User talk:Hdt83/Archive1

NOTE: This is an archive of my coversations between users from when I first joined Wikipedia to March 1, 2007. Messages left on here will not be read or received by me. If you need to leave a message please use my current talk page. Thanks.

Re: User talk:68.149.128.165 At first sight it seems weird that i've been vandalizing my own page, but i've traced it to a user who has tunneled through my SSH to get to here. This user has been dealt with, thanks.

I'm curious, to what act of vandalism are you referring?67.189.93.116 08:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

replied on his talkpage... User talk:67.189.93.116

there are 10 people using this computer....how can u block it for the act of one person

Thank you, your courtesy is greatly appreciated. If ever I can do you a service, please let me know.

Davidkevin 18:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your message. The place I look for info about the IUCN categories is IUCN Categories. Now, the US has a bunch of places that are officially declared wilderness, so those are the ones I would choose wilderness.

As far as the specific examples -- from the Everglades National Park article:

• "Wilderness designations covered 1,296,505 acres (5247 km²) in 2003 — about 86 % of the park."

Whereas, Yellowstone's article doesn't even mention an official wildnerness designation. For the Washington site, category 5 includes both scenic and cultural/historic sites, so that is a pretty safe bet. Nationalparks 17:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woops sorry bout that. I'll fix it. Killswitch Engage

I did NOT vandalize the BayShore High wikipedia page in anyway. Everything posted were real webpages, and news articles about the contamination found at the old school that was torn down. It's relevent to the school's history, and all true and verified. Why is it acceptable for you to add a link to the school's website, but I can't add a link to the news stories about its last contaminated school grounds? Many people have died....

Replied on his talk page User talk:Envirohazard

It's fine.. I'm new to this myself. If you get time you should look at those links.. its a really sad story actually. A lot of people are dying right now that went to that high school, or have already died. The school was rebuilt around the corner from the contaminated grounds, but the damage was already done to the students that attended all those years. I know this because my husband is one of the people who died.

Thanks for your input.  :-)

Have a great day.

Thanks for uploading Image:Lynnwood high school.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What nonsense are you talking about? That wasn't my work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.251.69.193 (talk) 23:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

1. We use IP addresses to identify anonymous users. This IP address is shared by many users on COX ISP. So these messages may appear irreverent. Please ignore these messages if you did not do this. Getting an account is the best way to avoid confusion as you have your own username.

User: Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 00:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Defacing Wikipedia's articles is one thing, but insulting users, especially in that manner, is despicable. I am more than glad to help in that regard. Happy editing! Gracenotes^T § 04:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not upload copyrighted photos of schools, they will be deleted. If you wish to claim fair use for an image, it needs to satisfy the fair use criteria. For a school that anybody with a camera can take a picture of, there is simply no reason we would accept a copyrighted photo when it would be a simple matter to provide a freely licensed photo. --Michael Snow 04:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will be taking photos of these schools over the next week. --Hojimachong^talk_con 06:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hdt83. I think i made a good contribution to the Death of Superman article. Under the Adaptations section. Anyway in the future I will make good contributions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.119.27.54 (talk) 03:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I didnt change anything on wikipedia... and i dont plan to... i edit another wiki sometimes (http://www.wc3wiki.com/) but never the real wikipedia. You must have made some sort of mistake. Peace. 58.104.106.102

EDIT: No idea. Never mind lol. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.104.74.81 (talk) 03:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Hdt83! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You put up a warning about removing an WP:AFD notice on User talk:66.16.113.56 for MARKSMAN ENTERTAINMENT. However, WP:PROD notices may be removed by anyone, so a warning in this case is actually inappropriate. If this was just a mistake, then OK, but if you didn't know, then now you do. :) Saligron 01:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok. Thanks for telling me. I just thought that simply removing any kind of template for deletion was vandalism so I reverted. User: Hdt83 | Talk/Chat

Thanks for the quick revert of my userpage. Stupid vandals... Nol888_(Talk) 00:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Unfortunately he vandalized my user page afterwards but now hes been blocked. :} User: Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 00:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You recently reverted my removal of a large chunk of advertising from the article above. The material had be put in by a person promoting their website. May I ask you to more fully review your revert. Party is a continually vandalized article and I am always removing advertising and rubbish from the article. This is the first time one of my edits has been considered vandalism. But there is a first time for everything! Maustrauser 01:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. Responded on user's talk page here :Party Article Response

User: Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 01:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prove it u cumbucket172.213.184.163 00:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i didnt do it. these allegations are unfounded <3 172.213.184.163 00:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um.. excuse me? You say that I'm vandalizing, but I was putting it up for speedy deletion because it had only the context "YOURE GAY" or something. So please don't warn me when it's not warrented. Thanks. Amber 07:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, then make the disambiguation, and rewrite the information so that it's not an opinionated commentary on the band (likely written by the band itself). It really pisses me off when people post this opinionated, personal-style bullcrap on here when it's supposed to be encyclopedic.

Please don't remove/modify administrative tags, like you have done with 79th Academy Awards. You are not an administrator, and it could warrant a block from an apathetic administrator. When Lorren put the sprotect template on the page, she was semi-protecting the page. Vprotect is for full vandalism. Real96 05:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry. I thought that all the protection tags were the same and since the articles has been vandalized heavily we should use the vprotect tag. Anyway, I won't do it again and thanks for telling me, I was a bit confused on all those tags. User: Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 05:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just reverted a vandalization of your User page by someone at 75.20.202.255 (check your page history), and requested semi-protection for you.

Best wishes, Davidkevin 09:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed some people put the word talk after their user name so it's clickable. How do I do that?LIGHTLIVING 23:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied here: User_talk:LIGHTLIVING

Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right page for sending a message, but otherwise let me know the e-mail or link (I'm not very good at wikipedia, unfortunately). Regarding about the Gringo page. I would like to say that I checked out the source of the supposed false ethimological meaning and the supposed real one. I must say that all of them are just supposed theories, but the Mexican one seems to be more accurate because the closeness and the way of being used by the Mexicans. The source that probes to be a fake one doesn't mention any factor that can be deduced as a false theory. Plus there are studies in Mexico about this word and its development during the Mexican-US war in the 18th century.

The theory from the spanish author might be true or false, same probabilities. The author didn't explain how Mexicans took an old ancient Greek word to make it an adjective slang, when the language relation between bloody Spanish language and the ancient Greek is minimal (Spanish->Arabic->Latin->Greek->Ancient Greek). How could that happened if Greek is not spoken in Mexico? how could a word be borrowed in the 18th century from the other side of the planet?

I think it is totally wrong to say that some theories are FALSE as it promotes Wikipedia and some totally TRUE. I wanted to write a comment not to change the page but then I though that the changes in the pages were probably checked out by someone so here you are. That's why I just deleted the 'false ethimology' and put them in place.

Regards,

Rafu