Archives
Archive 1 (to April 9, 2006) Archive 2 (April 9, 2006 – May 18, 2006) Archive 3 (May 18, 2006 – October 22, 2006) Archive 4 (October 24, 2006 – March 24, 2007)

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave me a message if you a question, comment, or just want to say hi. Just make sure to sign it (with ~~~~) and create a subsection for it at the bottom of the page.

Admin actions: If you disagree with an admin action of mine, leave me a message and I'll definitely look into it. If you are pretty confident that I have made a mistake, admins should feel free to revert me (just let me know).

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org?pojem=User_talk:Davesmith33"

You will notice if you removed those rose-tinted spectacles that it is DrFrench and yourself who are in fact undoing other people's edits repeatedly, without first discussing them on the talk page.

Can you tell me exactly what is wrong with the following statement: "Richard Hammond introduced a new "presenter" at the start of Series 8, a female Labradoodle named "Top Gear Dog", who is susceptible to motion sickness. However, she only appeared twice in Series 9."? Davesmith33 15:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

After concerted effort to stop the constant vandalism (especially when the article was featured on the Music Portal in February 2007) to the James Brown article, I had asked the administrators to restore protection. This article was repeated vandalized several times daily up to when the protection was restored to the article. However, I see that you removed the protection from the article? Can you provide your rationale as to why protection is no longer needed? And...on what basis have YOU decided that protection is no longer needed, since I don't see that you have contributed in a significant way to editing the article, followed the history of repeatedly restoring the content of the article, or even spent time reverting the vandalism yourself??? This significant change should have been discussed first on the talk page, where you would have gotten feedback as to why the article was protected in the first place.

In spite of the vandalism that repeatedly occurred when the article was unprotected, this article was still vandalized even by users with accounts older than four days. In fact, the article was vandalized AGAIN right after you removed the protection. Have YOU reviewed the history before removing the protection on the article? I disagree strongly with the removal of the protection and plan to reverse both the recent vandalism and your change to restore the protection a third time or ask the administrators to get involved a third time. lwalt 16:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Follow-up to previous message - We have an uptick in vandalizing the James Brown article again. As was the case before, the article was vandalized by both named and IP users (in one case, the same person revandalized the article after that person's initial vandalism was reverted). I've mentioned in my previous message, editors for this article have gone through the exercise of keep up with the constant vandalism on two earlier occasions, which necessitated protection. So, we're right were we started having to chase vandals to keep the article intact. lwalt 20:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I am getting rather frustrated by his actions. It seem to me that as he couldn't have his way over TGD, he's thrown his toys out of the pram. It seeems to me a clear case of WP:DISRUPT. I really dislike the idea of 'running to teacher' but I am sorely tempted to put it to an WP:RFC. I know as an admin you probably shouldn't get too involved where there is existing 'discussion' between you and him, but if you can put your 'neutral head' on, what has been the outcome of similar situations that you've come across in the past? DrFrench 22:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm going to sleep on it and see what he's like in the morning. If he's doing the same, then I'll go down the WP:RFC route. DrFrench 22:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Sadly since his 3RR block, he doesn't to have changed his approach, so I've posted {{rfc-ucc}} on his talk page. Hopefully he'll take note and try to build consensus. DrFrench 20:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

There should be a guideline to not submit a TV show for GA while it is still showing. The cruft levels just got too high over the past couple of months, time for another prune. And our friend Dave didn't help things either! --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 01:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)reply

After receiving complaints about the inclusion of Template:CinemaoftheUS in film articles, I have discussed the issue with Blofeld and (at least) the two of us agree that it is removed from American film articles (see also talk page). Hoverfish Talk 20:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply

I have also reduced the size of the template we think it should go in only the central /core articles only not on any film or actor articles. This is only for the American template ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 21:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Sorry for the slow reply. Thanks for the update and hard work on coming to a compromise. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 07:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Can you delete this:1? It's not even really a screenshot. I was going to try to come up with some rationale to use it in the article to illustrate the person's artisitic abilities but I don't think it will pass fair use muster. At least I don't see any way. Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 12:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply

I uploaded it by the way, in case that wasn't clear. Quadzilla99 12:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Actually I found and added a different tag, maybe you could just look it over, if you feel it doesn't merit inclusion you can just delete it—no explanation needed. Quadzilla99 12:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Great idea! I'd be glad to help out. Right now I'm writing an article in my sandbox but I'll contribute today or tomorrow. Quadzilla99 10:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Are you thinking of making it an official essay? I mean out of userspace, that way you shortcut to it through WP:FLICKR. It should be fine considering WP:FUCK, WP:BEANS, and WP:SPIDER are out there—I mean I don't personally see why it would get deleted if those essays are out there. It's certainly much more terse, straightforward, and helpful. Granted it does deal with a commericial non-Wikipedia site but only in Wikipedia's context. If I were you I would just be bold and do that. I'm still going to make some contributions by the way, just not right now. Quadzilla99 16:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)reply

