User talk:CardinalDan/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to WikiProject Ohio!

Hi, and welcome to the WikiProject Ohio! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Ohio.

A few features of the project that you might find helpful:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me or any other member of the project, we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around!
§hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Cheers, thanks for the barnstar! I'm sure you'd do the same! DARTH PANDAduel 02:05, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

  • Well, just think of it as my appreciation for helping me out. CardinalDan (talk) 01:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Jinder Jade

In that case then, why did you think it should be deleted, it wasn't offending anyone.

(Note I did it at the bottom this time) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BoingJBoing (talk • contribs) 20:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

  • I felt that the article in questions was not notable enough to warrant its own article. CardinalDan (talk) 20:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

anti-vandalism barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page and reporting the jerk. shirulashem (talk) 01:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

vandalism

Er, got two messages come up when I visited the site about editing userpages or something. Sure as hell weren't me. What's going on?

90.220.37.70 (talk) 19:00, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

  • According to your editing history, you vandalized User:MattieTK's userpage and placed a false blocking template on User talk:64.251.48.135 user talk page. I don't know if it was you are another person who was doing the vandalizing, but the warnings do apply. CardinalDan (talk) 19:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Weird. I'm not using a public network so it can't be that. Perhaps I was assigned an IP address that had already been taken by whoever did those edits. Thanks for the explanation. 90.220.37.70 (talk) 19:23, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
    • It's OK. Just be cautious and good editing.CardinalDan (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Now, the funny thing? Not having read this, I blocked him for the multiple talk-page edits, which were just full of violations--profanity, false block notices, impersonating admins, etc--and he "used someone else's account" to complain to me. The "someone else's account" name? (pardon my language, but this was the name): Smallegsbigcock. Something just doesn't ring true here, y'know? :) GJC 23:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Interesting, I noticed the the previous acts of vandalism, but it seemed that he/she didn't try any acts of vandalism while using the IP address. You are right, however, something's up. CardinalDan (talk) 23:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Drinkware

I deleted the tags because I split the article into two different articles. Most of the tags were in reference to glass not drinkware, so I put the tags there.--Jcvamp (talk) 20:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Sorry about that. I'll see if I can delete the warning. CardinalDan (talk) 20:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Oh, as an addendum, if you can, please give a reason when you move stuff, so it doesn't look like you are blanking materials for no reason.CardinalDan (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I forgot to add comments. Would you like me to keep the tags intact and allow them to be deleted as necessary if they don't fit?--Jcvamp (talk) 20:14, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Sure, that's fine. CardinalDan (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC) i apalogize my son has been vandalizing the site he does not know better

Thanks for the Assist

Thanks for putting up a warning on 68.111.101.39's page about Wicca. I'm new and still figuring out the anti-vandalism stuff. Shubinator (talk) 06:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

  • I'm curious, how did you put Wicca's article name and history page within the warning? The templates at Wikipedia:Warning templates can't be changed, can they? Shubinator (talk) 16:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I do know that after you place the warning template text, but before the parentheses, you add a | and the name of the page, such as . As for the history, I'm not so sure. You may want to talk to one of the admins about that. Alternatively, if you wish to, you can ask for one of the reversion tools, such as Huggle or Twinkle. CardinalDan (talk)

Fermented Honeypot

Thank you for your efforts, however, please review the change history. There was no vandalism, instead, there was a conversation between PMDrive1061 and I where he undid changes and inadvertently clobbered changes made to expand upon references to mitigate the concerns with same-day publishing of new security-specific coined terms.

Smeowpmeow (talk) 03:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

  • At the very least, could you at least explain your edits? I'm not sure of the term that you placed on Wiki, so you have to probably add more to it. Right now, at least from my point of view, the article looks questionable at best.CardinalDan (talk) 03:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
  • You continue to clobber the edits to the references by undoing my changes which support the new terminology. Please see User talk:PMDrive1061 as well as User talk:Smeowpmeow. The original article was restored by PMDrive1061 only to be later clobbered by you after I added additional references. I shall continue to add references as they are discovered to support this article. Thank you. I am reverting your changes to effect the references I added earlier.
  • Um... it wasn't me. CardinalDan (talk) 04:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Apologies. If possible please synchronize administrative efforts between PMDrive1061 and yourself, we are running into concurrency issues. Again, thank you in advance. The nature of IDS/Security itself is consistently dynamic, not static, and despite perceived worthlessness in contributions there is real value despite chosen terminology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smeowpmeow (talk • contribs) 04:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

ChinaCache article

Thanks for reverting the edits on this article, this guy's an obvious spammer. I have a question for you, I'm a little new at this. If you nominate an article like that for speedy deletion, and the user simply keeps reverting your edits, is there any other course of action I can take, other than the AIV? --MrShamrock (talk) 07:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep reverting the changes,talk to the user in his/her talk page, and ask them to follow the guide lines to improve the article, and if they keep acting up (deleting warnings, adding spam links), then warn them. CardinalDan (talk) 07:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Band Sawing

