User talk:BabuBhatt/Archive2

His Beastliness

Ohh, I don't regret it. It was great for a laugh. He's still at it too; I just saw another revert today.

Phish is a GA!

I would just like to pass on some congradulations for helping me and others make the Phish page what it is ... and now it is even considered a good article! Let's keep working towards that ultimate goal of seeing the page as a featured article! Cheers! -- MOE.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 18:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

{{Footer_Movies_Joel_and_Ethan_Coen}}

Wherever you see {{ ... }}, it's inserting the contents of a Template by that name: Template:Footer_Movies_Joel_and_Ethan_Coen. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-12 21:36

Protected your userpage

...because of the vandalism. If you want the protection removed let me know, or if I'm not around post on WP:RFPP. Ditto if you want your talk page protected as well. Cheers, Petros471 19:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Lebowski

Because you deleted the names of all the main characters and replaced it with an opinon. Unless of course you have evidence the Coen Bros. said that, in which case, it belongs in a different section. CynicalMe 21:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

My bad. Nice working with you too.CynicalMe 22:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

That '80s Show

Hey, thanks for helping out on That '80s Show article. Much appreciated! --DieHard2k5 | Talk 15:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Red Bull

Why are you removing redlinks? CRCulver 16:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

No need for you to be rude, I was asking a simple question. CRCulver 16:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

AFD

I notice that you have contributed to List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia. Would you mind making a comment against deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia? Thanks! - Ta bu shi da yu 13:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hippie edit

Hello. In your recent edit of the "Hippie" lead, you deleted "the." I understand that it might be possible to delete both "the" and "late," however to delete just one makes the sentence unreadable. In the past others have deleted "the late" together, then subsequent editors have put it back in.

I think for now I'll put "the" back in. Get back to me though--perhaps if we delete both "the" and "late" it will stand this time. Thanks. Founders4 23:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Deleting "the" increases readibility, rather than reduces it. Where did you get this notion? BabuBhatt 23:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I guess we see it differently, or perhaps "hear" it differently. Usually when I'm in doubt, I read a section out loud. For me it doesn't play without the "the," although it plays quite well without "the late." A British/American thing perhaps? Founders4 00:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI to readers, edit was

The word ''hippie'' was popularized by the late [[San Francisco Chronicle]] columnist [[Herb Caen]], who is also credited as among the first to include the words ''[[beatnik]]'' and [[yuppie]] in his daily column.

to

The word ''hippie'' was popularized by late ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'' columnist [[Herb Caen]], who is also credited as among the first to include the words ''[[beatnik]]'' and [[yuppie]] in his daily column.

This is a syntax commonly used in English-language magazines, newspapers, books and encyclopedias. Much like the word "that", "the" can often be removed to increase readibility by reducing clutter. I have no desire to argue, but take note of its use in various sources. BabuBhatt 02:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

RCU

I thought you might like to know that LUCPOL submitted your name with a list of what he believes to be sockpuppets to WP:RCU, here. --Wildnox 23:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Please use edit summaries

It will make it easier for other editors to use Wikipedia if you use edit summaries when you make contributions. Thank you, Lamont A Cranston 23:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you got my point. Please see Help:Edit summary. It is recommended that anytime an editor changes a page, she enter a summary of what she did, so that others can easily see how a page has changed. Thanks, Lamont A Cranston 23:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Haha, no problem. I'm from Alabama originally, now I live in far Western Kentucky. 23:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Oscar Nunez

You may be interested in the proposed move at Talk:Oscar Nunez. Gene Nygaard 16:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Tucker Max

Can you povide a link to the trannsexual part on the message board? BabuBhatt 02:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I haven't had time to provide the link but the admission about the midget and the transsexual are both on the message board. I have already provided a link to his claim about the post-op in the meantime. Keep in mind that there is much in the article that is not properly sourced, including the midget bit. But these are well known facts about Tucker. Unfortunately, the man is often drunk and makes wild claims on his board, so whether he is talking about having sex with midgets, transsexuals, amputees, or women in wheelchairs, it's impossible to tell whether he is telling the truth or just talking out of his ass. But I believe every notable remark should be included to provide additional context, of course. Nice username, by the way. :) Ertyuew 04:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty fishy that you claim the whole transsexual bit is right there on the message board, yet you can't cut and past the link right here. Have you not seen it yourself? BabuBhatt 04:08, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Fishy?? If you think that's fishy then you should remove most of the claims Tucker has made about himself in the article. I've already added a neutrality template. Maybe a cleanup template should be added as well. Like I said, I don't have the link saved in my bookmarks. But I find it interesting that this is well known about Tucker, as with the midget claim, but yet no one had a problem with the midget sentence or any of the other bits in the article. Yet when it comes to Tucker admitting he has had sex with transsexuals, suddenly it's an issue. As I said, I've already provided a link to the post-op remark, the pre-op one is forthcoming. Why don't you help and look for the midget source as well? That is, if you're interested in NPOV and not just being a fanboy of Tucker. Ertyuew 04:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The midget thing was widely reported in a blog entry here. You said "it is his proclamation from the forum," in an edit summary. You say "But these are well known facts about Tucker" on my talk page. If it is on the forum and a well known fact, how is it not simple for you to cut and paste the link if you have actually seen it? Fishy.BabuBhatt 04:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Apologies

