Well, I thought that the pictures were showing "traditional go boards"...
Jorge Stolfi 06:51, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I am sorry about the Tank article and the Tank (disambiguation). I have corrected the mess and have come up with a nice little article on the Tank, the town itself. Hope you're content with that.
- Arun Reginald 03:39, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Haha, don't you just love it when people indignantly accuse you of monitoring recent changes? Keep up the good work! --fvw* 09:02, 2004 Nov 28 (UTC)
I'm surprised you'd create a page like Kimberly Caldwell, with the full text: hello i like your voice ! which I am now about to delete. Or is somebody else using your account to make edits? --Woggly 10:08, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi Carnildo, I've supported the nomination of Special Relativity for featured article status. Can I ask you about the issue of whether the second postulate has been experimentally verified? There seems to be some confusion on that point, and I saw you reverted another editor's change about it. Could I ask you to provide a reference? That would settle it. I've asked on the Talk page, but received no response. See Wikipedia:Verifiability for guidance. Many thanks, Slim 21:00, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
Look in the mirror and see what you are, you are a religious bigot for HARASSING Sollog by not putting correct info in his article. You must be a real pathetic person to keep calling someone by a name that insults them. Religious names are not to be toyed with. Sollog is Sollog, anyone who calls him Ennis is a religious bigot. Hi bigot. Look in the mirror bigot.
Hi Carnildo,
I noticed you put Image:Goldbergsanta.jpg up for speedy deletion. As far as I can see, it isn't a Candidate, as it isn't redundant. Also, it appears to be actually used by Bill Goldberg. And copyvio isn't a reason for speedy deletion. (Use ((ifd)) for that.)
Not that I care about some hokey wrestler, but I just thought I'd mention it.
Dbenbenn 03:25, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I wish I had sufficient math knowledge to pull off a hoax like that. Alas, I don't. So, in the meantime, don't get your panties in a bunch. —ExplorerCDT 13:32, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
What were you planning to RfC for, the disinformation, the personal attacks or both? Either way I'll support, but I can only certify for the personal attacks part. --fvw* 18:22, 2004 Dec 26 (UTC)
Replied to you regarding ExplorerCDT at my talk page. -- Dominus 03:02, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi Carnildo. You might want to augment your links with the corresponding diffs — things change rapidly on the WP, and even more so on the talk/user pages where the user has announced his intentions to delete comments coming from his opponents. BACbKA 08:33, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Carnildo, could you double-check what you did here? Billy Mitchell disappeared; there may be other problems. Blair P. Houghton 00:32, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I spotted your edit: rm ((wikify)); seems nicely-linked now.
Yes. I did a lot of wikifying, but only in the top third. I did a bit too much I reckon :-).
I also plan to do some layout etc. to what is a pretty incomprehensible rambling article. Best rgds Peter Hitchmough 20:35, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Okay sorry for that you're right.-Flyingcheese 23:51, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi I noticed that you reverted some changes in the Amnesty international page. Unfortunately, any changes entered in that section are quickly reverted by JayJg... with no explanation, except to state that all entries are POV... little by little he then reverts everything to his own version.
I wonder how wikipedia put up with this tendentious and biased character. Kind rgds Otto dia
Hi, just to let you know I asked for opinions on a sentence you restored after my most recent edit of the autobiography album - I'm of the opinion it's worth taking out again but interested to know your thoughts: see Talk:Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album). Cheers - Worldtraveller 14:44, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi. FYI, I put an equivalent bulk vote on the main listings page rather than the discussion page. -- SGBailey 09:38, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
Please don't bite me! The comment removal was completely inadvertant! I was actually working on re-inserting the comments when I got your message. I was editing through jedit you see, and as I'm a n00b at using it, that wasn't going so well. With that edit all I *thought* I was doing was adding an extra line between my comment and the next heading... apparently not. I can assure you that such atrocities will not happen in future. I'd be just as mad if someone had done it to me. I apologise and ask forgiveness. Thank you for your time. [[User:Consequencefree|Ardent†∈]] 10:14, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Your edit summary involved an odd claim, which I've occasionally seen before. The verb believe doesn't mean having unsupported faith; to believe something is to hold that it's true. For example, I believe that I'm sitting here typing at a computer; I also believe that Einstein is dead, and that cricket is a more interesting game than baseball. Those three beliefs have different justifications (the first is empirical, the second is based on reliable authority, the last is personal experience and taste), and while the first two are objectively true or false, the last is subjective.
