Severity: Notice
Message: Undefined offset: 1
Filename: infosekolah/leftmenudasboard.php
Line Number: 33
Line Number: 34
This is an archive of this talk page. Please do not make any further edits, thanks!
Archive 01 (Mar 28, 2004 - Nov 30, 2005) Archive 02 (Dec 01, 2005 - Dec 31, 2005) Archive 03 (Jan 01, 2006 - Jan 31, 2006)
It is a highly contested article which is being turned into a political forum. It has been established that the unofficial flag of Kurdistan is not banned or criminal in Iran but is being written as so. After evidence has turned up that it is not banned and no proof given by the party that claims it as so they still edit it as so and even add phony sources....sources that have nothing to do with the flag. This article needs to be locked.
Thanks for unblocking me. It was a rough few hours. Pattersonc(Talk) 4:57 PM, Thursday; February 2 2006 (EST)
Is a work of art! —This user has left wikipedia 22:21 2006-02-02
rm speedy notice - how implausible can the typo be if the article creator made it?
True, I suppose ... I screwed up when creating the redirect
Moved the redirect to the correct spelling when I realised. Suspect that the old redirect is clutter more than something other clumsy typists would find useful, therefore tried to delete it. You think that it should be kept, or that it should be removed in a different manner?
cheers AndrewMcQ 22:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats on adminship, albeit a bit late from me! NSLE (T+C) 09:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
82/1/0...good show and congrats on your promotion!--MONGO 08:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for removing the vandalism on my page. The haters abound. Thanks a bunch! Pacdude 20:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats on the adminship, man! I know you'll do a super-awesome job. :) I'm off to congratulate you in the IRC channel, if you're there. Mo0[talk] 08:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to have to learn all these fancy tags before I start editing... -- Therealhazel (formerly 134.173.92.238)
Thank you for your advice. That was a first for me, as I'm pretty careful. I presumed it was a spam link that needed to be removed, but tried to check it to give the benefit of the doubt. Won't do that again. Pollinator 14:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks or reverting deletes on my userpage (twice now). --mitrebox 23:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The user 205.188.116.9 has reverted edits on the Fin Fang Foom article to include the "dragon panties" vandalism that he made previously. I chat with the actual user, and he has sworn up and down that he will continue the vandalism. Perhaps stronger action is needed.--Perceive 23:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Young boy, you did not see, because you are certainly 'enlighted' by your own convictions, that impeach you to see the facts, that mister CeeGee seems to be related to many vandalism problems.
By the way, I warned him that, as he is himself a Rotarian, he did not had to vandalize my own pages onto Rotary with his Rotarian point of view. Wiki has a neutral policy and is not the place for the damned RotaryClub propaganda.
By the way, I think that
- it is not very courageous, as CeeGee does, to give lessons without regarding the facts, AND to hide your real name and and mail address, as I do. I think that I would be a coward to give lessons and hide my identity and mail address. - you use the lama image to enlight others and hide yourself. - You do not like lama and Perou, but like your own image of yourself 'loving Peru' This attitude is not scientific and push to the growth of violence on the Wiki - you should grow and learn to have opinions onto the facts
Wikipedia User : PierreLarcin, France [email protected]
Please participate in the discussion about the introduction before reverting it to a version you like better. Bertilvidet 10:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out and correcting the Freud thing. I really only meant to add the pseudo-tag to try to get on the Bad Jokes list. I didn't mean to remove anything. Please accept my sincere apologies. I also apologize for making you do it three times -- I am on a slow connection and submitted repeatedly to try to get the send to "take". My mistake. -129.66.1.202 19:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can I please get down and leave the room, to pick my nose? Skull 'n' Femurs 20:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you've been working hard...so I stopped a barnstar by. See you. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 20:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As a new user, doesn't the 'criticism' in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitrogen violate the NPOV guideline...?
You reinstated the "criticism" part after someone I know deleted it. They were not trying to vandalize, but doesn't that part of the content seem unverified (no survey/citations) and against NPOV?