It wasn't my intention to remove content from the Mike Gordon article. I had actually built/tested the infobox on my own talk page to see if it looked right. I then ctrl-C'd it. When I went to the article I got curious about the constant "User Sega/IP sock 68.112.25.197" rv of the arrest section and just started browsing backwards. In my error I accidently hit "edit this page" on an earlier version to insert the infobox...a major goof I didn't pick up on.(I normally proof read any major edits/additions) If you could assume good faith for me I'd like to take another stab at it...hopefully wih a larger image(the musician infobox template is a little finicky with images) Good Day and again sorry for my blunder. Fair Deal 16:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

MC Mystic

The reason I gave was category a7 (musician with no assertion of notability). It could also have been a1 for lack of content. Feel free to recreate if you can establish this artist's notability per WP:MUSIC. NawlinWiki 21:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Sex Pistols

You placed a keep comment in reference to this article on its talk page. I assume this is in reference to the FA review. You should comment here, if you want it to be kept or removed. Cheers,

Removing semi-protection

Hi. I've removed the semi-protection on your talk page. I know that vandalism of talk pages can be a problem, but it's important that users be able to be contacted by newbies with questions and concerns about things they don't understand. I hope you understand - please feel free to contact me with any questions. Phil Sandifer 19:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

You have been invited to join a new project

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennywise/Invite Alex 22:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Spree of IP edits on Led Zeppelin

I noticed you're keeping tabs on that article. The IP that's doing wholesale changes has been rv'd many(too many) times in the past. In a complete disregard of all Wikipedia policy(WP:CITE, WP:NOR etc) and guidelines like WP:MoS, he continues on his merry way adding incorrect info, content that been discussed on the talk page and deemed unimportant/superfluous, dab links, dab links, dab links... It's getting to be quite frustrating. Trying to copyedit behind him seems to be a lost cause(as your last edit shows....he basically rv'd back to his own version..slightly altered) It's not vandalism(which he's been blcked for) but it is editing without any regard for rules. Any thoughts? I am not going to bother any admin/friends for this. Surely some sort of reasoning can be put forth.(although so far that has been a bit of a dead end). Cheers and take care! Anger22 22:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

The Office (Characters) edit

Thanks for fixing up my edit on the The Office page. I figured at least some of my revamp would be sub-par; I appreciate your dilligence in correcting it. Regards, Rahzel 05:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Office season 3 summaries

It seems you do a lot of editing in the season 3 summaries for The Office. I find they are too detailed, almost a novelization of an episode. They should be left as summaries

Just a thought

Re: Office Summaries

With spelling and grammar, the summaries are top-notch. They just go into too much detail. For example, a ton of Dwight's lines are quoted within the summary and they don't need to be. It almost reads like a story instead of an article.

The trivia is great.

I think a good example is the current summary of Diwali. It's much shorter, no or few quotes (from my last viewing anyway), and it still generally gives the basic synopsis of the episode without giving a play-by-play account.

That's my thoughts on it anyway

Re: Office Summaries

Yeah, but in the end, wikipedia is not a fansite either. It's an encyclopedia. I love the show, but I don't think the summaries for The Office in Wikipedia is the place to show people its humor. I feel that makes it biased, and people who edited on the page have not said anything so far because they are hardcore fans, too. I just don't want fans to get carried away with the summaries out of love for the show, that's all

BMW userbox

I have just created a BMW userbox, give it a look:

Code	Result
{{User:Porsche997SBS/Userboxes/User BMW}}	This user loves BMW.

(the little BMW in the box is actually a 5-series) --Porsche997SBS 02:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure to create it.--Porsche997SBS 01:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Steely Dan

I know this could be considered spamming, but I couldn't help noticing that you have a Steely Dan userbox. I am trying to start a Steely Dan WikiProject and was just wondering if you were interested. Come to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Steely_Dan to sign up and visit the WikiProject-to-be's temporary page here. NauticaShades 16:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)