tcapelle/kaggle-toxic-annotated-filtered · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 6 5k	racial_origin int64 0 3	gender_sex int64 0 3	religion int64 0 3	ability int64 0 3	violence int64 0 3
You You already pulled this persecution and threatening crap once. I don't care what you say, you're just a thug. Got it?	0	0	0	0	2
How about you do it? I simply asked because I had no time, had no experience with how to handle this kind of information on Wikipedia. Stop being smartass if I asked why anyone hasn't ALREADY included this information even after such a long time.	0	0	0	0	1
Top Model Pedrictions My Prediction: 6th place: Lauren 5th place: Marvita 4th place: Claire 3th place: Fatima 2nd place: Katarjenna 1st place: Anya	0	0	0	0	0
Oh, and just one comment. You added a comment to the page Talk:Swiss franc. At the same time, you removed, probably by mistake, a series of comments made by other people — I have restored the missing comments now. All the best,	0	0	0	0	0
" What dont you understand Dreadster, all the explanations, discussing and EVENTUAL ruling is in the talk page of the European football records page, do you not understand English. There was countless weeks of arguing about the fairs cup then and it was finally agreed that it would be included, saudi999 obviously hasn'ta a clue. So i suggest you go back and read the talk page of the EUROPEAN FOOTBALL RECORDS page and see all the arguing and eventual ruling, then revert it back. WHY HAVE ANOTHER POLL WHEN IT WAS ALREADY DECIDED. Now please revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadiga09 (talk • contribs) What I do understand is Wikipedia:Civility and how to communicate with other editors, something you seem to be having difficulty with - so much so that you have been disruptive on the articles with your edit warring, and also on the talk pages with your communications like the above - if you bother to communicate there at all. This places you in the position being blocked, so I'd advise modifying your behavior before that happens. † "	0	0	0	0	1
"== De Livera == Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. (talk) "	0	0	0	0	0
I don't know that I agree; I think many areas of alternative medicine are actually quite rational, and in any case they are often truly complementary in that they address areas traditionally overlooked by mainstream medicine. Those areas are obviously meaningful to a lot of people, as the popularity of alternative medicine attests. I think it's also a useful indication of the areas where mainstream medicine is failing to meet peoples' needs. I've been around long enough to know that there are more things in heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in my philosophy; after all, you can hardly go a day in the clinic without seeing something that defies textbook medical explanation. That said, there is certainly a continuum of alt-med which encompasses an awful lot of snake oil. There's a lot of money to be made and practically no regulation, which is a bad combination. And I do have very little patience for people who rail at Big Pharma (which, for all its nefarious deeds, is at least on some level accountable, subject to regulation, and required to prove its products actually work before selling them) and then turn around and hawk their utterly unregulated supplement blend. '''''' Talk	0	0	0	0	0
. I created the page BEFORE the 'Wikihelpdesk' gave their advice.	0	0	0	0	0
I also want this as a picture, and I also want a map of the location! Please help someone! http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/4180685.jpg	0	0	0	0	0
Which website i added a hindu link also( )	0	0	0	0	0
" Not a terrorist... I came to this article via [List of terrorist incidents in the United Kingdom] which mentions Copeland in a sub-list of ""terrorist-like incidents"". Does anyone know why this guy was charged with murder and not terrorist offences? "	0	0	0	0	1
09:37, 1 February 2009	0	0	0	0	0
" If you look at File:Stephania 1.JPG now, you will see that your originally uploaded image has already been deleted ""del original (non-anonymized) version, for BLP concerns)"". Wikipedia is fast with such things. "	0	0	0	0	0
Such a theory, in fact pure POV, show obviously a bad knowledge of French and Occitan linguistics.	0	0	0	0	0
I've found a source for nine fatalities in 2006. I'll edit the article later.	0	0	0	0	0
" If someone enters ""Twins"", there is a good chance that he/she is looking for something other than Minnesota Twins. Possibly something in film, TV, or music. Actually, as the hatnote is currently laid out, that reader must go to the very end of the hatnote, so it makes just as much sense to move the ""Twins"" DAB link so it appears before the sports link. Or for that matter, I'm fine with moving placing ""For other uses, see Twins (disambiguation) or Twin (disambiguation)"" first in the hatnote, followed by the baseball team. But in any case, I see no evidence whatsoever that most readers who enter ""Twins"" are looking for the baseball team. We had that argument in the previous debate with no convincing evidence that applies to Wikipedia (not Google) readers. "	0	0	0	0	0