You tagged Band Sawing for improvement. In fact it is one of a cluster of articles where a group of students are copying from Todd, Robert H and Allen, Dell K. Manufacturing Processes Reference Guide. See User talk:RHaworth#End milling for list (currently three articles). If you spot any similar, please let me know. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: Vandalism revert

My first vandalism attack! I almost feel a part of the project now. Thanks for spotting it and reverting the oddball vandalism, very quick :) Cheers mate doktorb wordsdeeds 00:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Don't let the idiot vandals get to you, just keep on working. I get a kick from their feeble attempts. CardinalDan (talk) 00:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

take a look

User talk:Jolibee08... lets see --Cerejota (talk) 06:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

One of the delightful bits of arcanity which separates wiki editors from real people, is the rules on who can remove deletion tags. The three methods, speedy, prod and AfD all have different rules - please learn them. Re-instating a prod tag is wrong. If you see a prod tag being removed, you must either: accept the article as allowable, raise an AfD or, quite possibly, add a speedy tag. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry about that. CardinalDan (talk) 23:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Buncranna declined speedy

as it made sense to me and typo removed by creator. Dlohcierekim 23:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC) Deletedas typo-> Buncrana. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 23:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Dickinsonre

I am not sure why you labeled my good faith edits "vandalism" on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWMM (Reverted 48 edits by Dickinsonre identified as vandalism to last revision by ABF--Dickinsonre (talk) 19:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC

It was my mistake. I thought you were deleting material as vandalism, but then I saw you were editing the article. But by the time I tried to revert it back to your original changes, you had already continued editing. Anyways, if you are making a big edit, make sure you summarize it so that it does not look like you are vandalizing the article. CardinalDan (talk) 19:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip - I will be careful to make sure I add an editing note in the future--Dickinsonre (talk) 03:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I should apologize to you for my error. Anyways, good luck with editing. CardinalDan (talk) 04:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Who are you117.196.132.197 (talk) 02:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Moved

  • Are you an administrator? If yes, may I suggest that you block King54 who has only done vandalism so far. Thanks,--Jacques de Selliers (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
No I am not. If you want to report a user for vandalism, go http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism and follow the instructions. CardinalDan (talk) 19:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Why Are You Destroying My Articles?

I wondered why you were going to destroy both my Gerudo Valley Theme article and Armatage Shanks article. They are both stubs, I agree, but there is not much information on them. However, despite this, I believe that they should be known. I was only starting the article, hoping other people would expand on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MyBeautifulZygote (talk • contribs) 21:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Dear user,what did i do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hohanyao (talk • contribs) 08:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

You destroyed my article on teen bands even though it was a legitimate page explaining the growing trend in teen bands. I gave an example of an unsigned band to give people a clearer understanding, this should not contradict any of the terms and conditions of article misuse. Please get back to me ASAP and give me the information back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feedback drummer (talk • contribs) 21:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

AngelOfSadness talk has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. 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. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

For reverting vandalism on my talkpage and for updating the vandalism count (not many people do the latter so that was very much appreciated :D). AngelOfSadness talk 18:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


Under Review: Speedy Deletion of Carey Schueler

You put a speedy deletion thing on the Carey Schueler page I created a couple of hours ago, would you be willing to re-review it? Thanks. MPet (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

It looks better now, since you have added enough for notability. The only quibbles is that you probably need to categorize the article and perhaps expand it a bit. Otherwise, it looks OK. CardinalDan (talk) 01:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Stefan Christopher Kaufmann

Just a friendly note on Stefan Christopher Kaufmann. I declined the speedy deletion request because professional footballer is a claim of importance. If you think it needs to go, you might try AfD.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 02:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

It's OK. If the guy is notable, then I'll let it go. At first, the way teh article was written, plus some quick research, made me think that he wasn't notable. CardinalDan (talk) 02:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

warnings

[1]

Why did you put back those warnings after I took them out? [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.120.116.185 (talk) 17:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Ohio meetup

Brainstorming is taking place! Feel free to check it out, and make sure to add your name to the possible attendees if you'd like more information, as this page is mostly gauging interest at the moment. hmwithτ 01:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Terrence_Webster-Doyle

I was trying to edit it way down to prevent it from being deleted-- i.e. to make it an acceptable stub. Sorry I forgot to indicate as much in my edit summary.  J L G 4 1 0 4  00:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


Cinemark Theatres

I provided valid reasons for my deletions. Please review information before marking changes as "unconstructive." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.92.13.111 (talk) 04:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, considering that you deleted the history section of the article, which I think is an important part of the article, I think you have to explain your edits a bit better or they will be construed as vandalism. CardinalDan (talk) 05:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Why did you mark my article as vandalism?

