User talk:Me-123567-Me: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:55, 31 August 2011

Welcome!

Hello, Me-123567-Me, 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:

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! GreenJoe 19:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

It is *you* that is edit warring as well. i've taken the time to write an article about coast to coast network. Such a description was neutral, and not "opinion" nor "point of view". Now instead of actually taking the time to read my comments on the article and template page, you simply "edit war" with me, reverting what i wrote and suggesting that my articles be deleted.

Please STOP. If you really think that "coast to coast" networks are NOT notable, then that's your opinion. The truth is, there's a difference between "network that serves all provinces" and "network that serves only some provinces". Get real, and stop "edit warring" with me. Thanks. --LABcrabs (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:YNDP-new-logo-web.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:YNDP-new-logo-web.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:05, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Western Arctic New Democratic Party

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Western Arctic New Democratic Party, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 19:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Student union articles

I wasn't really going to create student union articles (except maybe Scarborough Campus Students' Union, currently a redirect), but I didn't want the list having external links all over it. That's all. But, thanks! EelamStyleZ (talk) 21:22, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Darrell Pasloski

Please note that "the government allows non-commercial use" is not a valid rationale for uploading a photo that you took from their website. Nothing in our copyright rules prevents someone from repackaging or using our content for commercial purposes — Maclean's or the National Post, for example, could use our photo of Darrell Pasloski if for some reason they couldn't find another one, or you or I could burn 75% of Wikipedia's database to a CD and sell it for our own personal profit as "Bearcatpedia" or "Me1234567pedia" if we wanted to. As a result, we're not a non-commercial use even though we don't charge a fee here — so you can only upload photos of people from other websites if they're licensed in the public domain or Creative Commons, not "non-commercial reuse". Bearcat (talk) 21:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fido Solutions

How come the Spectrum Direct website isn't enough of a proof to justify the fact that Fido owns its own network? If Fido uses x spectrum, and Rogers uses y spectrum, then both are in theory completely separate networks. FM radio, too, works this way. So please feel free to explain why Fido is an MVNO, because i don't understand, and i think the RoFi case is much different from Telus and Clearnet. Thank you. --TELUS freak again (talk) 03:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions

To display the information, you must type "1900" in the From: box and "2000" in the To: box. Hope this helps you out! --TELUS freak again (talk) 03:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's an English buttom at the upper left. Only problem is that after entering information, there is no way to link the output. Why would you say that Spectrum Direct, or the instructions required to pull the page, makes it unreliable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TELUS freak again (talk • contribs) 03:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian Party of Canada

Hello, Me-123567-Me. You have new messages at 117Avenue's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nominating me for deletion

CSD isn't the right place - you hafta go here. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 14:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User:Nolelover, you may be blocked from editing. I'm giving you a level three because you should know better. You've abused Twinkle in the past, and should this happen again, I'll go to AN/I. Reverted, warned and hopefully forgotten. Goodbye. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just asking

Hi, I just have to ask, were do you see a personal attack in this comment Yes infact it is. It is at the very least a strong indicator of notability that you seem to ignore., I dont see any and it wasnt ment as one. To have difference in opinions is not a personal attack, to have different opinions is healthy.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK I give you this one... even though I personally dont think it was an personal attack. Anyhow, have a nice day!--BabbaQ (talk) 17:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CAP

On the CAP article, here is a quote from the platform:

"CAP asserts that the War on Terrorism has eroded and will continue to erode civil liberties in addition to creating wars of aggression.[4] CAP does not support the 9/11 Commission's report on the September 11 attacks in 2001. CAP leaders have also expressed skepticism concerning official accounts of the September 11 attacks in 2001 and advocated alternative explanations. At its 2006 convention, CAP passed a motion calling for a Royal Commission to investigate the September 11 attacks and Canada's participation in Afghanistan. CAP argues that the truth of what really happened on September 11, 2001 has yet to be uncovered; and that in the meantime, Canadians have been subject to anti-terrorism laws and security agreements, such as Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), that have compromised Canadian sovereignty and civil rights. It also calls for a moratorium on anti-terrorist legislation to be reexamined only after receiving the results of that Royal Commission's investigation."

That is 9/11 truth if I ever heard it... so do you mind if I add it back? LIbertyInSpace (talk) 23:50, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go (official site):

http://canadianactionparty.ca/policies/civil-rights-human-rights/royal-commission-911-nau-afghanistan/ LIbertyInSpace (talk) 01:53, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we need a third party source to confirm a political party's own official platform... but if you want, google it - there is tons of citations that could be used. LIbertyInSpace (talk) 03:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6452514250354486840 LIbertyInSpace (talk) 03:28, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why should we break a conversation?

Hello, Me-123567-Me. You have new messages at 117Avenue's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please read WP:BRD. 117Avenue (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is one sentence: If you are WP:BOLD and make a change, but it gets WP:REVERTed, discuss why the change should be made. 117Avenue (talk) 00:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

I guess you didn't understand what C.Fred and Fastily were telling you after your spurious edit-warring complaint was denied--you started all over again. I have asked other admins to weigh in at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_needed_for_edit-warring. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 Please read [[WP:BRD]]. [[User:117Avenue|117Avenue]] ([[User talk:117Avenue|talk]]) 00:27, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 :Here it is one sentence: If you are [[WP:BOLD]] and make a change, but it gets [[WP:REVERT]]ed, discuss why the change should be made. [[User:117Avenue|117Avenue]] ([[User talk:117Avenue|talk]]) 00:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
+==Edit warring==
+I guess you didn't understand what C.Fred and Fastily were telling you after your spurious edit-warring complaint was denied--you started all over again. I have asked other admins to weigh in at [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_needed_for_edit-warring]]. Thank you. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 02:55, 31 August 2011 (UTC)