, although that action does not appear to have been completed. Please post an update when the block is no longer active. Thanks	0	0	0	0	0
" File:The Big Bang Pop Sculpture.jpeg listed for deletion An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Big Bang Pop Sculpture.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. "	0	0	0	0	0
Why are you removing these things? Have you nothing better to do? They are genuine fact. You are doing this because of the McGeady jest. I was just showing a friend (Rangers fan) that you can edit wikipedia and I was going to remove those comments after.	0	0	0	0	0
"==Edit Warring== You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Constitution of Massachusetts. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:283:0:F00:410C:E87:42EA:3BE4 ""Warning/Threat"" Reply why are you attacking me at "	0	0	0	0	1
" You had left me the following message last month ... ""How do you do that script assisted date thingy? - (contribs) "" "	0	0	0	0	0
Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2014 Height = 5 ft 11 1/2 (1.82m)	0	0	0	0	0
Interesting, isn't it. This is the third person I've found who is blocked for merely citing UK law. Maybe these people think they are above reproach?	0	0	0	0	0
EFFIGY STUDIOS Sorry to report this, but according to the Michigan Business Lookup website. Eminem is NOT the owner of Effigy Studios. A Thomas W. Johnson is listed as the owner. See here.	0	0	0	0	0
, 4 October 2010 (UTC) List of people from Ukrainian lands is a content/POV fork of List of Ukrainians. That is not allowed. 22:43	0	0	0	0	0
" I really don't know and admit my sample size is small -). But I do believe their approach isn't satisfactory as a core foundation for the ""treatment"" section in an encyclopedia. Even if they reliably did good work, their output is not directly relevant to ""how is this disease treated?"". I think we forget that is the primary question. The ""why is this treatment recommended?"" is a secondary question which ultimately leads to the ""what evidence is there that it is effective/safe?"", along with ""is it available in my country?"" and ""what are the side effects?"", etc, etc. But sadly it seems WP medical articles are not written by people asking reader-questions in order to guide what to say. They are written by non-experts surveying the handy output of PubMed and collating a bunch of factoids they don't fully understand. In fact, that approach sounds just like the one done by the volunteer authors of the Cochrane ketogenic diet paper, who are district hospital doctors with no clinical experience of the subject. I managed to avoid your cold through my regime of mega-vitamins, herbal tinctures and homeopathic bath salts. -) °Talk "	0	0	0	0	0
Incosistancy in International appearances In the information box on the right hand side it says he got 31 caps and 9 goals while information in the article states he started for England 17 times and made 16 substitute appearences...that suggests 33 caps? Could someone sort this out?	0	0	0	0	0
HI I HATE TURKS A LOT, MAYBE ONE DAY THERE WILL BE A WAR BETWEEN GREECE AND TURKEY, I CAN GAIN BLOOD VENGEANCE AGAINST THEM THAT WAY, REVENGE WILL BE SWEET. BTW, I LIKE GERMANS, THEY ARE GOOD PEOPLE. I HAVE MET MANY GERMANS WHO HATE TURKS LIKE ME, THEY DONT WANT THEM IN THE EU.	3	0	0	0	3
Thanks x 73 I wasn't going to send thank-you cards, but the emotional impact of hitting WP:100 (and doing so unanimously!) changed my mind. So I appreciate your confidence in me at RFA (even if it seemed redundant to you), and hope you'll let me know if I can do anything for you in the future. Cheers! 'blis	0	0	0	0	0
" INDIA ZINDABAD INDIA ZINDABAD ! DBACHMANN MURDABAD Dbachmann, you have been constantly putting anti-Indian remarks. Please don't do it. Just like we Indians drove away the British from our lands we will drive you away from Wikipedia if you insist on your anti-India racist rants. INQUILAB ZINDABAD !!!!! DBACHMANN DOWN DOWN DOWN !!!!! "	3	0	0	0	2
"do any change to a picture in the Image viewer of Windows the changes are automatic saved with No alternative! @ I beg them to solve it or at least give us the alternative Excuse my English (talk me) It's already mentioned at Windows Picture and Fax Viewer#Known issues. Compatibility Paul Thurott has written an article about compatibility issues with the Beta, which makes me doubt the final release's compatibility. Removed Features _/\|\_I don't know why the Removed Features section claims that the classic start menu and taskbar will be removed. Nor do I know why the Inkball game is supposedly removed. This section cites no references and these claims are the most questionable. I'm not sure as the the reasons as to why they we're removed but I can tell you that Ink Ball is not found anywhere in the beta release, I'm not sure about the classic start menu and taskbar, i don't see an option for them but I didn't look all that hard Inkball only appears in Tablet Edition windows products. Is there a tablet addition of the Windows 7 beta? Hmm... I may be wrong there. The article mentions that it also appeared in Vista Home Edition. Still, Can't imagine it's very fun with a mouse. It does indeed come with Vista Home Premium, not sure about other editions. It also comes with Ultimate. But anyway, mentioning it has been removed if the only evidence we have is it's not included in the current beta is an incredibly bad idea. We need a reliable source saying Microsoft has decided to remove it. There could be plenty of reasons why it's not in beta, only one of them is Microsoft has decided to remove it completely Beta Release The date of the release of the Beta should be January 7 (Release on MSDN to TechBeta and TechNet customers) or January 9 (Release to public) ?? - Excuse my English (talk me) 06:04, "	0	0	0	0	0