Brian
I thought you might get a laugh out of the story I put on the Payson, Az's vandal's user page. User:24.121.122.92--mitrebox 04:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Something is wrong. It looks like a script attaching the page. My protection did not work. I am not an admin so I am not sure how to use it. Gadig 22:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I notice that you have blocked User:Hobbsie permanently. His talkpage is being vandalised by User:Stuart kirby, who may be a sock. thought I shd alert you. --Gurubrahma 17:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I feel there is a valid reason for removing the electoral record, it's not relevant to him at all. It's also not on any other MP in Canada, nor any other Prime Minister. I fail to see how that is vandalism.
Nevermind, I worked it out with the said user. Tkyle 23:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, why are you deleting my articles I write? I dont see why you have deleted them "Several times" if you QUIT deleting them ill QUIT writing them again. Simple as that. I dont see what makes you think you have the right to decide what is "Relevant" as that as purely an opinion. Another thing, there are articles about Myspace.com and that is relevant? I dont get your ideology . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pentalityism (talk • contribs) 03:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. A favor por favor- Would you please block this IP Freely Phallus? It's a serial vandal who has been repeatedly warned. Gracias,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Chadbryant has for some time been the subject of sustained and deeply childish attacks, as my page of sock-puppets indicates. It may be that user TruthCrusader was involved, but he has since seemed to me to be a decent editor in most respects. Chadbryant's behaviour, on the other hand, has sometimes veered towards being as bad as those attacking him. His responses to TruthCrusader, for example, have been on the paranoid-hysterical side. I washed my hands of the whole business a while ago (my page of sock-puppets has mainly been up-dated by others). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This user has been harassing me. I call attention to all other administrators that this user is abusing his power as an admin to strike down articles based on POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreatBarrington (talk • contribs) 20:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
THIS IS VANDALISM, SO MUCH EFFORT HAS BEEN PUT INTO THAT SITE, REMEMBER, SITES YOU HAVE WILL SOON BE GONE, IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME CHECK TOMORROW, IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AND TALK ABOUT, YOU ARE IGNORANT AND YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, IF YOU DONT LEAVE THIS SITE LIKE IT THIS, HELL, WE ARE NO LONGER WASTING TIME ON THIS BS...
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page. --Nlu (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That content belonged at WDTW-AM. I was making a necessary correction.
-M Daniels
Thanks for reverting the vandalism by 82.234.48.203 on my page! Copysan 09:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you've done well to block the user User:69.105.39.132, but why haven't you removed his vandalism on that page at the same time ? I had to stumble across it, it didn't seem to have hurt anybody else's feeling... Worried, 82.230.180.185 17:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is that picture on your user page really of you? You are one ugly SOB!-RicardoTubbs 00:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A photo of the guy Dick shot in on the page I linked to.
I don't know of any other plce that has one.
132.241.245.49 00:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".
The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.
Yours, as ever, Esperanzially, --Celestianpower háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply] (message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)
Thank you for reverting some of Linkdude's changes to several Dragon Ball-related articles today. I'm sure he means well, but he keeps moving things to their Japanese names rather than their English ones, changing character names to have accent marks which don't appear in the US, etc. Anyway, that is not your problem but since you have been touching this today anyway, could you please do an admin-move of Jinzō'ningen Family Tree to Android Family Tree. Frankly, I think this page is a candidate for AFD anyway, but this is one example of Linkdude being "helpful" that I can't deal with myself. JRP 23:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4.67.39.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) regularly vandalising Aristotle is back. Could you give him another block, worth of his "contributions" here? TIA Pavel Vozenilek 21:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Llama, below is my response to Eliezer. I believe it is the only solution that will work.85.65.219.226 06:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is not much of a compromise when none of the blatant factual inaccuracies raised in section 23, 25, 29 and 30 of this discussion have been addressed. Anybody who does even the slightest research into most "facts" in this article will find them to be embarrassingly wrong and unfair to Messianic Judaism. Whenever somebody tries even the smallest adjustments to make this article unbiased and accurate, Eliezer rejects their changes and threatens to block them. I am more than willing to retain the services of a Conservative Jewish scholar who teaches at an accredited university. His expertise includes Messianic Judaism. Allow him to write an objective article that gives a neutral point of veiw. Then we should lock his version of the article against vandalism. Can we agree to that as a true compromise? 85.65.219.226 06:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please see User:PyterTaravitch. User:Chadbryant has edited that article once again to reflect his views and his views only. He has deleted the views of others on the same subject. Rather than revert it myself and get into an edit war much like the one you banned Chadbryant for, I though I'd bring it to your attention instead. tv316 00:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to concur on this. I do NOT want to get into another edit war regarding this issue and I am tired of Mr.Bryants attempts at harrassing me by posting what HE thinks is my real life information. TruthCrusader
