You've found an underrepresented area of Wikipedia. :) 68.81.231.127 10:25, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
A reminder: When welcoming newcomers with an anonymous IP address, please use a message similar to {{ anon}} as it is specifically designed to invite the person to register a new account. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:47, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi Bushy,
Argh! my computer just locked up as I was about to preview the rather long message I was writing and I had to restart it by turning it off and on a few times. I hate Microsoft! Anyway, I will try to remember what I wrote.
Thanks for cleaning up the layout of pictures I put up on the Drill bit article, looks much better. If you will look at the pictures, you will note they have sawdust on them. I am not very familiar with metalworking other than what I need for wooddorking]. However, I am prepared to participate in a woodworking/metalworking wikiproject if you want to start up the page. I agree with you that much clean-up is required, stubs need to be expanded, new articles written, duplicate articles removed and a whole bunch of stuff categorised. I have been trying to do some clean-up on woodworking articles (and metalworking ones when I run across them). The big task will be to set up a to-do list. We would also need to invite other people who have worked on articles. Also, it might be a good idea to post the existence of our project on the rec.woodworking and rec.crafts.metalworking usenet newsgroups. I am a long-time participant in rec,woodworking and stopped posting only because I got addicted to wikipedia. Anyway, go ahead, start the project & I will certainly participate. 207.189.233.198 06:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC) Ooops that was me. Forgot to log in again after the crash. Luigizanasi 06:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
I tinkered with the idea of a materials science wikiproject: metalworking falls neatly into that category, but materials science has quite a broad scope. Metallurgy is also quite bad on this site; I just noticed the lack of a spring steel, and liked it to martensite for want of a better article.
I'm kind of overwhelmed with thesis work at the moment, but I'd be happy to give some input in a month or two.
I see you wrote hose clamp...heh, I wrote cotter pin. Perhaps there should also be a fastener wikiproject? But no, that's for someone else.-- Joel 06:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Their seems to be general support for a wikiproject, but from the above two comments (Luigizanasi and Joel) my only concern would be how broad. As Joel notes materials science is a huge area, as I feel both metalworking and woodworking are. While combining them may well work, keeping them seperate should keep them better focused. Looking at the Category pages for both woodworking and metalworking shows a lot of coverage, and that's only the pages that have been tagged (found).
I feel a Metalworking Wikiproject as a start and if that proves a success with suitable support/enthusaism being shown, ie: it works! then a sister wikiproject - woodworking could soon be created with co-operation/overlap between the two member bases.
I've also found the existing material a 'little' disorganized, in fact I'm suprised you found endmill as I did a search for it before creating milling cutter, thing is I would've searched for [[End mill]] (7,000,000 hits according to google, vs 17000). That just confirms that the project need some co-ordinating.
Graibeard| talk 07:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
That's about what I was thinking... metalworking and woodworking should be separate projects, but try to follow the same goals. As to a tree, right now we only have one blanket category of "metalworking" for most of it (with the exception of welding and metallurgy)... perhaps, after building a comprehensive list of metalworking pages, the first step would be to create a category system? (both a conceptual one, i.e. "how the heck do we organize this?", and article categories)
Something like...
Oh well, you see where I'm going. I've already found problems with the above list, and it's by no means complete, but it conveys the idea. :)
Of course, this reeks of excessive bureaucratic planning, something I try to avoid...
Perhaps each article should have a navigation footer, giving the place(s) it is in the category tree, links to the main Metalworking page, links to the top-level metalworking category pages, and links to main articles in the same category? And the main metalworking page would be a brief summary of each main category, with nice alternating left/right thumbnail pictures (i.e. person using a mill, person welding, person forging, etc), and the like... oooh, shiny!
Woodworking seems to be in a lot better shape than metalworking... though I haven't looked at it nearly as much. (my skills (or lack thereof) being more with metal than wood).
But that's all for now... have to go help someone. Unless there's comments on not doing it, I'll create the wikiproject when I get back, as so far it sounds like people like the idea. Bushytails 19:04, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Ok, a crappy draftish project page is up at
Wikipedia:WikiProject Metalworking -- feel free to fix and modify it in any way.
Also probably best to move this off my talk page and onto the project's talk page. :)
Probably tonight I'll create the uber-huge-list-of-articles to paw through...
Bushytails 23:00, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Don't forget to wind this barnstar daily. -- Phroziac ( talk) 03:25, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
Please accept this Barnstar of Diligence as you always take out the trash in Wikipedia!