Plasma cosmology is niche field. As such, sources dismiss it with the rest of non-standard cosmologies when criticism of it is offered. Plasma cosmology is criticized specifically by Peebles in his work. Moreover, the plasma cosmology proponent Eric Lerner has only mentioned WMAP in the form of arguing for a quadrupole alignment of plasma magnetic fields: it had nothing to do with any of the WMAP variables. The standard cosmology position is opposed to plasma cosmology by virtue of its opposition.	0	0	0	0	0
With Jews You lose! 86.181.0.14	3	0	3	0	2
I have posted heavy evidences of SqueakBox fabrications and lies under the Solana page discussion. The proof is also there under SqueakBox's own entry on my own blogspot, www.cumbey.blogspot.com. I am asking that this be grounds for permanently banning SqueakBox from Wikipedia!	0	0	0	0	1
"==Banned sockpuppet== This guy, Zephram, is obviously addicted to Wikipedia, so I doubt he'll stop contributing. Some of his past edits have been pretty good. Instead of deleting them to piss him off, why don't we use them as leverage? We could say, ""Play nice or we'll delete all of your contributions."" "	0	0	0	1	1
I see you have been experimenting with Wikipedia. Your change was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. —aco	0	0	0	0	0
" non-NPOV + inaccurate information Regarding the piece of text ""Since most of those hadith are on the authority of Abu Huraira, most Shia dismiss them as a sad examples of what happens when all Sahaba are counted as trustworthy: A clear breach in Tawhid, the belief that God is above its creation."" Reasons for removal: Abu Huraira is one of the most prolific muhaddithin and a source of many of the sahih hadith. The phrase ""most shia"" does not cite any authority or text and could therefore be completely fabricated. Not to mention that there are over a dozen subsects among the shi`a. ""sad examples of what happens"" <- that's a non-NPOV (non-Neutral Point Of View) See God as one sees the full moon or the sun in the sky. Or seeing part of God on the day of judgement is not a contradiction that God is above His (not ""its"") creatures in every respect."	0	0	1	0	0
" Understood, I just responded on the talk:coleco page as well. I can certainly agree with that, and its a perfect example of why the ""Consensus needed"" situation was defined in the guidelines. In this case, consensus is being formed against, which in turn solidifies the validity of the guidelines. That's my only real concern in this rather than they just being blindly removed as was happening. "	0	0	0	0	0
" Oddly enough, I am truly agnostic on this particular bit of software. It's always been my position that it should have a fair trial, but it seems that at every step things have been problematic. First off, there was the fact it was introduced immediately on the heels of two other major UI changes (the addition of revision deletion to the admin toolkit, and the switchover to Vector). Then there was the fact that the version on the test wiki was not the version to be introduced here, so nobody could even test it properly on the testwiki. The trial criteria were not developed until just days before the trial itself, and there were no benchmarks set to determine whether or not there was any change over time, or whether that change was positive or negative. The majority of early supporters in the original PC poll wanted it to be focused on BLPs, but for some reason at the end of the poll it was decided that PC should be applied to currently protected or semi-protected articles instead, and those were the articles targeted in the trial. The WMF press on the subject specifically referred to the ability for anonymous and newly-registered users to edit long-time semi-protected articles of high profile topics (the George W. Bush article was specifically mentioned), without discussing this in advance with the community. (It lasted less than 2 days on pending changes, with mountains of vandalism during that period.) Then there was the promise by the lead developer that PC would be shut off at the end of 60 days unless the community clearly requested otherwise. Four days later, when lead developer responsibility changed hands, the new lead developer announced that he would rather keep things running during any review, on a quiet page with only the most interested editors watching. Even with all of this disarray, I still hoped that we could get a reasonable