In other words, believe is neutral, whereas judge adds a further claim about how the belief was reached. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:27, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Why did you remove Constantine Cavafy from the list of Egyptian poets and Marco of Alexandria from the list of Painters and poets and added again the insignificant MTM group that hasn't survived even a year so far!?!?
Stop vandalizing my edits without good reason; you have done it often, don't make me feel its personal! Omar Filini 12:17, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
P.S. Constantine Cavafy already has a page on Wikipedia, so I guess it makes him notable. And although for some obscure reason Marco's page got deleted. The validity of him being an artist living in Egypt has been proved on a number of pages on google search; so even if there was a close vote on deleting a article about him, it doesnt mean he cannot be on the list???
Regarding the formatting, the current version looks fine on Mozilla 1.7.5. screenshot here. Maybe you need to clear your cache? If the problem is fixed (either by clearing cache or updating to 1.7.5), post a reply at the FAC page letting everyone know. Thanks. --brian0918™ 01:11, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Editing polls while in progress isn't unheard of--ArbCom does it all the time. It can be a bit dodgy when it's an open poll (which ArbCom polls are not), so Cantus was perhaps a little bit naughty. I don't think it's a big deal. He's usually a nice chap, I'm sure the best thing to do is just discuss your concerns with him. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:34, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Could you update the Autobiography album chart image? We're three weeks behind now. I've been adding the updates into the table on the image page. Everyking 01:54, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
As you have recently expressed interest in this article, please see Talk:Killian_documents#A_poll. Wolfman 18:39, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for your recent pro-science vote on the talk page of RNA World. The anon user continues to vandalize the page however, so we've begun a RfC page. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. please see Wikipedia:requests for comment/138.130.194.229--Deglr6328 19:58, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment on Wikipedia:requests for comment/Stude62. A neutral point is always appreciated. Could you please place the same comment for user:Metheso on the page whose first and only edit is on the page above. I find it fishy but I do not want to comment since my views on who is right and wrong in the disputes on the page are well known to the other parties involved. Thanks. Rananim 22:01, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Found this: (see Feb 9, 2005) Current events in Hong Kong and Macao.
Davenbelle 09:11, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for you response on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy), Carnildo. I'd be interested in knowing more about this proxy edit precendent you mentioned. For example, would they count in a breach of the 3RR? How would I go about dealing with an editor using proxy editors? --Axon 04:18, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi Carnildo I see your Wikipedia:Descriptive image tagging proposal is very similar to Wikimedia:End-user image suppression and Wikimedia:Potentially offensive images. I think a merger and redirect might be in order. Come discuss at Wikimedia:Talk:Potentially offensive images. —Christiaan 21:17, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Because of GerardMs disruption and as one who has contributed to meta:End-user image suppression or related articles, perhaps you would like to add your comments, endorsement or otherwise to Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/GerardM. —Christiaan 15:59, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
You were kind enough to contribute to the Wikipedia:Untagged images project; I beg to draw your attention to part 2 of the project - there are about 12,000 more images in need of tagging. Any assistance you could provide would be most welcome. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)
Why have you enabled the external links on Goatse.cx that link to hello.jpg? It has been a long-standing policy on this and other similar articles to not enable such links, and provide a nowiki-version of the URL. Could you point me to a place where this practice has been discussed and overturned? - Mark 07:31, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I was just trying to figure out what to do with all those. Thank you. If you don't mind a bit more work, there's also atmokinesis. --Paul A 04:25, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your support on WP:RFA. – ABCD 03:15, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Greetings, Mark. I was counting up the votes to see where we currently stand on the vote. I'm having trouble interpreting your vote. You said: "Keep if it isn't a copyvio." The trouble is, that's a highly contested question. Some claim that the image is absolutely a copyvio; others claim it's not. Images of the same actor performing the same act have been found on pay-sites, but that exact image has not been found. How should I count your vote? As keep, or delete, or neither? Thanks, – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 19:12, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
Hey Carnildo, thanks for voting for me in my adminship nomination. I very much appreciate your support. Best, SlimVirgin 02:28, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Hi there--
Another user and I have done a rewrite of the Oh! Mr Porter! article in the hopes of making it worthy of keeping. I'm wondering if you'd take a look at the new article, and reconsider your vote to delete it . Thanks!