All I was doing is redirecting the page to another user since it had all the details on there, can you please direct it to User:Uttamo

Because it was non-notable. Also, redirects from an article to a userpage is not allowed. Finally, if you want to make a comment, place it on the bottom of the page. CardinalDan (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Why was my prescription treatment edit marked as vandalism? I thought it was helpful. (Wylee75 (talk) 13:27, 21 February 2009 (UTC))

G10

When tagging material for speedy deletion, please use {{db-g10}} or {{db-attack}} for articles that appear to disparage a person. It brings them more rapid attention, as well it should. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 07:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Will surly keep that in mind. Thanks.Serbian Defense Forces (talk) 23:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Just wanted to tell you that. CardinalDan (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

My edit to Jack Black was not vandalism.

Take a second to read the article. If you do read it, you will find that the article on Jack Black was actually HIGHLY vandalized. I'm sure that the section on challenging an article or tagging parts of an article said that if there was false information on a biographical person, it must be removed IMMEDIATELY. Or was I supposed to give valid reasons for the edit? If I forgot to, I apologize. Conjo278 (talk) 05:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Just read the article and you will understand. Perhaps try editing the article yourself to remove the vandalism? 71.141.141.6 (talk) 05:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. But more importantly, you should at least discuss it first at the talk page before making such a large edit. Also, like you said give a valid reason for the edit. It doesn't look good if you delete large parts of an article, replacing it with "This part has been vandalized and needs to be fixed." It doesn't send out a good signal. CardinalDan (talk) 05:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for telling me. I'm a little new at this editing thing, so sorry about my mistakes. Sorry for forgetting to sign as well Conjo278 (talk) 05:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It's a bit tough at first when you edit here, but you get the hang of it. CardinalDan (talk) 06:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Vandal fighting

Thanks to you and the others for reverting my user pages faster than I could even refresh, and for also updating my "vandalised" stats! Lol. Apparently User:Terrancee is annoyed at me for calling out some copyright violations :) Cheers! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 06:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad I could help. CardinalDan (talk) 06:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
The Userpage Shield
CardinalDan is hereby awarded the Barnstar of Userpage Protection for his tireless efforts in reverting vandalism on userpages. Turkish Flame ☎ 08:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fighting vandalism

Thanks for reversing that vandalism on Whoopi Goldberg. You beat me to it. LA Movie Buff (talk) 01:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. CardinalDan (talk) 01:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh

So, you're saying that it's okay for an article to have multiples sections with the same informaton? (sarcasm) Mamolu (talk) 17:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, you should have mentioned it first in your edit summary. CardinalDan (talk) 20:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Ohio meetup location

Where should the Ohio meetup take place? The best option is probably wherever the most people can attend, so you opinion counts. See Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Ohio 1#Location !vote. hmwithτ 20:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Discordia

OK, keep the page as is with a screenshot of a softare that is no longer supported, denying a company that acquired it from the rights to what is now its own software and instead spam the page with conspiracy theories by people associated with a completely unrelated prodcut. It's Wikipedia's new independenet point of view. Good luck. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.157.252.209 (talk) 15:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


I don't understand why you have delete this article. Please check hi5, facebook, myspace, mychurch, Billy Graham, A Afghan Times Anglicans Online B Bibeltemplet BibleGateway.com C The Christian Post Christian Today ChristianRock.Net Christianity.com Church News Conservapedia C cont. Crosswalk.com D Desperate Preacher's Site E Elijah List Esprit Omnimedia G Gay Christian Network Gentle Christian Mothers H Hearitfirst.com I Independent Catholic News Internet evangelist J Jesus Freak Hideout M MyChurch O Oneplace.com R Rapture Ready Rapzilla S Sacred Space Salem Communications Salem Web Network Ship of Fools (website) T Tangle.com The Text This Week X XXXchurch.com 


and more i think then all of these fall under A7  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanleywishes (talk • contribs) 01:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

My article deleted

Hi,

I'm so sorry, I can not understand why you can't accept my article... I'm not english native, it's a bit tough... Well I think I have mentioned all reference tho. and all what I wrote is informative about the music and rock world I belong to. My article is not finished yet. I have many things to share and to add as a renown Agent and promoter in the rock world. ( but it already took me so long to type this first step of the article ) I don't need any promotion, I think I deserve an article here. It's all about telling the story of rock of the 21st century. A testimony which is my life and my experience, the life of my company, of my boss. Very rich and intense experiences. I have to tell the story so that the people can understand who I am, and what I, we are doing and want to do in the Music World. Please, tell me how to do. It took me about 2 hours or even more to put all references and links. It's horrible. I thought I was right...

All the best,

Nathalie Nbecquet (talk) 04:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I did not delete the article myself, it was one of the administrators. I marked the article for deletion because it sounded very promotional and it talked about an individual who was not notable. With that being said, if you want to work on your article, you could possibly make a sandbox on your userpage and work on it. Also, check out Wikipedia:Your first article for more advice on creating a page.CardinalDan (talk) 04:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CardinalDan/Archive_4&oldid=1142917076"