Take care, Molotov (talk) 22:18, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Sorry about the edit conflicts, I am so sick of people adding crap.
Take care, meep!
Molotov
(talk)
22:37, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
'Tis ok. And thankies again. and I'll keep the roadrunner picture here, too. :)
Bushytails
22:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
well, I didn't have any idea where it might have been from. If I see something I can verify as copyvio, I do it! Thanks. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 04:57, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
Well, how about that! :) Accepted and appreciated. Graibeard 05:00, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Hello, me again! =;) I notice that you've edited the section of the furry lifestyler article concerning furs' sexualities. That part of the article was originally written by me at a time when Rust's statistics [1] (which gave figures of 25% heterosexual, 48% bisexual and 19% homosexual) were still cited as a reference, so I certainly don't have a problem with an edit now that said reference is no longer used.
Actually, though, I personally don't think Rust was as far out as all that, though I'd probably reduce the "bisexual" figure a bit. I'm heterosexual, but am in a minority among my furry friends. The Demographics of sexual orientation article (isn't Wikipedia great?) gives a range of statistics as one might expect, but the estimated "non-hetero" total varies from 5% to 15%. I would be very, very surprised if as few as 15% of furs identified as non-hetero.
Having said that, "identified" is an interesting word. Furry is much more accepting of gay/bi people than most other communities, and I've sometimes wondered (damn that No original research rule!) whether in fact it's not that furs are more likely to be gay/bi than the general population, but rather that the general population is much less likely to be open about it. In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot more than 15% of people were non-heterosexual; it's just that furry is one of the few places they can say so without fear.
This is a subject that interests me, but this rambling comment isn't doing a lot to improve Wikipedia's article quality, so I'm going back to the article now. I think I'll have to remove the "likely far less than often perceived to be" sentence, though, since that's no better (without a reference to back it up) than the previous version. I like the "common perception" bit, though, since that's a fact rather than an opinion. It's going to mean a rather short paragraph, but until and unless we find some good external statistics then that's unfortunately inevitable. Loganberry ( Talk) 00:36, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
I think you got my IP wrong beacuse I didnt add anything to Wikipedia lately From 198.148.166.5 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.148.166.5 ( talk • contribs) 08:35, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. -- nixie 23:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied"
If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions. After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to:
Blank the page and replace the text with
to the article in question, leaving the content visible. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not. |
Thank you for your contribution at 2005 South Asia earthquake. Please keep it up!!! Pradeepsomani ( talk)
I will learn how to write my own info .. thanks very much for you help
AC
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article strap-on dildo, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
Great work on the strap on dildo article. As your probably aware I reached it via "Did You Know?" on the frontpage, again much positive sentiment on getting it there. I checked out the talk page, only to see accusations of trollhood and so forth. If the world was more tolerant perhaps it would be a featured article, marveled and referenced by millions, with the only accusations being that of genius. -- D-Katana 21:45, October 17 (UTC)
Hi. I like to read Talk:Main Page everynow and then, and was rather irritated at the rudeness a few other users displayed towards you. As far I'm concerned, tolerance is the best thing a person can practice. Besides, sex, like politics and religion, is a frequent target for POV, vandalism, and such, so you need to have people devoted to keeping the atricles up to a high standard. Keep up the good work, and don't let close-minded people get you down.- Sean Black Talk 01:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
On the other hand, I was extremely disappointed by your participation in the exchange on the Talk and felt it lowered the overall quality of Wikipedia. Your article is well-written. The subject matter, while I thought mildly inappropriate for the main page, is respectfully treated. You obviously had editorial support or it never would have made the DYK at all. So why did you feel you had to lobby so hard against every bit of criticism? Your refusal to acknowledge the validity of any detracting argument, your comparison of dildos to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the naive dismissal of any sort of standards as culture-specific POV all struck me as particularly insulting and juvenile. For someone so ostensibly concerned with NPOV you were sure working hard to impose your standards on everyone else. You pulled off a coup by getting this article on the main page, congratulations. Next time take a step back and let your work speak for itself. -- squirrel 14:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
I don't like Bushytails..... Just so you know.... Spawn Man 09:09, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi there,
You created a talk page for IP address 207.6.147.254 and invited me to create an account. It was on my list of things to do -- honest! But considering I had edited a few articles I guess it was appropriate that I did so. Thanks for the gentle shove.
I send this message to thank you (above), to let you know in case you should or need to remove the talk page for that IP address (since it is a dynamic IP address and someone else could have it assigned to them at some stage [in fact, other people on my local network do use this IP]), and to ask a question: Do you know if it is possible to have the contributions associated with my IP address before I created my account somehow transferred to my user name ( Lapsus Linguae)? Just a little narcissism on my part I suppose!
