User talk:AQFK

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, AQFK, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion at 9/11 conspiracy theories

You recently deleted a line about parallels between 9/11 and the Reichstag fire as POV (along with three references). Could you please explain what you mean here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:9/11_conspiracy_theories#.22Reichstag_fire.22_motive_deleted_as_POV.3F Ghostofnemo (talk) 19:38, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: This is A Quest For Knowledge on a public computer. I'm not logging into a computer that might not be secure.

I've responded on the article talk page.[1] Please note that this is not my main account. AQFK is an abbreviation for A Quest For Knowledge. I've copied this discussion from here to my main account.[2] 67.107.55.130 (talk) 21:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, AQFK. You have new messages at Ahmedunbreakabletato's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Barts1a | What did I actually do right? | What did I do wrong this time? 07:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, is that how that works?

It was my impression that the discussion was effectively closed the moment the banner on the top was posted, and that while a decision hadn't been reached, the discussion was effectively over. Was I incorrect? I'm not going to revert your revert (of my revert) without discussing it with you first, as I don't want to edit war, but I'm pretty sure that my revert was actually correct. Cam94509 (talk) 23:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, apparently it was my fault. I didn't realize that it was closed. I think what might have happened is that I did a diff of the changes and it readily doesn't show that the discussion was closed in that view. AQFK (talk) 12:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions 2013 review: Draft v3

Hi. You have commented on Draft v1 or v2 in the Arbitration Committee's 2013 review of the discretionary sanctions system. I thought you'd like to know Draft v3 has now been posted to the main review page. You are very welcome to comment on it on the review talk page. Regards, AGK [•] 00:17, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My Bad

Hey I just meant to capitalize the title on the celebrity photo leak post, not change the iCloud links. My chrome extension automatically did that. My mistake; I didn't realize it would edit the text of the article. I'll disable that for editing. Neverr Summer (talk) 02:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lydia Cornell BLPN discussion

I've tried to address your concerns. For your reference, my initial response was

The information is sourced. See the talk page. If we need to clarify the sources, let's do so.
Her birth date has been discussed in detail on the article talk page. She and her publicists have tried to obscure and confuse her birth year, repeatedly publishing erroneous dates.
Wikipedia is not censored. --Ronz (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

What did I not address? --Ronz (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ref desk

Please explain how this is an appropriate thread. If you want to say I should hat it instead, I'd be willing to consider it. It's not a real question. There is no real answer. It's just stupid. --Onorem (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Side note: I have to read it to realize I don't like it. I can't pre-judge. You, however, restored fucking stupidity to a reference desk without explaining why it belongs there. --Onorem (talk) 04:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

J. Geils Band

I noted this on WT:WPMUSIC but as usual, no one responded beacuse no one has touched that page in fucking years. This is why I never use article talk pages; no one ever reads them. That's why I escalated to ANI. But apparently no one wants to help me, so @Piriczki: are apparently going to go around in circles forever because he can't read a goddamn policy page or some bullshit.

Read more at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard. I want to get to the bottom of this. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:07, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]