User talk:ScottyBerg

Your question to Kim at my RfA

I believe Kim was referring to User_talk:Sphilbrick/Archive_2009#Tendentious_editing.

Admittedly not my finest moment, but I didn't appreciate the accusation. I wish I had responding more calmly. --SPhilbrickT 19:51, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'm interested less in that exchange than in the underlying sentiment behind it. ScottyBerg (talk) 19:52, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

There is no doubt that this wasn't the finest moment from Guettarda - and it wasn't the civility or tone in the exchange that i'm referring to - but rather the rationale given by you. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 19:56, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to remove the above if you think that it shouldn't be here. It is not my intention to discuss - but just to clarify :) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 20:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

NYC Subway Graphic

I agree that is duplicative, but it does provide unique information useful to Wikipedia users. It adds information (sorting by express and local lines) that is not featured elsewhere on the site. Taylorluker (talk) 17:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)taylorluker

Best to discuss this on the article talk page, to get a wider sampling of opinions. ScottyBerg (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

East Harlem

The Italian Harlem article correctly illustrates my point and there is no reference that supports the assertion that the remaining Italian Americans are living mostly on pleasant ave, the ones who stayed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jammin566z (talk • contribs) 14:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Then the thing to do is to remove the Pleasant Avenue reference, not the entire reference. ScottyBerg (talk) 14:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Tony, they destroyed the article AGAIN

I see. However please refrain from removing the "See also" section, which is my concern, since all Puerto Rican related bios. have adopted it in their format. Tell the Ip or the creator of the article, in his talk page, the same that you told me and invite him/her to discuss the situation. Take care. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The creator of the article is an indef blocked meat/sockpuppet of the subject of the article, as is, probably, the IP that recently materialized to canvass. I am sure that he/she is perfectly aware of my post to your page. ScottyBerg (talk) 01:30, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I left a message on my "talk page' to the Ip to take up the issue here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. As for myself, my time is now very limited due to personal family and health issues. Thank you once more for your proper interaction with me. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree that administrator intervention is urgently needed. ScottyBerg (talk) 02:54, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

its a sock farm

Hi Scotty. I do totally agree with you, seems like it is one single person and it was the same user that created the BLP attack on the political opponent of Dennis. I was just looking at some way to move forward if they were prepared to stay in one account and edit within policy .. but the attack page was one of the worst I have ever seen.. .. well done to you for sticking with and working on the report, it is still open and does seem to be now waiting for admin to action the report .. best regards and thanks for your work there. Off2riorob (talk) 01:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, ScottyBerg! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 03:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Don't move talk page comments

As you did here.[1]. Comments do not have to be in strict chronological order, and you are not to move them.ScottyBerg (talk) 21:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me, but you squeezed your comment in my reply to another user. The reason we use indents in Wikipedia is to control the flow of conversation in a chronological order. If you are replying to a specific editor, and its out of order, note that the comment is directed at a specific person by stating such. You can even use bold text , ie:

To ScottyBerg: I disagree with your method of approaching user disputes, etc.

That is how it's handled in places like AN/I topics, or other lengthy conversations. If you'd like to consult with an admin on this matter - as you seem to be unwilling to take the advice of someone with almost 30,000 edits and 6 years of experience - please feel free. If you refactor my comments after this notification, I will report you to AN/I for disruptive and tendentious editing.

Btw, I am now watchlisting your talk page, so we can continue the conversation here, instead of my usertalk page (you will recall that I invited you not to use such during our previous exchange a few months ago. As your behavior shows no signs of improvement, I see no reason to reevaluate that decision). :Thanks for your time. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)