Hope I have done the right thing by sending you a message this way. I was going to send it through the "E-mail this user" link, but then I noticed that you had a link on your user page suggesting that people contact you this way. I have been familiar with netiquette for years now, but I can see that I will need a bit of time to figure out some of the norms in this community with its rather unique structure.
Thanks again.
-- Craig 09:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Given the quality of the information on the sloths page, I think the references to dog buggery constitute a marked improvement. You may want to have someone edit the entry whose information comes from more than Disney movies. (unsigned comment by 24.34.21.215 ( talk • contribs).)
Can you tell me how my link is not relevant?
I get it - thanks
good idea, thanks for telling me about the other template. -- MPerel ( talk | contrib) 21:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Ouch! Woah. That's the worst personal attack I've received so far. I can't help but feel a litle perverse pride, really. :)-- Sean Black Talk 00:42, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
This guy doesn't quit [2]. Frankly, your disparaging nickname is much more creative than mine. :).-- Sean Black Talk 01:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Evilphoenix mentioned it when he voted neutral. Was he referring to someone else...? It's not entirely clear. freestylefrappe 02:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I filled out the article more. -- Kmsiever 19:25, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
The reason why I deleted your sockpuppet notice from my user talk is because:
1. It is not true, you made a clear assumption that isn't coherent whatsoever.
2. Something like that on my talk page is detrimental to my credibility.
You are hurting my ability to edit Wikipedia for the better by posting something like that on my user talk. It undermines my credibility and people will be more likely to dismiss my edits. Please don't do it again.
- 71.132.159.145 00:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Hey Bushytails, I figured you'd need a place to put all your dildos now that it looks like you're becoming an admin. I've also put up a notice about JJ Johnson up at WP:AN/I. Congrats! Karmafist 20:06, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Hey, Bushytails. This little Biggie.P thing has spiraled out of control, so see JJ.Johnson ( talk • contribs). He seems to have swiped the layout from your user page, and then claimed that I gave him a Barnstar, but I ,er, didn't. I don't think he's actually Biggie, but perhaps a friend or schoolchum? I saw the discussion at WP:AN/I already, but keep me posted.-- Sean Black | Talk 20:51, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
(copied from my talk page)
Hi, and thanks for the welcome. I've learnt a lot, and written a lot in the last four days, but time spent working things out detracts from contributing, so perhaps you can answer a few questions:
Lindosland 14:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Sincere congratulations on your RFA. Just being nominated speaks highly of your dedication and contributions to Wikipedia. I genuinely regret having to oppose because I feel you've done lots of good work. I hope this experience is an overall positive for you and helps you become an even better Wikipedia editor. -- squirrel 15:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Something I just noticed : Your RFA ends on Halloween! */OoooOOHhaa!!/* :)-- Sean Black | Talk 06:34, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, but I coudn't think of any other way to say it. Either way, he (or she)'s misreprenting you by saying "animal fetish". Sheesh!-- Sean Black | Talk 05:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Isn't this a surprise? I thought I'd give you this for being you. Although we had our disagreements, you still didn't change your point of view, & for that I will respect you. Although the argument, or heated discussion if you will, got out of hand a bit, I do not resent you. Your sexual preferences are different to mine, but I don't care, who am I to judge? Everyone is different. Although I am still voting for oppose on your adminship, do not presume that it is because dislike your sexual preference. I am not expecting a reply, so you don't have to give one, I just thought it would be nice to show that we are not enemies & I'm not that mean... Spawn Man 06:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)-- BTW. Your friend mentions you live in the Pacific, what country, as I too live in the Pacific...
