Yep, this is my talk page. Probably the most interesting discussion on Wiki? ;-)
In answer to your message: I'm just trying to be useful. I was adding a link to the EAA page because folks who are looking at the issues involved may not look for EAA, but may benifit from what it offers. As you may know, folks in the US and around the world are struggling with these issues (eating disorders).
There is often a lot of material about the problem, but not much about getting help. The EAA site is not commercial and it is about HELPING people get better. It is similar to AA for alcoholics. Peace. Bluewidow 21:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Since you actualy bothered to come and tell me you'd reverted one of my comments, I suppose I should say something. I WAS going to say that you were wrong, but you're not. I think the vampire page should cover everything, but that's another battle to fight. Thanks for steering me straight :) - Litefantastic 01:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Im pretty sure I fixed a spelling mistake..."navitgate" to "navigate" cartar
Yes, Yes I did....how did I not? Cartar..
I assume that you were talking to User:211.30.212.33. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I just saw your edits. I wanted to know what references you had, because after deleting a referenced part, you failed to source what you wrote in. -- Orbit One Talk| Babel 08:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
— Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 03:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Your claim about my blocking of schuminweb is completely untrue. I uphold WP policy, irrespective of whether I agree with it or not. Schuminweb unilaterally doctored the content of a project page to create the opposite impression to that created by its authors. He then proceeded to use his falsified version of the page to mass delete a template and replace it with the one he had pretended, through doctoring of the page, was the project template. No user can do that. He was repeatedly warned to stop. Other users asked him to stop. He ignored all calls to stop. As a result, in accordance with WP rules, after being warned he was blocked. That is standard procedure and is done by whichever admin finds it happening. No user is allowed to falsify contents of protect, naming convention or manual of style pages and then begin mass deletions on that basis. He was only blocked for 24 hours. Other users have in the past been blocked for such antics for far far longer. One some months ago was blocked indefinitely by another admin. Schuminweb was very lucky to have only got a short block for such a serious act. Falsing pages and mass deletions across pages invariably leads to a block. It sometimes leads to a request to the arbcom to ban a user from those pages. Please withdraw your totally untrue statement.
FearÉIREANN
\
(caint)
23:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Thankyou for informing me. I wasn't looking for vandalism, just was checking edits by AutoWikiBrowser
Thanks for Re-adding my changes
Reedy Boy
16:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I don't want to bring us up to the three revert rule, so I shall ask you here as well to discuss the matter. I only reverted the article twice in an attempt to prompt you to discuss the issue on the talk page as I stated in the summary.
See you on the talk page, -- RadioElectric 14:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I was just following the UN list. The UN considers the listed entities as "countries" whether sovereign or not. I have updated the intro of the article to reflect that. This is in line with List of countries by population. Polaron | Talk 19:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
The rankings for the countries (including dependent territories) was messed up. I am trying to standardize all these rank numbers. We can always get rid of rankings in the infoboxes and make these lists alphabetical instead. Polaron | Talk 20:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the list was messed up. Some were using CIA rankings, some were using the Wikipedia list, some were using some other source I don't know. There were multiple entries that were claiming to be Xth in rank. Also, I am not including just any territory. Only entities recognized as "countries" by the UN are in the list. Polaron | Talk
[2] but note that you are skirting 3RR there too... so do be careful (If I thought you'd actually transgressed I'd give you a block too, to be fair)... ++ Lar: t/ c 17:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
--Comanche cph 22:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
That's right. Comments like this is unacceptable. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Stockholm&diff=70481523&oldid=70480687 --Comanche cph 22:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Not sure why you reverted Horseshoes [3]. It seemed like the link you removed was perfectly legitimate, no? -- JanesDaddy 16:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the Swedish Prime Minister, please see Swedish Wikipedia. - Vints 06:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I'm having a dispute with a newly registered user, Nihilum at vampire. He insists on inserting this in the article. I consider it to be either OR, or an addition without a reliable source (a XIXth century archaeologist referenced by notorious believer in vampires Montague Summers). Would you care to join the discussion? -- 194.145.161.227 17:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I've just noticed that you recently left a templated userpage message. I'm just bringing to your attention that the format and context of these templates will be shortly changing. It is recommended that you visit WikiProject user warnings and harmonisation discussion pages to find out how these changes could affect the templates you use. We also would appreciate any insights or thoughts you may have on the subject. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards Daniel . Bryant 09:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Given you contributed alot early on to ghost, you may have an opirion on some proposed merges etc. Scroll down from Talk:Ghost#Merger_proposal. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 20:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)