User talk:Seb az86556

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dicklyon (talk | contribs) at 23:53, 9 January 2011 (→‎"The"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

earlier on this program...
(archives)
(+)

2013

12285
  
january 2013
8185
  
february 2013
18650
  
march 2013
6264
  
april 2013

If it says what I'm guessing it says...

I don't get much of it, but could you read this and give me your one or 2 cents? thanks... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 15:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's on the US of A, literally "Land of the Americans". It calls itself a stub article, and indeed, it is. It gives a brief rundown of the history, starting from the point that today mainly descendants of European immigrants lived there, who had exstinguished most natives, had held deterred Africans as slaves, had become rich from their labour. While not doing that any more, they were still the richmost land on earth, ruling some other parts of it by forces of economy and occasional wars mostly now in Asia. Its inhabitants regarded themselves the most important folks somewhere between god and the rest of mankind and certainly above the pope (here you have to know that this is somewhat reminiscent of several local stories and legends and carries a connotation of self-irony: Hey, they can be as bold as we!) They called themselves Christians but their "pope" was called "president" and elected in a somewhat democratic looking way, where one needs huge amounts of money to spent to have a chance. Last, a superficial parallel is drawn between the "old world" role of the Roman Empire which brought culture "to us", and the current role of the USA in the world. That's about it. Greetings --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 19:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... that sounds a bit tuned down from what I understood... I trust you think that stuff is OK to write... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's (imho) at the brink of deserving a "not objective or impartial enough" QA sticker. Since we have no writers taking care of those on a regular basis, I've put it on my agenda to improve the article adding simple base facts on the country at least. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 03:30, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you; unfortunately, I am only fluent in Afrikaans, so I find myself unable to write anything in Kölsch, though I understand quite a bit. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just the opposite with me :-) I am fluent in Kölsch and reading Afrikaans pretty well, regarding the fact that I never learned it, but am unable to write or speak it. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want to hear that why do you remove the correct information. My information about the voting result and immigration process are true, but you comment it is destruction. Currently the DREAM Act aritle is not the voice of all in the Wikipedia:Twinkle because I add the information. Also What you do mean "nope" on your editing comment? Woonhocho (talk) 07:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Partial revert; please provide references, and write better English. thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:30, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My edit of Arizona

How do you think that a edit that says "THERE WILL BE A COUP AGAINST JAN BREWER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT IN THE COMING MONTHS"is a good edit.TucsonDavid GOD BLESS THE U.S.A. 11:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. You tell me, since you're the one who made it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 11:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I see you Can't or won't give a straight answer.TucsonDavid GOD BLESS THE U.S.A. 11:52, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How is that not a straight answer? I gave you the diff, the diff clearly shows vandalism. Next time, look before you leap. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 11:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it was not vandalism per se I admit I was wrong I'm guess I m to tired and when I saw "THERE WILL BE A COUP AGAINST JAN BREWER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT IN THE COMING MONTHS" and a ip edit i guess I hit revert a little to fast. We both forgot to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith, well sorry will be more careful in the future.TucsonDavid GOD BLESS THE U.S.A. 12:11, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would've assumed good faith if this had been your first screw-up; it wasn't. Your "mistakes" are numerous. You alone are responsible for your edits, and cannot hide behind some good-faith stuff anymore. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 12:15, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Had you told me of my error I would of reverted my edit I may not be a editor with 1000's of edits but getting alot better but I don't think I have made tons of mistakes.TucsonDavid GOD BLESS THE U.S.A. 12:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Seb

Thanks for your help at my user talk. See ya 'round Tiderolls 04:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Careful with using 4im right off...

...I got a talking to for using one the day before. Unless it's a sock or something. HalfShadow 04:39, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Obvious IP-hoppers, a.k.a. socks Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
S'alright then. HalfShadow 04:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the "talking" you received? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here. HalfShadow 04:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User not attacked

He called me names, it's the other way around. Your good ol' boy system is coming to an end. You are all being recorded and reported for Wiki improvements and reconsideration of free editing. Be careful. I'm out! Oh, and mind your own business. If anything, he should be warned. I was harrassed, I was attacked. Leaving warnings on my page to make me look bad and create a consensus to block me is very immature. How do you know the creator of Wiki doesn't come on here to see how you "show boaters" are behaving?? You "chill". 63.131.4.149 (talk) 05:07, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're Jimbo, I suggest you put that bottle away and get some sleep. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Time

r.e. this. Time Will Say Nothing == Insideintelligence, he had a name change a little while back due to it being the name of a company. Just so you know --Errant (chat!) 10:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know; but he cannot change/remove other people's comments in the process.. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 10:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry I missed that. Too sleepy this morning :) --Errant (chat!) 10:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ossewabrandwag

Hi Seb az86556, I was working diligently yesterday on cleaning up the article title, etc of Ossewabrandwag as per WP:AT. Today I notice that someone undid a good faith edit that I preformed with the comment: "needs def-article". [[Ossewabrandwag]] >> The [[Ossewabrandwag]]

Have you read the following regarding the use of definite articles in an article title, WP:DEFINITE:

Avoid definite and indefinite articles: Do not place definite or indefinite articles (the, a and an) at the beginning of titles unless they are part of a proper name (e.g. The Old Man and the Sea) or will otherwise change the meaning (e.g. The Crown).

Can you please provide me with the section of the WP:MOS supporting the effort to put the word "the" in front of every Wikipedia article --or-- a citation proving Ossewabrandwag's formal name includes "The"? --Hutcher (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This applies to titles, not first line of text. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 23:52, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The"

I reverted your "The" removal at the MoS since I found your statement hard to believe and you didn't cite the evidence. Dicklyon (talk) 23:45, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see you were just being WP:POINTy. Don't. Dicklyon (talk) 23:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]