User talk:4twenty42o

CONDITION: BLUE

Very low level of vandalism 1.92 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot 07:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC) change

/Archive1,/Archive 2, /Archive3, /Archive4

You do not have new messages (last change).

My talk.. If you are here because I reverted an edit and made a mistake or accused you of vandalism please be civil and I'll fix it. No reason to curse or SHOUT. Accidents do happen...

Please remember that:

DGAFThis user doesn't give a fuck =)) and thinks that angry editors should chill out and remember we were all new once upon a time.

You may have made a mistake..

Hey 4twenty42o,

This is a friendly notification to inform you that you may have made a mistake while rolling back an edit by User:Bipxy on the page Bipasana siddhi bajracharya due to the editor being the only contributor of substantial content on the page. As such the blanking is taken as a request for page deletion under WP:Speedy G7, not as vandalism. + Crashdoom ^{Talk // NekoBot OP} 09:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Misogyny

So, you going to report HypatiaX or you gonna make me do it? 69.181.248.16 (talk) 05:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Just feeding him a little more rope... - 4twenty42o (talk) 05:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

D9 Teddy Bear

While I can understand your reason to delete my post on use of the IDF D9 Teddy Bear Bulldozer by U. S. forces, I don't agree. IMO the story is about the machine, not the IDF as such. As another example, the American A4 Skyhawk is one of the great airplanes of the 20th century......and one could write about it's history with the US Navy and US Marine Corps......but the history of the machine would not be complete without telling about the use by the IDF, Argentina in the Falklands, and even the Brazil/Argintine carrier cooperation today. So you deleted my paragraph distilled from a multi page footnoted article,,,,,,,,,,,,ok,,,,,,,,,,,,by why delete my reference from a Wiki page that has so little in the reference section??? Best regards Jtmilesmmr (talk) 13:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC) I've let this go for a month to think about it. The D9 was so important that when some of the 70+- machines started to break down,US forces brought in IDF techs to fix them. (why that is not classified, I have no idea, and I have never seen it reported in the popular press) Although hard to move (we had to borrow carriers from the Army), the Teddy Bear is a great breach maker, and saved untold lives. The enemy never found a way to stop a D9 flanked by a pair of M1 tanks and a squad or platoon of grunts. The D9 does the breaching work of 7 or 8 D7s, the USMC standard dozer the I had a very small part in bringing to the Corps,but because we don't have the lift for D9s the 7 will remain standard. Back to the A4 Skyhawk comparison, perhaps the story should just be about the Cat/IAA D9 Teddy Bear, rather that the IDF Teddy Bear. I hope that you access the Marine Corp Gazette piece that I cited, before you dismiss my thoughts out of hand. If not, it is not worth a fight, because a true researcher can still access the history, and decide for him/herself. Jtmilesmmr (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Naniboujou

Hello Sorry I am a little new... still learning. I work at Naniboujou Club Lodge and I have been making edits to the page there. Will do me a favor and let me know why I was in the wrong. Again, I'm not a vandel, just stupid. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majestic Pyre (talk • contribs) 21:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks For Being so welcoming and understanding. I appreciate the advise. Good luck on your future endevors Majestic Pyre (talk) 22:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me, I have a question, I thought you might be able to help me with. I started editing in order to be able to create a wikipedia page for my mother, who is an author with many published works. I realize now, I have a COI. Would you look at the page I am creating, it is my only sub-page, and let me know if I should continue or pass the project off to the requests bin.Majestic Pyre (talk) 22:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi

i borrowed you dont give a fuck thing because i like it hope u dont mind --27.3.18.100 (talk) 16:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Like Seafood?

