User talk:Deflagro/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Egyptians
I can't be wrong on this one i got facr!. present day definetions for Egyptians is only for nationality since present day Egyptians consider themselfs as Arabs and its a huge vandalism to state that they are not. and this article try so hard to link acient egyptians with present egyptians wich is so hard, since the old ones are not semitic people they are hamitic and dark skinned. this is not what i say but this is factr, egyptians are Arabs. and you shud warn people who are using Wikipedia as a Poropganda opbjeckt THANKS.Nochi 15:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism
My pleasure. :) -WarthogDemon 04:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Ariakon Overlord
If you've added notable sources which confirm the Ariakon Overlord's notability per WP:SOURCE, the article will not be deleted. Looks okay so far. :) Switchercat talkcont 01:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Re. Vandalism warning
Ah this happens occassionally, I'm using Twinkle and when I click the rollback button it does it's thing without any warnings (i.e. of someone else already having reverted it) and then it turns out someone actually has somehow got in there first and made the revert. Usually it will tell me that someone's done it but it must be something to do with the timing of page loads etc.SMC89 14:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Reply
No problem. It's my boring Friday afternoon now, waiting to go home for the weekend, and reverting vandals are fun things for me. :-) — Indon (reply) — 14:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Piracy Portal
I'm not an especially active Wikipedia user, I mean, some months I don't edit at all (school, work, and life get in the way, you know how it is). When I created the Piracy portal I wasn't exactly sure who was going to help maintain it, so I figured the safest bet would be to make the featured stuff rotate monthly, that way I could show up once a month to change whatever needed changing and people wouldn't complain about the portal being neglected. I could not faithfully put new stuff up every week, but if you think you can we can change the rotation to weekly. Perhaps if all of the WikiProject Piracy crew were notified of the portal they could help maintain it as well, that way you wouldn't just be the only editor when I'm not around. --Mad Max 16:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, as the portal is set up now, the articles in queue will change by themselves. I haven't created anything for Portal:Piracy/Selected biography/August 2007 yet, but if we put in something for that page right now the portal would update itself automatically when August rolls around. But I guess that wasn't my problem, perhaps my problem is that we still need to create subpages for each queue, and weekly is a lot more work than monthly. If we are to make fresh content for every week instead of recycle stuff, we'd need to make 52 queue pages for each week in a year instead of 12 for monthly. If you're dedicated enough we can make it weekly, but that's up to you. I can only promise to be of limited help in maintaining the portal. --Mad Max 16:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Alright, then I think it would be best to switch over on the 31st week, since this one is almost over. Articles will be weekly, and each I'll implement the code so that the pages in queue will update automatically. What we'll need to do is start creating some queue pages:
- Portal:Piracy/Selected article/Week 31 2007
Portal:Piracy/Selected article/Week 32 2007 - Portal:Piracy/Selected article/Week 33 2007
- Portal:Piracy/Selected article/Week 34 2007 and so on.
- Feel free to start on those if you have any idea for the articles. By the way, for Portal:Piracy/Selected biography/August 2007, who should we have next? Who would you nominate? I'm thinking we should do Bartholomew Roberts myself. Any objections to Image:Captain Kidd (Pyle painting)-large.jpg being next month's picture? --Mad Max 17:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
-large.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
removing warnings from user talk pages
Hi. Contrary to your message on User talk:66.32.27.118, users are actually allowd to remove warnings from their own talk pages, although it's frowned upon. This policy was different at some point, and I'm not sure when it changed, but I believe the general consensus was that warnings are always available through the page history. One can assume that, if the warning was removed, the user has seen it and can be treated as having received the warning. So things like blocks that only happen after warnings can go ahead regardless of what's on the user talk page. Natalie 01:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- No worries, people make the same mistake all the time. Apparently it was against the rules at one time (I can't remember when exactly) but the consensus has since changed. But of course, no one sends out emails to every single Wikipedian when consensus changes, so lots of people still think it's strictly against the rules. It is "frowned upon", whatever that means, and can definitely indicate a user who is less than willing to actually discuss changes and abide by consensus. But I have definitely seen people either given warnings over misunderstandings, or change their ways and remove the warnings on their page. Any good administrator will check the talk page history before deciding whether or not to block. Natalie 01:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
The comment I deleted...
