User talk:Djk3/Archive 1

Thanks for catching that one in Yaoi

Looks like I missed an edit between yours and mine. Ha ha.Casull (talk) 03:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Haha, that was a lot of edits in a very small amount of time. Looks like it's done, though. Djk3 (talk) 03:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on Trench Warfare

I am the network administrator for Center Point ISD and got notice that someone from my IP address vandalized your article on trench warfare. Please tell me more about what happened because I'd like to catch whoever it was. Jody Rhoden, rhoden@cpisd.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.147.26.124 (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I added a template alerting editors and administrators that the IP address is shared and belongs to an educational institution. On the talk page for your IP address, you can subscribe to an RSS or Atom feed to keep track of any additional comments there. Thanks for letting me know! Djk3 (talk) 22:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Your VandalSniper Application

Good day, and thank you for applying to use the counter-vandalism tool VandalSniper. I am pleased to inform you that your application has been accepted, and you are now approved to use the tool. You are now welcome to download the program - and be sure to read the features guide, if you have not already done so. Please bear in mind that VandalSniper is a powerful program, and that misuse may result in your access being withdrawn by a moderator. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions, and once again welcome to VandalSniper! Kind regards, AGK (contact) 18:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Homeland Security Stoplight of Doom

I found my edit quite funny , actually. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.108.192.179 (talk) 02:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of whether it is funny or not, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Djk3 (talk) 02:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

But admit it. It was funny. Wasn't it? ...Come on... --130.108.192.179 (talk) 02:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Please practice editing in the sandbox, not my talk page. Thanks. Djk3 (talk) 02:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not practicing editing... I'm trying to have a serious talk with you! Acknowledge me!! --130.108.192.179 (talk) 03:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Peter North

Why revert Peter North? He is the best known practitioner of the act in question. 76.186.118.246 (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It just seemed silly and I assumed it was someone screwing around. You seem to be editing in good faith though, and he does employ the technique, so I won't revert again if you add it back. Have a nice day! Djk3 (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

You are not a vegan

Not one single vegan at Wikipedia would ever destroy or "remodel" so many vegan themed articles. No, buster, you are one of those disguised guys who destroy them methodically. The damage you did to the soy cheese article is outstanding and your prevalence doing so is remarkable. We will see how good you can go on with this behavior in future. Daimakaicho 06:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Which "attack"? :-D

If you feel attacked or assuming other strange things, maybe you need help from a doctor.
You seemingly cannot face the fact, that several vegan editors are trying to fix your vandalism.
But no matter what you assume, the "edits" you are trying in one of the 10 biggest and most known pages on the entire internet are not mentioned to support information, but to destroy an article, which is very unpleasant and unwelcomed for milk lobbyists.
What a weakly little jerk you are :-D Daimakaicho (talk) 07:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

sockpuppet

If you think Daimakaicho is a sockpuppet you should make a checkuser request but otherwise AGF of Reiskeks. I've left a message for Daimakaicho which i hope will help them cooperate better with other editors. Kellen^T 12:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Zeno

The nature of motion, which Zeno and Aristotle misunderstood, was explained throughly by Galilio. And all of Zeno's paradoxes can be resolved by the use of calculus. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

My edit summary wasn't clear. I meant two things. First, it's not empirical science that resolves Zeno's paradoxes; it's mathematics. Second, I'm not sure that it's such an obvious resolution to most people that will be reading the article, so it's probably not a good example in that spot. I didn't mean to imply that Zeno's paradox isn't resolved. Thanks for the response, and have a good day! Djk3 (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)