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

For calling people who care about the appearance of Wikipedia "nosy". And because your user pages and Christanandjericho's represents Wikipedia, a place where 11-year-olds and grandmothers edit too. This is a public place. Do you swear and give the finger in public to people like grandmothers and kids? It's just unnecessary, and unfunny, much like the stupid orange message bar. Happier editing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

LOL!! I always edit happily... - 4twenty42o (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Anna Frodesiak has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Okay. You've had to live with the sting of the the dreaded trout for twentyn minutes. That's long enough. Let that be a lesson to you. Besides, I never stay cross.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

I'm not trying to quarrel with you. Some people just don't like profanity or practical jokes shoved in their face. I'm just trying to seek your understanding, that's all. Best wishes and ecstatic editing. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:33, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

As I have alluded to on my user page I am an army veteran.. Specifically an infantryman and a Ranger. Cursing 13 year olds, practical jokes, cold wet seafood and upset women are a all apart of life =)) Nothing personal... I do appreciate the cookie however. Cheers! - 4twenty42o (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry. No feelings hurt. Army veteran, eh? Ok. A bit of slack. Plus, you contribute nicely.

I guess these sorts of problems are inherent as it's a workplace, so certain rights are expected, but it's the internet, so it's the wild west. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Like Anna I'm not nuts about the implied insult in your Talk page post but I do appreciate your candid advice to the user, and so thanks for that! JohnInDC (talk) 15:02, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Well for what it's worth I had hoped not to hurt any feelings too bad. Most of us are, after all, adults here and therefore capable of a little ego bruising. However "Vince" is obviously a little younger, not a blatant problem user and needs to be prodded a little differently. I think the blocking admins get it. - 4twenty42o (talk) 15:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I think - hope - that he can be brought along, and up, successfully. If a little snarkiness aimed in my direction is the price of that success then it's fine with me. Thanks again. JohnInDC (talk) 15:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Industrial music list

Thanks for the advice. I'm trying to add references. Each edit I make has new content. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, but how are you going to help? —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:24, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

There are currently about half a dozen editors that have reverted the IP now. Don't you think his edits, which include removing sourced content, and almost all the contents from the page, are vandalism? My understanding is that vandalism does not fall under the purview of the 3RR rules. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:34, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

From the 3RR page, exceptions to the rule: "Reverting obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking". That list was being blanked, more or less, and is now under semi-protection for the next three months due to continued vandalism by the IP. The same editor was making similar edits to that list back in September of 2010, and was also blocked then, along with the page being semi-protected. They vowed "This fight will never end." I hope I didn't come off as sounding aggressive yesterday, but I hope you'll agree I was on solid policy footing. Take care. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 19:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I also tried to engage the user in a discussion here, before most of the back forth reverting, in an attempt to follow WP:BRD. They refused to respond. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 19:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

What Delta was trying to say...

...and is having a little communications problem about, is that the images may have non-free rationales (FURs) for other articles, but they do not for that specific article.

If you're going to add them back you will need to verify that they meet the NFCC criteria for that specific article, and add FURs in for that specific article, to each image before doing so.

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 05:56, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Darrell Hammond

I am Darrell Hammond's sister - and I am correcting this information at his request. Thank you. JC377257 (talk) 18:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC) Janet Collester

Starship Enterprise

No, what I want is for a consensus to be built. I have made clear attempts to make sure that BOTH viewpoints are either represented equally or not represented equally. Several of the others editing that page have continued to allow only THEIR viewpoint, despite the fact that it has been made clear, not only by me, that there is NOT a consensus. Notice that all of the edits I have made have attempted to give equal weight, either by inclusion or ommission, to both equally verifiable sources, whereas the edits made by EEMIV and MikeWazowski have included only the source they prefer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDiNardo (talk • contribs) 19:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I have sought dispute resolution. The others involved in this edit war have chosen to continue their actions rather than allow the dispute to be resolved civilly. TDiNardo (talk) 19:47, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thea Gill

Hey 4twenty Thank you for reaching out. I am Thea Gill's business partner, and I am trying on behalf of her to update this page. The information is OLD as is the photo. She has also tried many times to update this page and has also had conversations with someone there who didn't believe it was her. I think if Wikipedia is going to have pages on public profiled people, The least they can do is to get the info right, and let the updates be accordingly. The updated bio is Thea Gill's Bio, which I am the author of. We both hold the rights to it. The Filmography update is on IMDB, which I have heard that you think is not a secured site. If the film is not a legit project, then IMDB DOES take it down. So updating Thea's credits should not be an issue. There are still's and trailers of the work all over the place to back it up. I also updated the awards section as she received a Spotlight award in 2010 for her role as Blanche in A Streetcar Named Desire. If I am posting the information incorrectly then I apologize. I am following the rules that I am reading set by Wikipieda! Again We just want this page to be updated and correct. Thank you.(Wonkygirl1 (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC))