You're a credit to this project. Please reapply for adminship again if this attempt fails. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Please see User:Phroziac. She says she's leaving. Please tell her that things aren't as bad they seem. Thanks.-- Sean| Bla ck 00:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi there! Sorry about the results for the RfAs. As I mentioned in the talk page, I have concerns about the motivation of some of the oppose votes. I think you handled yourself commendably and will eventually make a great admin. BTW, you did great work on that DYK article, kudos! Best regards, CHAIRBOY ( ☎) 04:38, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
And further to the above, sorry for the belated reply but I've been distracted with non-wiki matters, and it will remain so for a bit longer too, you know how it goes. If I can do nothing else (articles and adding content) then a few quick reverts or edits from my watch list will have to do, especially when the server response is crippling. Be back soon(ish). — Graibeard 06:39, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Ah, the good old DMV. Smog referee's decree cost me $100 for parts I'm still convinced I didn't need, but I digress. If you want to remove the hobby tags from the R/C car articles, go ahead if you feel the category is inappropriate. Hey, and if you're into giant-scale R/C, run, don't walk to the R/C wiki!! - Lucky 6.9 05:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
That would be the R/C wiki with the black background. :) I feel your pain regarding cars. I bought a new car with some equity I cashed out of my house. Off to sell the old one...won't pass smog! Only cost $1500 to fix. Damn. So, rather than sell it, I gave it to my son. Figured if I was going to spend that kind of bread on a car, then I was going to keep it. The $100 was for two little rubber hoses on my old Mercedes 6.9 (hence the screen name). Got to set the timing to TDC and make another appointment with the ref. Joy. I can think of a lot of things I'd have done with $1600 that didn't involve car repairs.
I'll keep you in my thoughts and prayers. Hope you get out of the mess soon. As for the "hobby category" edits, I haven't changed anything since we spoke last, so don't worry about an edit war. - Lucky 6.9 19:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I read your user message today, and wanted to give my condolences for your loss! Just know, a lot of us out here care, and we're wishing you well. - CHAIRBOY ( ☎) 01:55, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't think we've met, even on Wikipedia. I came over here from an article talk page, and then I started closing tags so I could read things (the HTML tidy is off, if you haven't heard). Then I realized about your loss. Don't know how much it will mean coming from someone you don't know, but I can try: my condolences. Jacqui ★ 01:55, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
It's never easy when you lose someone close to you, and to echo Jacqui I don't know how much this means coming from a perfect stranger. But I would like to offer my hand in friendship. Extend some wikilove and just let you know that I am deeply sorry for your loss. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 06:00, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm very sorry for your loss as well. Best wishes to you and your family in this hard holiday season. — Catherine\ talk 19:33, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I am saddened to hear of your father's passing & you have my condolences. Happy New Year, (as happy as it can be). Spawn Man 04:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I must say that I found your note to me somewhat offensive as I never vandalised wikipedia or even looked at the article you refer to. It may be that every AOL user comes up the same (as we sem to be classified as multiple users) but rest assured I have not done anything untoward. ben
Furrywolf, we miss you on IRC and Wikipedia. At least give us something to know you are still alive and kicking. Gigs 18:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Anything? :-( WikiFanatic 03:07, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
No, not on here or IRC... sigh Gigs 14:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry to know of your loss and offer my condolences. I pray to the Lord to give you the strength to overcome this loss. My best wishes, -- Gurubrahma 03:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Carbide pcb bit.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{ GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ( T/ C) 17:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
What's the difference? Many technical articles (eg. Java programming language) are better suited to be posted in Wikibooks rather than Wikipedia. Anwar saadat 12:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I have uploaded images (embedded in articles) directly to Wikipedia. Is it appropriate? Or should I upload them to Wikimedia COmmons and link back to the article in Wikipedia? Anwar saadat 12:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Good to see you back. We've missed you, hope you'll stick around! - CHAIRBOY ( ☎) 04:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I love the article, and it is definitely worthy of DYK. I know this is an area of your expertise, but I do think that there should be at least a few references. I will take the liberty of adding some references. Please add a few yourself. I too was shocked to find out that there had not been an article for impact wrench. Cheers! Royalbroil T : C 13:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure that it will never fly on DYK without references (not that I have any influence). I googled for 20 minutes too. Feel free to remove the reference if it is wrong. I understand that you have advanced knowledge about impact wrenches. Do you have an book references, especially textbooks? Mine books are useless. I would love to see this article on DYK. Royalbroil T : C 22:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Writing from "personal experience" or "common knowledge" is one of the gray areas on Wikipedia. Just off the top of my head: [3] [4] [5] [6]. The last link to google books appears to contain some content that you might be able to use. Can't really help you that much because I'm not familiar with the topic, but I am uncomfortable with the article being featured on DYK—which is supposed to be a good example of new content that is well-verified and soucred—without more thorough sourcing. You still have a couple days of elegibility for DYK; if you can make a signficant dent in the referencing, I'd be glad to see it featured on the main page. savidan (talk) (e@) 23:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Although I can't be a contributor to the project (I know nothing of metal working), I would like to add a suggestion to the Drill and/or power drill articles. I would really like to know what the differences are between a power hammer drill and an impact drill. As a simple home owner, who needs to make some repairs, etc., these bits of information are important, due to the horde of power tools available, but lack of adequate info. If you can add this information sometime in the future, I would appreciate it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.118.29.21 ( talk) 20:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 00:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I was cruising through Wikipedia recently and came across your strap on page. I was shocked and disappointed by the level of intolerance and ignorance in the world today. I thought your page was very well written and is an incredibly valuable tool for anybody trying to research more about this subject. I think awareness over this subject is very important, not only for the sexual gratification aspect of it, but for safety and health as well. I am fairly new to this lifestyle and am saddened by the taboo that surrounds it. It has become acceptable for my girlfriends to talk about blow jobs over breakfast, but I'm sure heads would spin if I talked about using a strap on with my boyfriend the night before! APinkGoddess
Bride Has Massive Hair Wig Out has been kept now, just barely.