I will make this comment. The 'name' that Mr.Bryant likes to refer to me as, is not in fact me. However, if it was, and since NOWEHERE on Wikipedia does ANY of my real life information appear, than Mr.Bryant's posting of such 'info' would in my eyes, be grounds for immediate ban from Wikipedia. This seems to be something that people 'overlook' when dealing with Mr. Bryant. Mr. Bryant accuses almost anyone who edits anything he does, as a sockpuppet of Dick Witham. The ironic thing, which I know no one here at Wikipedia is aware of, is that on the usenet group rec.sport.pro-wrestling, where Mr.Bryant regularly posts, its was HE HIMSELF who invengted the name 'Dick Witham" and who posted under that 'alias' for a long time. This can be easily verified by doing a google of rec.sport.pro-wrestling, as Mr.Bryant 'X-No Archives" his posts. TruthCrusader 20:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Again, Mr. Bryant appears to regard himself as above Wikipedia rules. It amazes me that he is allowed to continue to post, what he claims, to be my real life info (which it is NOT) and is not banned or even blocked for such behaviour. And abusing others because of their chosen screen name shows a level of immaturity that truly astonishes me. I am not the one posting basless accusations of sockpuppetry on anyone who dares to correct or re-edit anything I write. I am NOT the one posting supposed real life information everywhere on Wiki. I am NOT the one who has caught re-editing user remarks on talk pages to make it seem like they were saying something else. All of these things Mr. Bryant has done and continues to do. I wish to also point out Mel's comments that he posted a few paragrahps above.
If the posting of supposed real life information is grounds for banishment from Wikipedia than I wish to request that Chad Bryant be banned for said offense. TruthCrusader 23:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 07:16, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto ([3]). :) Thanks. Yid613 10:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Same here. Nice to know someone's got my back! =) Thanks! --† Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 20:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya, just wanted to say a big thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page! Beat me to it :) -- Daverocks (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You just blocked Funkymonkey4ever indefinitely for vandalism. There is nothing in the blocking policy that specifically allows this. The only time an account should be indefinitely blocked for vandalism is if it's clearly a sockpuppet, or is doing something horrifically malicious (page moves, etc.) Ral315 (talk) 01:40, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Several other users beat me to the gun, but thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page. — Ambush Commander(Talk) 01:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
New admin, congrats! Tan DX 06:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya, I think now moved talk page. Thanks -- Paxomen 03:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya, I have finished giving all the Buffyverse characters the same naming format where specification is needed (by adding "(Buffyverse)" to their article names) but botched these two by accidentally editing short-cuts, then it wouldn't let the 'move' function work. Could you passs over the histories?
Connor (Angel) to Connor (Buffyverse),
and
Jasmine (Angel) to Jasmine (Buffyverse)
Help or advice massively appreciated -- Paxomen 16:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so I have a question here, and I want a second opinion before I submit this as an AfD
The Drowned Baby Timeline appears to me to be non-notable fan-fiction. It's admittably fan-created alternate history by User:Johnny Pez. A google search of Drowned Baby Time Line and Drowned Baby Timeline both come up with a handful of hits, however two of those hits are the wikipedia and answers.com wiki entries, and the remainder appear to be either blog entries, submissions to short story database, and a link to a Flickr.com photo archive [4], [5]. Now I'm of the belief that while the article appears to be well written, it's non-notable. I don't want to generate any ill-will, however, and I wanted a second opinion before I submit to AfD. Do you think this should be submitted for deletion? Thanks. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 14:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reverting my Talk page vandalism. I wasn't on wiki all weekend and if not for the new messages notice and my talk history, I wouldn't have even known anything had happened. Dannybu2001 17:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Under the AfD list, I believe on the Feb. 22 page, there is an entry for Ipod Hacks (second submission) that I submitted. It was a second submission so I had to use the afdx template. Unforunately, I apparently messed it up, though it seemed to work mostly. If you could look ath the page Ipod hacks and let me know what I did wrong and how to fix it on the afdx template, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 04:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]