Iread the talk and understand that I may have been doing things in the wrong format! I am trying to correct that. I would like you to look at Thea's iActor page. This page not only requires an ID & Password, but you must also be a paid registered actor with SAG (Screen Actors Guild) If you scroll to the bottom you will see the same exact bio that we want to update with as well as her updated credits and photo we would like to update with. If we are ok with this being the secured site which you require, I will look to format the bio to your standards and hopefully we can all move forward with this. If you want to make sure I have access to the iActor page I will gladly make a change of your choosing on it so you can see I am legit and work with Thea Gill. http://www.sag.org/iactor/TheaGill Thank you again, for your time and help with this! (Wonkygirl1 (talk) 18:00, 18 July 2011 (UTC)).

Backstage Pass

Hello! Thanks for your interest in attending the Children's Museum's Backstage Pass. I will be checking in to confirm your attendance about a week prior to the event, but if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime, don't hesitate to let me know. Looking forward to seeing you! LoriLee (talk) 11:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Wha?

I have no idea what the hell this edit summary is supposed to mean, could you explain it to me? Swarm ^X 15:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

branford library

I apologize if my edit was inappropriate, adding an external link to the Branford, Connecticut library, but it seems that it IS a relevant link when talking about the town and all that it has to offer. I initially created the account on behalf of the library, but have since created my own personal account and will use that from now on. However, I do think that the town's public library website should be an external link on the town's page... I'd like to add it back in from my personal account, but don't want to red-flagged again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackstonelibrary (talk • contribs) 17:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi.. Thank you for your prompt reply. Just so you know the link you are providing is considered spam and while it maybe appropriate on the libraries page. It is not appropriate anywhere else. Wikipedia is neither a travel guide nor a collection of links. I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Regards.. - 4twenty42o (talk) 17:23, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Not Spam

hey 4twenty42o

I'm adding a link to a licensed copy on the Internet of the original source material for the article, which I believe is not "spam" even if hosted by MySpace. Please revert your "undo" of my changes.

Thanks.

J.wong.wiki (talk) 17:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I can see what you did and while you may not agree that it is spam, I most assuredly believe it is. As I stated to the user above, Wikipedia is not a collection of links. Nor is it a place for links to myspace videos or fan pages. Following that criteria I am unable to fulfill your request. regards.. - 4twenty42o (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Please revisit your decision. I agree that Wikipedia is not a collection of links, however, the links I added were to licensed copies of the original source material of the articles to which I added the links, which is a legitimate external link. Perhaps, you believe all MySpace links are spam, but these links are to offical pages by the artists. J.wong.wiki (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

So you are telling me what exactly...> You are using a Myspace page as a reference? Whether or not "copies" of anything are licensed or not are beyond my care. I am more concerned with the "collection of links"... - 4twenty42o (talk) 17:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the Myspace page provides access to the original source material of the article, which is a legitimate external link that overrides the "collection of links" rule.J.wong.wiki (talk) 17:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I see what you are saying now but I personally remain unconvinced. I will however look into it when I have the time and I will not revert your edits without further discussion. Regards - 4twenty42o (talk) 18:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Harold Covington Discussion Page

The discussion page for Harold Covington has repeatedly had (my) posts removed by,........Harold Covington himself 24.113.172.237. I thought it might be a good ides to block him from removing posts from that page and if that is not an option, just block him from editing it altogether. He has continued to do so even after being warned not to.--SlapChopVincent (talk) 11:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Defamed By Wikipedia

Hi. My name is Harold Covington. I apologize for the intrusion. I should be posting this on my own talk page, I know, but I have been blocked from making any comments on it. Good netiquette is kind of difficult when people with power are trying to use force to silence one.

I have had my account permanently banned by Wikipedia for the hideous and unspeakable crime of removing false and defamatory material from my article, and for generally back-sassing the powers that be over there, wherever exactly "over there" is. You will find more back-sass at

http://defamedbywikipedia.blogspot.com/

I'm sorry, my actual account is banned, so I have to post from my IP address until that is presumably perma-blocked as well, so I can't sign with the four tildes. However, since I am not a Wikipedia editor, I sign everything with my own name.