trial of the tool. It was agreed that we'd start off with 2000 articles in the trial, starting with just a few and ramping up so that we'd hit the 2K articles around 2 weeks into the trial, with the expectation that if things went well, we'd add more incrementally, perhaps up to 10K; however, only a handful of administrators participated in adding articles to the trial, and I don't think we ever got above 1500. Further, at that point, we'd pretty well added all of the articles that were eligible under the criteria for the trial, except for ones in categories where one or more administrator had objected to inclusion; as best I can tell, their objections were based on the articles being honey pots for socks. I was one of the most active admins in adding articles to the trial, and I confess I sneaked in a pile of BLPs that technically didn't meet the criteria (they had been semi-protected in the previous 6 months and had fewer than 10 watchers). Indeed, one of the most telling factors on this trial was the fact that very, very few administrators appeared to be interested in using the tool as currently configured. I also note that the time that it has taken edits to be reviewed has continued to lengthen as time has gone on. A few weeks ago, I led a panel on the topic of Pending changes at the New York City Wiki-conference. Thanks to DGG, Becksguy and Jamesofur, who were also on the panel. That same day, keynote speaker Clay Shirky talked about the fact that once a culture is ""broken"", it is not able to rebound back to its prior state. In my own closing statement, I reflected on that comment, and wondered if pending changes might be the ""culture-breaker"" for Wikipedia and, if it was, whether or not that would be a good or bad thing. Certainly the manner in which this entire trial has proceeded has shown that there are some pretty huge differences in what people perceive as the way we do things around here. I don't think the pending changes software or its use will be the culture breaker, but the manner in which it is being integrated and promoted into the project might very well be. I am very considerably concerned that this pressure to keep a bit of trial software running has resulted in a level of divisiveness between good-faith Wikipedians from which the community may not recover. "	0	0	0	0	0
Rollback restored, per your explanation.	0	0	0	0	0
I agree the enlisting of ministry would be a good idea, analogous to Michelle Lensink. See what I can do.192.43.227.18	0	0	0	0	0
" Fair use rationale for Image:LarryClarksCameoInKenPark.gif Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:LarryClarksCameoInKenPark.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the ""my contributions"" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting ""Image"" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. "	0	0	0	0	0
2006 Season Will they stay in Toronto or will they move?, and what about added the 2006 Season to the article? anyone help thanks.	0	0	0	0	0
Removed parent categories. What's so unexceptionable about that ?!	0	0	0	0	0
I also would like to thank you for that as well. I have found an official document on this matter on the Legislative web site speaking to the name of the Parliament Buildings. Perhaps we should include information about this in the main document?	0	0	0	0	0
Is this drug really that expensive? You can get it over the counter for about ten dollars...	0	0	0	0	0
There isn't a reason. Someone claimed some false authority by adding a hidden note into the article. this is not acceptable.	0	0	0	0	1
" Fixed, thanks. talk ♦ contribs "	0	0	0	0	0
" Depends on what it means to do an admin action at the behest of a third party. Asking an administrator ""Please block User X, he is a vandalism-only account, here is the evidence."" seems fine to me, especially since it would be up to the administrator to indeed determine the validity of the person's claim and then take responsibility for it themselves. @'''''' "	0	0	0	0	0
Why? Why do you get soo offended when i call you an airhead? It isn't even offensive!! I love them, they always make me laugh and i try and befriend them LOL!!!!!!! (real life obv) god knows why you find it offensive, and blocked me before due to it. jeez.	0	0	0	1	0
" Again, I don't think this is productive, but I'll make my position clear anyway. Oppose. There are some sources here that support the idea that various types of nuclear power have been considered as sustainable, but that wasn't the only reason the IPs edits were reverted. This is one reason tying this into the above discussion is a bad idea, because this isn't just about the academic consensus on a loosely defined ""type of nuclear fission"". Using the article to explain in context that nuclear power is in some ways sustainable, according to some points of view, would be fine. The edits introduced large quantities relatively weakly sourced material to present nuclear as being a primary and uncontroversial source of sustainable energy. The above sources support mentioning nuclear as one aspect of sustainability. They do not warrant altering the article to make nuclear energy the