User talk:BigNate37/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions ending on June 2006. 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.

Archive 1
2
3
4
5
6
10

At A Glance Box

Go for it. If you would like to customize you "at a glance" table further you can find additional userboxs at Wikipedia:WikiProject Userboxes. TomStar81 05:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I was actually just browsing to Wikipedia:Userboxes. BigNate37 05:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks Good! Glad to see you are having no trouble fitting in. And jundging from your "user contributions" tab, you have been busy. I wish you luck with your edits, and if you do a good job with the AFD you may even wind up an admin (a demanding job, but a good one I am told). At any rate, keep on trucking! TomStar81 04:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PWI 500

Thanks for the heads up... click the title link for the merger changes I made. It shouldn't have a problem anymore other than that the article is huge... it remains encyclopedic, though. Clint 06:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No biggie, I sometimes forget to sign posts myself. I'm going to go ahead and pass on those numbered lists. While it might be a better option in terms of wikifying the page, I just don't know how to do it without a ton of work... I'm really not up for deleting numbers and entering a # for 7500 items. Clint 23:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome templates

Hi Nate, I saw your question on Newton 2's talk page. The template he's using is Template:Welcomelaws. You ougth to take a look here to see if there are any others that you like the look of. Or of course you can create your own. If you need any help with anything then just ask.--Wisd e n17 10:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! BigNate37 15:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

eCustoms, etc.

We would like to post some basic information about our company, eCustoms. We have been quoted in magazine articles, we have columns published in magazines and we have been involved in one ranking. I realize that we aren't IBM or Nike, but we are well known in our field: that of being a developer of import/export compliance systems. As I mentioned, we have appeared in many magazines -- notable supply chain magazines -- over the years. We have been in our niche for over 25 years. Any suggestions you can give to help us list in your Company listing section would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. -- Customs Compliance Specialists.

The first thing you would want to do is remove the {{prod}} tag (PROD stands for proposed deletion) from the article. You're allowed to outright remove a {{prod}}, more on how to contest proposed deletion at WP:PROD. Because it is strongly suggested that you do not write about yourself, you are likely to meet more opposition to your article because of that. Now, I'm not suggesting you create a sock puppet or anything like that. Myself and many other editors would be happy to expand your article, for instance before you created it you could have requested it to be created instead. At this point, the best course of action (and still a good one) would be to request an editor to work on your article.

Personally, I do not have much time to lend to researching topics. If you would like me to work on your company's article, I would be happy to insert content for you if you could point me to some neutral third-party information about eCustoms on the internet. As another alternative, you could ask other editors for help, or visit Wikipedia:Requests to see all the ways you can ask for help regarding Wikipedia. Thanks for coming by to drop a note, it is very nice to see that you're willing to chat about the article. BigNate37 17:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For now, the article has a {{inuse}} tag, so let them finish doing what they want to do. At that point, the article can be evaluated. Wikipedia does have plenty of articles on notable companies, like Microsoft and Nike; in general, if they have a reasonable assertion of notability, the article ought to stay. Of course, at that point it would be need to be cleaned up; all articles must follow WP:NPOV, which generally excludes advertising by definition. --EngineerScotty 20:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Camils

That user is a troll that I've been having some fun with, and who has already been slapped around by greater authorities than I. In any case, I'm done with him now. Wahkeenah 23:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC) Oh, and by the way, I'm right. Wahkeenah 23:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I just like to point out the easy flaws in someone's position in a disagreement; either they go away and leave it alone or they make appropriate corrections and actually argue solidly, which is a good thing because if they have a solid foundation for their claims it is likely they are in the right anyways. Maybe I'm just naïve, but I think if we all respect policy we will all eventually come to a consensus because of it. BigNate37 00:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For a bit of background, you need to see what that character was up to. He was changing all the baseball team articles to singular, e.g. "The New York Yankees is a major league baseball team", which is incorrect usage, and he got one user so irritated with his attitude that a block was installed. He's obviously a troll, because he's just going on and on about this subject, while his own writing is filled with typos and incorrect usage. This is just some sort of game he's playing. Wahkeenah 01:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw (and reverted) some of his handy work at Toronto Blue Jays. Troll or not, he needs to develop a respect for policy at which point he's fine by me. BigNate37 01:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite certain that he's not the least bit interested in what anyone else has to say. His goal is to foment arguments. That's why I posted the last message the way I did. I will only cut those characters so much slack, and then I stop communicating with them... because part of their thrill of trolling is to engage in dialogue, i.e. arguments. If you stop arguing back, they lose interest. I give them a chance, but only so far. Wahkeenah 01:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Suffice to say I won't be arguing the same point twice so User:Camils is going to have to come up with some legitimate arguement to hold my attention. BigNate37 01:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that he's back, probably out on parole or something. I recommend not answering his latest paragraph. "Don't feed the squirrels." Wahkeenah 12:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, but it is really unnecessary. I can take care of myself. If you really want the issue to go away, you'd be better off not coming here to mock Camils where he isn't likely to look — not only is it akin to talking behind his back but it risks bringing arguements to my userpage. Further, I don't want to be accused of "ganging up" on him, and so I don't want it to look like we're consorting on ways to argue with him. BigNate37 12:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roger. On the contrary, I'm advising not arguing with him. Wahkeenah 14:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]