-Harold A. Covington — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.172.237 (talk) 19:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure what you would have me do with this.. Except to offer the following advice... Press the shift key when you press the tilde key 4x times to produce this effect ~. Then you should at least have the signature part down pat. - 4twenty42o (talk) 02:29, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkpage userbox

I would suggest that it might be worth re-wording the userbox on this talkpage. I'm afraid a big yellow box at the top proclaiming that 'This user doesn't give a fuck about your opinion' is not very conducive to discussion, or the collaborative editing environment that is Wikipedia. SQL^{Query me!} 09:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I seriously will consider your suggestion. As of yet, to my knowledge, my userbox has not offended anyone. Nor has it been counter productive in conversation. However, appearance is everything =)) - 4twenty42o (talk) 14:31, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

• Try using my version below, short and concise. Best of all, nobody could really disagree with Mr. Mackey, right? I said, right?!? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 08:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I was leaning more towards refactoring it to say something like:

DGAFThis user will aggressively ignore those who choose to express their opinion here and thinks that angry editors should chill out and remember we were all new once upon a time.

Because the essence of what the original user-box is about is: people expressing themselves angrily, talking to my like I was new here and then butting into shit that didn't concern them. And on top of it all expecting me to actually care.. I don't know though. Still undecided. - 4twenty42o (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

• Do you want the good stuff or do you want the bad stuff (Ask yourself this question: which one of the two do you really want to manifest itself more? Get the drift now?)? Ditch yours and use mine, less is more sometimes and you're not writing a "Ts & Cs applies" clause/kind of fine print. Besides, you're no longer a newbie... what you should let people know is the fact that you are a human being (by that definition, we are not perfect because we do make mistakes every now and then), you do the right thing (per WP:Common sense) and you know that this is just like any other job because competence is required (per WP:Competence). Regards to your brother as well. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 00:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Ha indeed.. Another interesting viewpoint. Ryan sends his regards. He edits anonymously still but rather prolifically. Who would've thought.. Regardless, I'll take all considerations under advisement.. - 4twenty42o (talk) 15:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

• Tell him to remember to provide a solid explanation in the edit summary box or I'm still gonna chew his ass out again! (Note: Please feel free to bleep out the offending bits with "¡Ay, caramba!" in the tradition of The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson#Swearing, thank you.) *note to self, must watch Ryan's IP again!* --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 01:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Defamed By Wikipedia

I no longer attempt to work through Wikipedia talk pages or Wikipedia in general regarding the malicious and defamatory material which left-wing Wikipedia editors, acting out of ideological bias and their own personal agendas, have repeatedly inserted into my Wikipedia entry. I attempted to use the Wikipedia mediation and arbitration procedures, as prescribed, and to date I have not received one single reply from anyone in authority at Wikipedia. Every attempt I have made to use Wikipedia's formal complaints procedure has been simply ignored and my comments taken off line (as this comment probably will be.) FIVE YEARS of discussion was blown away in this manner, I presume because I was making my case against the entry in too persuasive a manner and the Wiki-kooks were becoming embarrassed.

I use multiple accounts, yes, because Wikipedia has responded to my repeated attempts to get them to remove malicious and defamatory material from my entry with silence and with censorship. They say that the greatest compliment one man can pay to another is to attempt to silence him by force. I could do with fewer such compliments from Wikipedia.

These days I carry on my efforts to counter the false, malicious and defamatory material from my entry in a forum which (so far) Wikipedia and the rest of the left has failed to silence. Check out

http://defamedbywikipedia.blogspot.com

-Harold A. Covington — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forky1138 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Ugh, okay man... Here we go again I suppose. - 4twenty42o (talk) 16:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

And here we will go again, and again, and again, and again, until my Wikipedia article contains not one single false, malicious and defamatory statement, nor one single link to such material which some giggling little lefty who thinks he's being cute has snuck in.