first specific section, nor do they warrant excessive ref-bombing to support that perspective, while using similarly selective tactics to undermine those who hold a more critical perspective. This isn't just about verifiability, this is also about WP:WEIGHT. Even the sources presented here indicate that nuclear's sustainability is under-researched and hinges on too many unknowns to be accepted without further comment. This is true for many areas of sustainable energy research, but especially nuclear. It is an active area of research (or areas, rather) which has a relatively small but extremely vocal core of active supporters. This should not be used to diminish that perspective or the potentially revolutionary research, but major context was being selectively left-out from the proposed edits. "	0	0	0	0	0
For the 2005 race, DARPA has said the course will be at most 175 miles. As for roads, because of environmental restrictions outside of their control (the desert tortoise for example), all or most of the course is over dirt roads. The course can and most likely will cross active roads. In last year's competition, one team was paused to allow a truck to cross the road. The only external control allowed (actually, its required) is a 3-way control, RUN, PAUSE, and STOP. If the vehicle is paused, the timer stops running for that team until they start running again. 12:08, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)	0	0	0	0	0
" Speedy deletion of Derek Schoiack A tag has been placed on Derek Schoiack requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. (talk) "	0	0	0	0	0
When you can't come up with a genuine reason to block, you make one up. Classic admin abuse. Fuck you. -CoM	0	0	0	0	1
hey what r u doin after school baby .i love blake crase abunch -)	0	0	0	0	0
Happy New Year to you too! Yes, I did find the spider article interesting; I tidied it a bit and added more on the choice of name.	0	0	0	0	0
REDIRECT Talk:Right There (Nicole Scherzinger song)	0	0	0	0	0
Good Call Whoever organized the external links - good call!	0	0	0	0	0
" Conspiracy theory In my interpretation removing the {npov} template from an article when an in good faith dispute exists is a form of vandalism, so I am merely correcting vandalism. It is your right to choose not to debate the neutrality merits of ""conspiracy theory"" within presentation contexts but please stop pretending there isn't a dispute. T "	0	0	0	0	0
Why don't we put this matter up for arbitration and let others figure out the motivations for your edits both here and on the Sweetest Day page. After all, it is in the best interests of Wikipedia to determine whether or not industry is using Wikipedia for profit.	0	0	0	0	0
. Because the first is archived, it may be better to go to the original (not archived) items - for those items that are linked	0	0	0	0	0
Ok, so we agree she said it, just you suggest it is out of context. could you provide a link to a source with the full context?	0	0	0	0	0
I didn't vandalise it you cockface! I just told you shut up and sit down.	0	0	0	0	1
I did so. Thnx for the review!	0	0	0	0	0
Similarly did he die at Kings Cross or Torquay?	0	0	0	0	0
That's good but I still think the article should talk about the United Arab Emirates unfair treatment of the Israelis swimmers.68.5.214.41	0	0	0	0	0
Another mention, this timke as Hardy-cum-chorlton, in Beyond Our Ken from 1960. It seems that decade was the high-point [or nadir] for comic usage of the name. 86.12.129.2	0	0	0	0	0
Also have a look at Talk:Main Page/Archive 74#American-centricity	0	0	0	0	0
" heh. Well, I (And all the Thomas articles) refer to just being there, and not doing anything to be a cameo. It's also pretty hard to find a reliable source saying that they cameoed in Season whatever. Since, I'm trying to revamp those articles with proper sources, and what not, I figured, hey, it's not like cameos are that notable, according to AMIB, Rob, TTN, and the rest of 'em, and I can see where they're coming from. Better off for a Wikia. Skeletal Soul teh Hedgie "	0	0	0	0	0
Whitman and SWAT Thank you Gilliam for bringing my attention to WP not being used as a source. I had used other sources before, but they did not deal with John Nelson exclusively. I have found a source that meets WP standards (I assume), and will revert with that source. Personally, I think the paragraph should be removed, because it implies that Whitman was the impetus for SWAT, he wasn't, and is dramatizing the article and unnecessary. I also appreciate the link to the rule you cited. I found it fascinating and will be useful for my lectures, as to the use of WP as a source. Thanks again!2001:558:6007:27:7992:7DA3:D702:EE6A	0	0	0	0	0
n ig ger nig ger Hi n i g g e r	3	0	0	0	0
Elizabeth Ivanov What happened to Igor's wife, Elizabeth?Mattster	0	0	0	0	0
(speak to the Llama!)	0	0	0	0	0
What the fuck happened to my article bitches?!	0	0	0	0	1
[corr. archive page numbers. ]	0	0	0	0	0
Sourcing? Why are you using http://howtopickagreatcollege.com as a source for your edits instead of directly citing the original source?	0	0	0	0	0