So I thought I'd drop you a note just to say that, in retrospect, I regret the tenor of some of my remarks to you during the deletion debate. While I have been on the losing side of a deletion nomination that I believed in ardently (and one that in retrospect was properly kept, since she'd merit an article now) I am very unused to having articles I've created nominated for deletion, and that accounts for a lot of it. So, in the name of civility, I apologize.
If there is anything you need help with that you think I can help you with, don't hesitate to let me know. Daniel Case 04:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for your help with copy edits. Now it reads much better :) Cheers, M.K. 08:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hiyo, glad to see you back. I was worried about you. :) Gigs 23:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Bushytails. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image ( Image:Vac-u-lock female icon NON-FREE.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Bushytails/Drafts/Strap-on dildo. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot) -talk 10:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Bushytails. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image ( Image:Vac-u-lock plug NON-FREE.JPG) was found at the following location: User:Bushytails/Drafts/Strap-on dildo. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot) -talk 10:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bushytails. In fact, there has been no other discussion regarding the category. However, I believe that there is precedent to delete user categories that serve no purpose for the project. I will not delete the userbox, and I do not believe Category:Furry Wikipedians will serve any other purpose that the userbox cannot.
I won't complain if you wish to take it to Deletion Review. However, from what I have seen, that category is also a fairly popular target for vandalism and attacks; a userbox buried deep in someone's subpages is harder for the casual vandal to trash than a category.-- §hanel 19:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I could undelete it, but I would also have to rollback a hundred edits or so, and rollback my edit to the userbox (I edited it not to automatically place people in the category) It would be a bit of a pain.-- §hanel 22:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I've been thinking about it, and I was wondering what you think of Category:Wikipedians interested in furry fandom or somesuch. I think that would serve an encyclopedic purpose, as it indicates users who probably have some expertise, not just someone who stuck a bunch of userboxes on their userpage and never edited again. It would be too much work for me, because I am dumb and don't know how to use AWB and other time-saving things (It was boring enough doing it by hand. :P). Feel free to revert me or create said category if you wish, or whatever else you'd like to do.-- §hanel 01:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
FYI I posted this on talk page as well. "Bushytails: Edits by socks of a banned user without discussion are not acceptable and a complete disregard of Wikipedia regulations. After all, what do we have ArbCom and admin enforcement for, revert paroles and restrictions, if all banned user can do is establish 100+ socks and continue editing. I agree with fixing an article and typos or English in it. But along dozen edits, the anon IP was also moving words out and changing the meanings and even removing some references along nationalist lines, without any discussion. So, unless the spelling corrections only are made, everything else should be discussed on talk page first. As a courtesy, I have even expressed willingness to work with these IP socks of the banned user to incorporate his edits properly. See below. Thanks. Atabek 00:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)"
Dear Bushytalis, thank you for this comment: [7]. As you can see here: [8], Atabek's revert was a bad faith edit that destroyed 3 hours of hard work. Again, in the talk page he is accusing and insulting me, calling me racist (because I have quoted a paragraph from the Encyclopaedia of Islam). He himself is on a revert parole and is not allowed to have 1 revert per week per article. It was an ArbCom decision: [9]. He is also accusing other Wikipedians of using sockpuppets, IPs, and so forth: [10]. Anyway, thanks for your comment. I think that someone should report Atabek to an admin, since he has broken that ArbCom rule. My edits were not vandalism, and I am not the IP of a banned user. His edit was a bad faith edit, and he had 2 reverts on in less than 24 hours.