...on the Irish Republicanism page was my own.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.134.227.49 (talk • contribs) 21:33, July 28, 2007
- Replied here. Really? It was two different IPs. It was posted by 193.61.200.145 (your's is 69.134.227.49). If you did post this then I am sorry and everyone else please disregard the above warning. Sorry bout that, but I hope you understand why I reverted it thinking it was vandalism. If you have any questions about Wikipedia feel free to ask me and welcome! Deflagro Contribs/Talk 03:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Ariakon Overlord
Thanks for contacting me on my talk page. I suppose my "sales brochure" remark may have sounded too curt. My concern is that the website sources you referred to simply reproduced releases from the company. A reliable claim that the Overlord is "best selling," with the fastest loading mechanism, would have to be based on the finding of an impartial third party. That's why I changed the wording to state that the loading mechanism is "claimed to be" fastest. About the sales figure, is there a source that tracks sales but is not affiliated with a marker manufacturer? Another concern: "Best-selling" status changes from year to year, if not month to month. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 16:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- If the information that the Overlord is "best selling" comes from the manufacturer, then we'll have to do without it. If a reliable source is found, we still need to put a time frame around it. For example, "As of January 2007 the Ariakon Overlord was the best selling ..." marker? pistol? semiautomatic pistol? Have to be sure we're comparing apples to apples. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 13:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Nasty Girl, Inaya Day song
Hello, I'm just sending you this message regarding my Nasty Girl page. Up until this point, I have yet to find any new information about this song and I would like to let other members know that they are free to expand on my article and I will be placing a stub on my article to let the board know it needs expanding. Thank you for notifying me. --Vipers8993 01:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 33 | 13 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 34 | 20 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 35 | 27 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Re to your signing of my signature book
Ooh really? Would you mind if i used it a little on my userpage? I will change it alot ofcourse, I won't just completely rip off you. Would that be ok? → jacĸrм ( talk | sign ) 23:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks alot! I'll let you know when I've done something to it! → jacĸrм ( talk | sign ) 00:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 36 | 3 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 03:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 37 | 10 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok
I didnt leave anything on your page so dont think i did. And i am making a acoount to i wont get blocked anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.138.42 (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Gazzo Macee
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Gazzo Macee, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Leuko 14:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Francis Drake GA nomination
Thank you for nominating Francis Drake at WP:GAC. However, at this time, the article does not meet the GA criteria for souring requirements. I have quick-failed the article at this time, and you can read more about my review on the talk page of the article. Keep improving the article and consider renominating the article again in the future. If you disagree with the review, you can take the article to Good article review. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 19:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey
You are welcome. Sorry if I didn't have an authentic signature to sign it with. Speed CG 16:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Socks 01
I am currently running for admin. Click here to read my answers and vote. Socks 01 06:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 01:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Pirates!
Arrr, avast, Deflagro, ye scurvy swab :) Thank you for the barnstar! I'll add my name to the Project list, but I don't think I'll have the time (or the inclination, honestly) to help out with the Portal, I'd rather be editing articles, including pirate ones - I reckon an FA for Lowe is entirely possible (just added a new section and some more references), and I'm gonna do Lowther or Charles Harris next, or maybe get the Edward Teach one polished off.
Have you considered trying to get an advert for the Piracy WikiProject added to Template:Wikipedia ads? Neil ム 09:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
hey
will you sign mine?--Summerluvin 23:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
is at FAC. Piratey reviews welcome. Neil ム 18:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Nice Sig!
I like it, did you create it your self?--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 05:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Drake and letters of marque
Got your message, Deflagro. Unfortunately, for some reason I am not able to access the specific pages of Kelsey's book that you cited on Googlebooks. I'm going to try to find a hardcopy of it.
Not every commission from the Queen is a letter of marque, so I am not sure whether your conclusion that Drake was in fact a legitimate privateer is correct. But I'll let the Piracy section on Drake stand as is until I've had a chance to look at Kelsey and maybe some of his sources.
Pirate Dan 21:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- A royal commission may be to grant officer status and powers, instead of granting privateering rights. Even in peacetime, there were royally commissioned civil, navy, and army officers, but (according to my understanding) there aren't supposed to be letters of marque in peacetime. As of 1585, England and Spain were formally at war, so this renewed commission might have been a letter of marque. If the original pre-1585 commission Drake had was also a letter of marque, then my sources saying that a letter of marque was a wartime-only measure were wrong.
- I'm willing to give it some time to examine the sources. We can surely reach a consensus about this.
- Pirate Dan 21:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Signature concerns
It was more related to the displayed size. But looking again it's not actually that bad. Ignore that bit of my review!! Keep up the hard graft - it's appreciated! Pedro : Chat 14:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Signature page
Hiya mate...
Thanks for signing. I've signed ur page. I've been trying to add as many autograph pages to the category... you wouldn't believe how many uncategorized sign pages there were. If you see any such pages, could you add them to the category. Thanks. As for the category, It had been deleted, I dont know why. I suspect that it was because there were too few members. Hopefully that wouldn't be a problem now.
The reason I didnt sign the page was because I was just adding pages to the category... there were 30 tabs on my Firefox filled with such pages. Thats why. I'm sorry for that. Anyway, take care. Cheers Sniperz11talk|edits 19:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
The "sig banner thing"
Um, you mean the Wiki toolbar? Come to my shop if you want it.-- Vintei talk 13:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)