[Both posted before the #request by Gnan/garra, which went into an archived talk page, not this current talk page inadvertently it appears now. ]	0	0	0	0	0
" Well for starters it might help if you wrote it in English, this being the English Wikipedia and all that. Second there were no actual references to demonstrate any notability Talk "	1	0	0	0	0
At any rate, I still think you are a fuck face.	0	0	0	0	1
Easy to Understand Message: Politely: Please don't edit my work again. Not so polite: Back off asshole.	0	0	0	0	2
" I think it should go under its own section, such as ""Soundtrack"" or ""Film score"" depending on what the film project prefers. "	0	0	0	0	0
Drug use belongs in lead Winehouse's status as a celebrity drug user is often and persistently noted in reliable sources. In fact, she gets more prominent publicity for her substance abuse than her music. The numerous media references are certainly enough to outweigh any BLP concerns.	0	0	0	0	0
Thank you Thank you for the unblocking of the article (Bulgarian vocabulary). I hope this doesn't come too late - but I don't come here so often any more. Regards and have a good weekend!	0	0	0	0	0
NAVS says: If Mason disagrees, I guess we have conflicting sources. Is it possible that there are some old copies of these editions somewhere?	0	0	0	0	0
" : would be my idea. Of course, there would be more information and of course sources, but you get the general idea. - • Talk • @Powergate: I thought I said to remove yourself from my talk page. I could be wrong, it has been known to happen. You aren't helping things and I would rather discuss this with admins and other editors who don't have a interest in seeing these pages go. - • Talk • "	0	0	0	0	1
Dude you're gay, now seriously STFU and get the fuck off my warning page you little fag. You've 'warned me' now get the fuck off and act gay somewhere else.	0	3	0	0	2
Well... I also meant rationales. Usually, non-admins have closed discussions that have unilateral consensus.	0	0	0	0	0
Sometimes they even watchlist your talkpage!	0	0	0	0	0
Hi Guys...Am very happy to be officially Back after being block for some weeks!I am ready to come back to work!!!Hi Avnfx and the other new guys here!!	0	0	0	0	0
Removal of LA Times and New York Times reference URLs It seems to me that keeping the URLs is most consistent with WP:V. I'd like to put them back in.	0	0	0	0	0
Ancestor Hey Ed, I was browsing the internet and found a picture of one of your early ancestors. 68.203.13.249	0	0	0	0	0
Mikhail Bocharov (singer) ( )	0	0	0	0	0
" July 2007 (UTC) Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Tibet are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. Please refrain from doing this in the future. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk Retrieved from ""http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:81.155.103.36"" I have received your message above and looked at the page suggested. I don't know what you are trying to say, but if you are saying what I think you are saying, then there is nothing in Wiki to back up what I think you are trying to say. If you wish to be an editor and contribute, then please refrain from making up your own Wiki policies and rules and deleting other people's contribution in the discussion part of Wikipedia. And yes, you should read the bit about deletions. If you follow your own made up rules, then you should delete a very large chunk of your own (Tangerines) and Nat Krause's discussions in the discussion section of the article. 02:51, 30"	0	0	0	0	0
" and ironically enough, the true answer really is ""yes"""	0	0	0	0	0
Floor need what the scoundrel, everything just rolls back, and silent in a rag, I complain to you, all you're there insolent77.51.60.183	0	0	0	0	1
" Funnier still is how I dismissed you like a jerk initially, thought about it, and now we are working well together to improve the article (and no one is objecting because it's obvious it is being improved). You've got a thick skin, , and your edits are accurate and true. We should keep analyzing and ""culling"" this article, methinks... "	0	0	0	0	0
No. The way to avoid edit wars in a contentious articles is to establish a consensus on the talk page first and then edit the article.	0	0	0	0	0
From Depleted Uranium in Urine of Soldiers by the WISE Uranium Project: Is DU more hazardous than natural uranium, since it contains contaminants such as uranium-236, plutonium-239, etc.? No. Depleted uranium used for bullets has been found to contain trace amounts of artificial radionuclides, such as uranium-236, neptunium-237, and plutonium-239. The presence of these radionuclides can be explained by contamination from recycling of spent fuel introduced in the manufacturing process; for details, see [Diehl 2002]. The radiation dose from exposure to such contaminated DU is only a fraction of a percent higher than from pure DU - and thus still is lower than from natural uranium; for details, see [Diehl 2001].	0	0	0	0	0
. Zico - clean up external links	0	0	0	0	0
Welcome! Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Help pages Tutorial How to write a great article Manual of Style I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!	0	0	0	0	0