I have opened an RFC regarding Atabek here: [12] Hajji Piruz 03:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, you do not have to write any new comment. It would be enough if you move your this comment to here (new ArbCom). Since your name is mentioned in the ArbCom and you are (allgedly) involved, you should copy your comment to the ArbCom page. Thank you. 82.83.155.124 21:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I reverted your edit. Until there's a link to the page where the image can be found (and that has information such that the license can be verified), there's still no source. Regards, howcheng { chat} 00:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I just happened to be visiting graphics tablet (I'm mostly responsible for VBTablet) and I noticed your name on the talk page. Fun coincidence, as I don't recall seeing you around until a week ago. It's a small world! :-)
On another positive note, it looks like the category deletion will be overturned. I'm wondering if we should try organizing that user community a bit more formally. GreenReaper 17:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment [13], another two sock IP addresses of User:Tajik got blocked - [14], [15]. The anon IP above actually confirmed being User:Tajik by this past comment "I am living in Hamburg...I have not signed up as "Tajik", because I want you to see my IP." [16], and then, the same is on Safavid Dynasty talk page [17] without admitting to be User:Tajik. As I clearly said on the talk page, I am ready to collaborate with anyone willing to discuss the edits on the talk page and even made this offer to the sock of Tajik. Instead the IPs are engaged in plain reverting without discussion (and today's RVs were to the detriment of quality). That would be OK, but it also happens to be a sock of a banned user. Such a blatant violation of Wikipedia rules (i.e. continuing to edit and even war while being banned), without restriction and with encouragement, will only spoil the order and editing etiquette in Wikipedia. Thanks. Atabek 22:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I like bushy tails. *swishes bushy tail* ^_^ - ∅ ( ∅), 10:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
That's the third revert by you for no reason, You have removed content going against discussions on the format of this page. 24.17.59.171 07:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm really getting tired of you blanking the Panoramic Heads page. I have referenced other pages that use the same format and there is no copyrighted material on the page. STOP this or your going to get yourself suspended from editing. What qualifications do you bring to the table about panorama photography? John Spikowski 17:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Looking for something to do?
WikiProject Furry is improving articles on furry and anthropomorphic topics, and we'd like to
have you on board.
Our current goal is to raise Anthrocon, furry convention and furry fandom to good article status and beyond - but if that doesn't take your fancy, there are plenty of other articles to work on. Give it a go and let us know how you're doing! You received this one-time invitation because you are a Furry Wikipedian. GreenReaper 22:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC) |
Hi - I saw that you reverted my change to Strap-on dildo. I'm don't think it's accurate to specify the sexual orientation of the man in this article. Men of any orientation can participate in the act described - with women. The experience of bisexual men, in particular, makes your edit problematic. I'm reverting your edit back to mine - your edit summary doesn't make a case for the current change. If you want to discuss this further I'd be happy to come to a consensus, as it stands you haven't yet convinced me. :) Popkultur 05:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, firstly, the term "pegging" is explicitly heterosexual, as said in Dan Savage's column. Secondly, it states the _most common_ use / type of pegging, which is a heterosexual couple. Thirdly, I and many other people get so bloody sick of the "anal sex = gay" stereotype, that the more places to stick the word "heterosexual", the better. The most common use of female-male strap-on sex is to allow a heterosexual male to be penetrated. Sure, some of them may be used on bisexual men, but that's a very small percentage, and isn't even in the original definition of the term. And, since without it most people will assume the man must be gay, the presense of the orientation is required for the article to be accurate. Bushytails 06:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey,
I see you are good at programming. I have a few personal ventures and ideas in regards to software I want to make. Could you be of help?
Kind Regards,
Sina —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sina7 ( talk • contribs) 05:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that you tried to restore the BOB image to Pegging (sexual practice), but had it reverted. I thought that you might be interested in this discussion and also wondered if you knew who originally uploaded the image. As far as I can see the image deletion cannot be undone, so the image will have to be uploaded. I think it is likely that the deletion of Bend Over Boyfriend will be overturned, so this image may well be needed again (if not in that article, then in the pegging one). F Mita 20:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
You and John254 keep reverting each other but I don't see any evidence of any attempt to talk about it. Don't just revert, talk. - CHAIRBOY ( ☎) 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Since admins obviously have no respect for consensus or process (such as the recent issue of closing a deletion discussion as "delete" that was 5/1 in favor of keeping, with no argument for delete and 5 well-reasoned arguments to keep), I see absolutely no point in wasting my time talking about anything. If "I get to chose which arguments I give weight to such that it matches my personal opinion" is valid reasoning, trying to accomplish anything is a pointless waste. As such, there will be no attempt to talk about it. Bushytails 02:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)