Best wishes, Jacobw 18:49, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Greetings. I'm contacting you because you voted to keep Image:Autofellatio.jpg, but you indicated that part of your reasoning was because the image was not demonstrated to be a copyright violation. Someone recently found the image on http://www.wowboy.com/welcome.htm, a porn pay site, with the notice "© WowBoy 2001-2004, All rights reserved". I don't know if this changes your vote or not, but I thought you might want to know. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 02:27, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
Hi. I didn't merge in the info from the other article because it smells supiciously like a copyvio, though I can't find it. RickK 05:20, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Care to explain User:Carnildo/watchlist? Thanks! --Santa's Little Helper 03:36, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I was almost positive that he was a sockpuppet of User:Everyking, but their IPs are 160 miles apart. The fact that he's asking you to "explain" your watchlist indicates some prior knowledge of Wikipedia, and his contributions so far (exclusively to Ashlee Simpson articles) indicate that he is probably not someone who used Wikipedia regularly and just decided to get an account. Conclusion: sockpuppet. :) brian0918™ 04:21, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I meant to put an edit summary (as you can see if you check the history of phase diagram when I merged in stuff), but on phase (matter) I hit the return key and submitted it, and by then it was too late. —Lowellian (talk) 09:41, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
I just wanted to mention that thanks to your undeletion of Image:Autofellatio 2.jpg, the autofellatio vandalbot was able to post it to a few dozen articles today. Good work :) Adam Bishop 17:38, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting my nomination on RfA, it failed because of Wikipedia's minority rule system, although I thought 21/8 support was sufficient. It was also cut short by 12 hours. But your vote of confidence is greatly appreciated, now let's build an encyclopedia! --Bjarki 13:51, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey Carnildo... If you're still awake, check your vote on Crescent School, the signature didn't carry over. -R
Just say your "new" sig on the Village Pump—very amusing. I especially liked how you gave yourself a featured article star and how "Talk" led to your user page. — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:34, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please respect other peoples right to have a chance to discuss their project. If you want to be sarcastic, use discussion page. Preferably I dont want to hear it. Wait for the voting and vote no if you still dont like the project. --Cool Cat My Talk 09:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I add no nonsense. All I add is in my estimate factually correct.
I do not know how "print google" works, but nor do I have proof that you have used it to retrieve the work in question.
Do you actually posess, on your person, at this time, the book in question? I find that highly improbable, and consider what you are doing nothing more than wiki-bullying me. I think you are lying and do not have the book at all. Nothing else in this article is exhaustively sourced. In any event, what i mention is on page 87 of the book. Since I have it and you dont, I consider myself more qualified to speak of this than you. It is also wrong of you to lie about this, that you could come to posess the book within minutes of this exchange is extremely unlikely.
This "print google" you mention only features public domain works. As your link itself states
"you can view the entirety of public domain books or, for books under copyright, just a few pages or in some cases, only the title’s bibliographic data and brief snippets)"
So I am forced to conclude that you are lying. You dont have the text at your ready and are lyign to me.
I do not know what you see, I cnanot in fact see anything on this page, all pages are blank or display errors. Nor do I know which edition of the book is used, if it works at all.
Well, I already conceded making an exhaustive sourcing, but I stand by the view that my source was true and my edit was factually accurate, and for diplomacy's sake I agree not to contest further reversions of my edit.
And despite this, just to be arrogant and impolite, you decide to describe the edits as "nonsense" one final time. No need to be a jerk.