You You already pulled this persecution and threatening crap once. I don't care what you say, you're just a thug. Got it?

0

2

How about you do it? I simply asked because I had no time, had no experience with how to handle this kind of information on Wikipedia. Stop being smartass if I asked why anyone hasn't ALREADY included this information even after such a long time.

0

1

Top Model Pedrictions My Prediction: 6th place: Lauren 5th place: Marvita 4th place: Claire 3th place: Fatima 2nd place: Katarjenna 1st place: Anya

0

Oh, and just one comment. You added a comment to the page Talk:Swiss franc. At the same time, you removed, probably by mistake, a series of comments made by other people — I have restored the missing comments now. All the best,

0

" What dont you understand Dreadster, all the explanations, discussing and EVENTUAL ruling is in the talk page of the European football records page, do you not understand English. There was countless weeks of arguing about the fairs cup then and it was finally agreed that it would be included, saudi999 obviously hasn'ta a clue. So i suggest you go back and read the talk page of the EUROPEAN FOOTBALL RECORDS page and see all the arguing and eventual ruling, then revert it back. WHY HAVE ANOTHER POLL WHEN IT WAS ALREADY DECIDED. Now please revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadiga09 (talk • contribs) What I do understand is Wikipedia:Civility and how to communicate with other editors, something you seem to be having difficulty with - so much so that you have been disruptive on the articles with your edit warring, and also on the talk pages with your communications like the above - if you bother to communicate there at all. This places you in the position being blocked, so I'd advise modifying your behavior before that happens. † "

0

1

"== De Livera == Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. (talk) "

0

I don't know that I agree; I think many areas of alternative medicine are actually quite rational, and in any case they are often truly complementary in that they address areas traditionally overlooked by mainstream medicine. Those areas are obviously meaningful to a lot of people, as the popularity of alternative medicine attests. I think it's also a useful indication of the areas where mainstream medicine is failing to meet peoples' needs. I've been around long enough to know that there are more things in heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in my philosophy; after all, you can hardly go a day in the clinic without seeing something that defies textbook medical explanation. That said, there is certainly a continuum of alt-med which encompasses an awful lot of snake oil. There's a lot of money to be made and practically no regulation, which is a bad combination. And I do have very little patience for people who rail at Big Pharma (which, for all its nefarious deeds, is at least on some level accountable, subject to regulation, and required to prove its products actually work before selling them) and then turn around and hawk their utterly unregulated supplement blend. '''''' Talk

0

. I created the page BEFORE the 'Wikihelpdesk' gave their advice.

0

I also want this as a picture, and I also want a map of the location! Please help someone! http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/4180685.jpg

0

Which website i added a hindu link also( )

0

" Not a terrorist... I came to this article via [List of terrorist incidents in the United Kingdom] which mentions Copeland in a sub-list of ""terrorist-like incidents"". Does anyone know why this guy was charged with murder and not terrorist offences? "

0

1

09:37, 1 February 2009

0

" If you look at File:Stephania 1.JPG now, you will see that your originally uploaded image has already been deleted ""del original (non-anonymized) version, for BLP concerns)"". Wikipedia is fast with such things. "

0

Such a theory, in fact pure POV, show obviously a bad knowledge of French and Occitan linguistics.

0

I've found a source for nine fatalities in 2006. I'll edit the article later.

