Gsgeek540

RE:That's Why God Made the Radio

Well, I have't reverted anything on the album page That's Why God Made the Radio. yeepsi (Time for a chat?/OVAR 9000!) 17:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Whoop. I meant to type That's Why God Made the Radio (The Beach Boys song) 100% my mistake. An edited version has been posted on your wall Gsgeek540 (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

BB 50th tour

Thanks for fixing that - I obviously had not re-read my edit based on how many times "appear" appears! I was focusing on fixing the convoluted wording and that last sentence and must have been tired! (Have you seen them on this tour? It is fabulous.) Cheers Tvoz/talk 07:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Cheers! Can't be perfect all the time! I will be seeing it in Calgary! Look forward to it! Gsgeek540 (talk) 18:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

CGY

I'm not a big fan of your tone. I did realize that I forgot to cite the pages from which I retrieved that material. A stupid mistake, but one that happens when you're distracted by real life. I'd appreciate it if you'd kindly drop a reminded to others who make similar mistakes, rather than condemning them as vandals. I've been editing wiki for 8 years (6 on this account alone), and I think my track record proves otherwise. And I do hope Iginla stays put for the rest of his career.Mr. Vitale (talk) 16:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I can assure you that no "tone" is intended rather a reminder of the high standard of authenticity and expectations for editing these pages. The terms and conditions are clearly indicated and you, as well as all humans are not perfect, and therefore, must be reminded of them from time to time. The message that was posted on your wall was a template that several users use in this circumstance and i will continue to use it as it is a blunt for effective reminder.

As for the vandal comment, several bots see not having an edit summary on a major edit to an article as vandalism. It's more efficient to appropriately correct the mistakes of the user and send them this reminder then having a bot fish out their mistake, deem it as vandalism, deem the user a chronic vandalizer(sp?) because they have done it 20 times in a day and potentially have a valuable and resourceful users account and/or IP suspended from editing. I've seen it happen to way too many great users.

As for your comment for how long you have edited on wiki, as clearly indicated on my homepage, time is just a number and that means nothing to me. I have been here since 2005 but no one cares about that. It's not about how long you've edited for but more important what you bring to the table and how accurate your information. Users don't read your articles asking themselves "i wonder how long they've edited for", but more importantly "i wonder how accurate they're information is for my essay".

In regards to Iginla, I am here to edit pages, not have a personal conversation.

Gsgeek540 (talk) 16:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Some people aren't very good at being nice. It's great to know that you're one of them.Mr. Vitale (talk) 17:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I am not here to be nice or make friends! I am here to maintain a high level of authenticity editing Wikipedia articles. Ultimately, I prefer asshole, but if holding a user accountable for their actions and reminding them about the terms and conditions of editing articles makes me an asshole, then nominate me for asshole of the year. Like I have told several users, "Wikipedia isn't for everyone. It's not as easy as typing words in a box and calling it an article. If a cook can't take the heat, don't come into the kitchen and leave it to the chefs"Gsgeek540 (talk) 17:22, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, what a "refreshing" attitude. You remind me of my graduate school professors. No concern for the individual, no concern for cordially working to address issues (keeping in mind that I never denied that I made a mistake). Instead, you are eager to jump at others when you see their faults and failures. You seem to be one who would fit well in the corporate culture that I so loathe.Mr. Vitale (talk) 01:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

My number one priority in sending out that message is for the users sake. Like I said, I hate seeing valuable and resourceful users, like yourself, lose their editing privileges do to bots. Like I often tell people in related situations, "it's better you hear it from the harmless cat then the cougar that can do damage." If i didn't care about the individual, I could have just as easily let you fall but I chose to hide your mistakes, that every human, myself included, make, and kindly remind you of the potential after effects it could cause.

As for your comment about the corporate world, i spent 3 years working in the corporate world. Owner/Franchisee/Director of Operations/Director of Development for a restaurant group in Canada. I got the hell out of there as soon as I could and will never go back. Besides, I love people and dealing with people in a customer service or employee service kind of role like I am right now.

I understand your concerns, and I feel that, with your last messages, you see how I am thinking as well. Let's bury the hatchet, eh? Mr. Vitale (talk) 22:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Ballad of ole Betsy

Not sure why you need to post the stuff about next time I edit it will be considered vandalism. I have added most of the song updates to the page including this song being soundchecked. The song was performed last night so I removed the little comment about it being soundchecked since it now has been done live. My mistake I guess in not adding that but it did make it's debut on 5/26 with Scott Totten on lead vocals. http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,13128.0.html Jason1978 (talk) 17:26, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's a template message that users made based off of Bots actions....they have a few right now that deem any edit of more then 200 characters without an edit summary vandalism. There are a few users that didn't have an edit summary for 5 pages and had their account and IP suspended from editing...just a blunt heads up because these bots are not too kind. I'm glad that Totten still has lead on it! *listens to 2011 performance right now* Gsgeek540 (talk) 17:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

interesting reading ;/

...on this page. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 22:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Again, I have no further comment

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)