-Harold A. Covington — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forky1138 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Ecological traps

Paying attention

Hi Chris, My name is Bruce Robertson. I wrote the vast percentage of the content on the ecological trap and evolutionary trap pages on wikipedia. I'm an ecologist, and could very arguably be considered the global expert on this subdiscpline in ecology, considering that I have published about 3 times as many articles in the literature as any other researcher. I've been making some changes in the ecological trap article recently that you have reversed at least once. Among the various small changes I've been making that you may have reasonable differences in opinion about, there is one, in particular, that I'd appreciate you deferring to me on. It is on the topic of the perceptual trap diagram that I have eliminated from this article. I am very familiar with this topic. I was one of 3 reviewers asked to scientifically evaluate Patten and Kelly's paper for the journal Ecological Applications in which it was published. In my opinion, the term 'perceptual trap' has no meaning. If it refers to ecological traps alone, it is redundant to that term. If it refers to the broader concept of evolutionary traps, it is redundant to that, too. I believe that the authors intend the use of the term as a synonym to the reverse of a trap (e.g. the 'undervalued resource' Gilroy and Sutherland 2009). In this case, the term has already been previously defined that their term is redundant. Regardless, of my opinion on this topic, discussion of this term does not really belong this page. At best, it should be placed on the evolutionary trap page where it is more relevant, as ecological traps are just one of many traps of evolutionary trap. I would also consider a 'perceptual trap' page as an appropriate place. I only update this page to help other people understand the cutting edge of our understanding of this topic, and I actually throw in unpublished, yet (I think) valuable observations of my own, that I probably shouldn't because of their value. I do this, and made the changes I made today because I find this topic fascinating and hope others will, too. For this reason, I try to eliminate confusing or misleading information. In summary, I know that what ends up on a wikipedia page is (in antagonistic situations) more the result of an attrition of wills. In this case, I'd like to ask you to defer to my evaluation of the science. Cheers, Bruce Robertson Postdoctoral Fellow Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute BruceALRobertson (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Well hello Bruce. That is not only an impressive resume but an inspiring introduction to your efforts. As you noted I am Chris. I am the guy who asked you to use an edit summary. Something I noted you do not tend to do when making changes. Especially changes that remove content. So...we have sort of an impasse here. See I am kind of firm in my ways. I can agree to disagree when a person discusses their changes or "makes some sense" of the removal of content. That doesn't seem to be the case here. This seems to be a case of "I'm smarter than you and therefore above explaining to you". Say it ain't so Bruce... - 4twenty42o (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Chris. I'm sorry if I came off as trying to impress you with my resume. I know my opinion isn't more important than any body else's and so I didn't expect you to value my opinion more than your own. My only intent was to communicate with you that I have spent my entire academic career researching this topic. And since you obviously care about wikipedia and spend a lot of time working to improve its content, I thought the only chance I had to get you to consider my opinion was to show you that I care about the quality of the articles, too. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I promise you that I am not the least bit impressed with myself. :) (actually, not kidding) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceALRobertson (talk • contribs) 19:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries my friend and your resume is more than impressive. Just please learn to use the edit summaries in the future. Cheers.. - 4twenty42o (talk) 19:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for reverting vandalism to the article Canis lupus dingo!Chrisrus (talk) 00:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

No worries. You seem to have a good edit history. You may want to request rollback. or alternately employ Twinkle. Cheers - 4twenty42o (talk) 01:51, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate it

I only disagree with the term cult leader as Meher Baba never declared, himself to be a cult leader in any publication. (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:20, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).

I know so little about Meher Baba it is silly. However you are removing sourced content. Argue it on the talk page. Not through edit summaries. Cheers.. - 4twenty42o (talk) 18:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Changes to articles associated with Meher Baba

Per WP:MOS the lead sentence in the article should encapsulate its later content. Unless a section about Meher Baba's cult-leader status is added to the article, there is no reason for the words to appear in the lead sentence. This term is being added wholesale to dozens of articles, and the information, sourced or not, has little if any reason to be included in the lead sentence.

As to discussing the matter on the article talk page, so far as I can tell, the term was added without discussion, and reverting merely returns the article to its more appropriate state.

If you wish to add the term to the articles, please also add relevant content to the article itself.

