wishes on your first edit day Vendettax! Cheers --RobNS 01:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Happy First Edit Day Vendettax!Best wishes and cheers! :-) --RobNS 02:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC) Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Talk:Rev. Thomas Aitken, by Koavf (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Talk:Rev. Thomas Aitken fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: Talk page for deleted article.
|