You have been included as a 'related party' in a request for arbitration Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Bullying_and_Victimisation_against_Davesmith33 Davesmith33 17:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Sorry, I forgot to strike down the support vote when changing to oppose, I changed my vote because when I further checked his editing records I discovered the lack of project-space counts. Thank you for pointing that out. Happy editing! Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 23:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)reply

I'll tell you why I'm notable. I am a Novell Support Forum SysOp. There are less than 30 of these in the world, and membership is invitation-only. Such a person has to exhibit a number of qualities to receive such an invitation. To verify that I am indeed a SysOp, please visit the list of Novell SysOps2. This makes me more notable than other people, such as Sanjaya Malakar. He has an article because he's a bad singer. I have a great deal of knowledge with Novell products, I help the user community a great deal, and I have been recognized by being invited to an exclusive club. Jmmarton 02:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Hey there.

I'm interested to see what you think. In regards to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Speedies_again..., I deleted an article that you said didn't qualify for db-copyvio.

I find the CSD on it sketchy, and I wondered if you agreed. I went behind you and deleted the article as I felt that copyvios should be deleted on sight, and if a valid contest is made to myself or the Foundation the article should be restored. However, the criterion does seem to read that any sort of hang-on tag means to not delete the article.

I went ahead and deleted Moshav Matityahu as I felt as I should delete on sight, despite the hang on. I see your reason for for declining the speedy on sight, but you did not remove the speedy tag after review. I probably would have done the same in the context of the situation. So basically, I was just fishing for your thoughts on copyright policy and what you would/would not delete on sight as a matter of practice. Happy editing to you! Teke 05:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)reply

...and that's an example of how process can work :) Good stuff. See you around, Teke 05:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)reply

• I feel that when a plausible claim of permission is made, we don't need to delete on sight. In this case the article (or page as it wasn't really an article yet) was clearly copied from a website. On the talk page, the creator claimed to be the owner of that site and author of the text. This is not a case where the site was a celebrity site or a major institutiuonal or corporate site for which such a claim is highly implausable. I would have put a note on the creator's talk page, indicatign how the claim could be validated (relase on site, or email to foundation's permissions address, and warnign that the text would not remain unchanged. If the creator responded within a day or so saying that he was persuing either option, i would wait. None of that is required, but the CSD does say "and no claim of permisison is made". In this case the article would require so much claenup I'm not willing to undelete and cleanup, but I think that doing so would be proper. Of course a hangon alone is never reason not to delete a clear speedy, althouhg if the hangon was posted only a few minutes poreviously i will usually wiat to see what the creator has to say. All just my opnion, of course. Also, when deleting for copyvio, I think it is a good idea to paste the source URL into the delete reason. DES ^(talk) 22:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Hi P- Thanks a lot for your nomination and support in my RfA. Hopefully I'll live up to it- Staecker 12:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Per your request, I will delete the scanned images.

Anthony22 13:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Welcome to wikinews — n:template:hello. Happy editing. Bawolff 00:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Thanks! --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)reply

I reverted your edit of the Michael Jordan page because he, in fact, was called "Superman" (mostly in 97-98). Chicago media personalities would refer to Jordan as Superman, Pippen as Batman, and Rodman was -well, Rodman (get it, Superman, Batman and Rod-man?). It was a stupid media thing that got Jordan and the team more attention, but it was a nickname nonetheless. Search the Google News archive for superman batman rodman for confirmation. RMelon 15:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Can some start a Polish-American Relations page —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaminski Aleksander (talk • contribs).

I made a comment on User talk:TyrusThomas4lyf that I think should you be aware of, just for the purposes of clarifying the situation regarding this user, since you commented there (see the last section). Read it when you have time, he's made tons of good edits but his behavior needs work and I think he bears a little watching. Also although the other account he has is generally fine (read the talk page message) I'm curious as to why he called this his list:3 When another user started it. All in all if he could just tone down his behavior and confrontational style he could be a fine editor he has alot of solid edits, there's just a general belligerence about him that is off-putting. Quadzilla99 08:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Ok I will but I just wanted to make it clear that his behavior goes farther than just his edit history under his current username. I'll keep an eye on him. Quadzilla99 19:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Yeah, sorry about that. I didn't know what the tag was, and some were just "uploaded newer version" instead of complete replacement. I'll try and make sure that I do that from now on. Did you get all of them?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

There were others, I took care of them.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)reply

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Milo emil halbheer . Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. DES ^(talk) 20:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)reply

Zdroj:https://en.wikipedia.org?pojem=User_talk:PS2pcGAMER
Text je dostupný za podmienok Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 Unported; prípadne za ďalších podmienok. Podrobnejšie informácie nájdete na stránke Podmienky použitia.

---