Peace. --Nemonoman (talk) 22:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

No... I am sorry but that's not exactly what's going on here. I peeked and saw several rollbacks that were blatantly labeled vandalism. They were made by you. That is a content dispute and by definition a misuse of rollback. But I am less concerned with that than the obvious conflict of interest. We all fuck it up from time to time but I am not entirely sure you were editing neutrally, assuming good faith, communicating with editors you disagree with or properly seeking dispute resolution. Regards - 4twenty42o (talk) 22:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you in my opinion you have misjudged the situation. I've made a request for review on the Edit-warring notice board here, and I suggest that may be a better place to air these concerns, since dozens of pages have been similarly affected. --Nemonoman (talk) 22:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

By the way, your "You do not have new messages" link is very amusing. --Nemonoman (talk) 22:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I saw that as well. Which as I alluded to is the improper approach IMO. Because you just came here saying it was a MOS issue. My statement stands...except about rollback. You cannot misuse what you do not have. Apologies, I misread the diff's. And thanks...I have fought hard to keep that damn banner. Regards - 4twenty42o (talk) 22:39, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

New section

Stop messing about with my changes to Waltham Forest. The introduction is a load of crap as it stands and gives the wrong impression entirely. My stuff is factual and easily verified. It isn't vandalism - you and others use that label too frequently. What is questionable is your use of swearwords in Talk which I wouldn't want my daughter to see. Thanks. Lloyd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.11.178.239 (talk) 13:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Confirming Backstage Pass

Hello! The Children's Museum's Backstage Pass & Edit-a-Thon is this coming Saturday, August 20th. Please confirm, either here or on my talk page, that you will be attending. Kindly include if you will be bringing a guest.

We ask that you meet us outside of the Welcome Center Security Office between 9:45 and 10:00am. Park in the free garage and make your way across the skywalk (located between the 2nd and 3rd levels of the garage). Come down the ramp and make a sharp left towards the security office. You will be asked to check in prior to starting the day.

Please check the event page for more details. If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Looking forward to seeing you! LoriLee (talk) 15:16, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:23, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J1_(Y-DNA)

If you are going to get involved, get the facts. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HG_J1_(ADN-Y).PNG
The "three revert rule" was violated with vandalism long ago by the unsigned person who is, as a matter of fact, putting up a map based on NOR and in contradiction of the papers it cites where the map claims J1 haplogroup rather than E haplogroup is over 60% of the population of Ethiopia/Sudan. Either be a part of the problem or a part of the solution. At this point, you are part of the problem. The map is his and it is biased.

Tell it to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2.4.216.52

JohnLloydScharf (talk) 21:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Ahh don't give me that bullshit. I get so sick of single purpose editors telling me this shit. No where in your extensive edit history have you reported a problem nor sought dispute resolution. Now take your complaints to the proper venue before you really piss me off and I say something you regret. - 4twenty42o (talk) 21:49, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

HG J1 (ADN-Y)

Your language is vulgar. You need to engage in a civil conversation. I have consistently reported problems with maps for that page and have reported the use of copyrighted maps and this particular image I have reported. I have also reported a bias on the page more than once. Believe me, I have no problem reporting issues. JohnLloydScharf (talk) 22:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, my language is vulgar. I do not care what you are edit warring over. I am not even concerned with your map. Hell I don't even care if you care. What I care about is productivity. About editors wasting their time, other contributors, admins time and then my time, by edit warring. Instead of engaging in dispute resolution. Now take a hint... Cheers - 4twenty42o (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Dacian language

Your intervention is misguided. I did not remove text, I was simply completing a paragraph I was responsible for myself. Instead, you have removed a large para I inserted. No hard feelings: I'm assuming an honest mistake on your part. But please take time to read edits carefully before you revert them. 178.102.62.32 (talk) 15:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Tripoli

First, I was not the original one to put vagina in there, so i deleted it. When I went to preview edit the box was screwed up. So I thought it had something to do with the vagina, so i put it back. Now that you got rid of it the boxes are screwed up again e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Battle_of_Tripoli&action=historysubmit&diff=446227944&oldid=446227456 Now that I think about it I think there needs to be a hyphen after the vertical bar. Im gonna try that now, but if that doesnt fix it I have no idea. Dan653 (talk) 23:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixed it, it did need a hyphen. I'll take this as a fault on my part. I mean vagina having to do something with it lol.