0

" If someone enters ""Twins"", there is a good chance that he/she is looking for something other than Minnesota Twins. Possibly something in film, TV, or music. Actually, as the hatnote is currently laid out, that reader must go to the very end of the hatnote, so it makes just as much sense to move the ""Twins"" DAB link so it appears before the sports link. Or for that matter, I'm fine with moving placing ""For other uses, see Twins (disambiguation) or Twin (disambiguation)"" first in the hatnote, followed by the baseball team. But in any case, I see no evidence whatsoever that most readers who enter ""Twins"" are looking for the baseball team. We had that argument in the previous debate with no convincing evidence that applies to Wikipedia (not Google) readers. "

0

, although that action does not appear to have been completed. Please post an update when the block is no longer active. Thanks

0

" File:The Big Bang Pop Sculpture.jpeg listed for deletion An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Big Bang Pop Sculpture.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. "

0

Why are you removing these things? Have you nothing better to do? They are genuine fact. You are doing this because of the McGeady jest. I was just showing a friend (Rangers fan) that you can edit wikipedia and I was going to remove those comments after.

0

"==Edit Warring== You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Constitution of Massachusetts. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:283:0:F00:410C:E87:42EA:3BE4 ""Warning/Threat"" Reply why are you attacking me at "

0

1

" You had left me the following message last month ... ""How do you do that script assisted date thingy? - (contribs) "" "

0

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2014 Height = 5 ft 11 1/2 (1.82m)

0

Interesting, isn't it. This is the third person I've found who is blocked for merely citing UK law. Maybe these people think they are above reproach?

0

EFFIGY STUDIOS Sorry to report this, but according to the Michigan Business Lookup website. Eminem is NOT the owner of Effigy Studios. A Thomas W. Johnson is listed as the owner. See here.

0

, 4 October 2010 (UTC) List of people from Ukrainian lands is a content/POV fork of List of Ukrainians. That is not allowed. 22:43

0

" I really don't know and admit my sample size is small -). But I do believe their approach isn't satisfactory as a core foundation for the ""treatment"" section in an encyclopedia. Even if they reliably did good work, their output is not directly relevant to ""how is this disease treated?"". I think we forget that is the primary question. The ""why is this treatment recommended?"" is a secondary question which ultimately leads to the ""what evidence is there that it is effective/safe?"", along with ""is it available in my country?"" and ""what are the side effects?"", etc, etc. But sadly it seems WP medical articles are not written by people asking reader-questions in order to guide what to say. They are written by non-experts surveying the handy output of PubMed and collating a bunch of factoids they don't fully understand. In fact, that approach sounds just like the one done by the volunteer authors of the Cochrane ketogenic diet paper, who are district hospital doctors with no clinical experience of the subject. I managed to avoid your cold through my regime of mega-vitamins, herbal tinctures and homeopathic bath salts. -) °Talk "

0

Incosistancy in International appearances In the information box on the right hand side it says he got 31 caps and 9 goals while information in the article states he started for England 17 times and made 16 substitute appearences...that suggests 33 caps? Could someone sort this out?

0

HI I HATE TURKS A LOT, MAYBE ONE DAY THERE WILL BE A WAR BETWEEN GREECE AND TURKEY, I CAN GAIN BLOOD VENGEANCE AGAINST THEM THAT WAY, REVENGE WILL BE SWEET. BTW, I LIKE GERMANS, THEY ARE GOOD PEOPLE. I HAVE MET MANY GERMANS WHO HATE TURKS LIKE ME, THEY DONT WANT THEM IN THE EU.

3

0

3

Thanks x 73 I wasn't going to send thank-you cards, but the emotional impact of hitting WP:100 (and doing so unanimously!) changed my mind. So I appreciate your confidence in me at RFA (even if it seemed redundant to you), and hope you'll let me know if I can do anything for you in the future. Cheers! 'blis

0

" INDIA ZINDABAD INDIA ZINDABAD ! DBACHMANN MURDABAD Dbachmann, you have been constantly putting anti-Indian remarks. Please don't do it. Just like we Indians drove away the British from our lands we will drive you away from Wikipedia if you insist on your anti-India racist rants. INQUILAB ZINDABAD !!!!! DBACHMANN DOWN DOWN DOWN !!!!! "

3

0

2

"do any change to a picture in the Image viewer of Windows the changes are automatic saved with No alternative! @ I beg them to solve it or at least give us the alternative Excuse my English (talk me) It's already mentioned at Windows Picture and Fax Viewer#Known issues. Compatibility Paul Thurott has written an article about compatibility issues with the Beta, which makes me doubt the final release's compatibility. Removed Features _/|\_I don't know why the Removed Features section claims that the classic start menu and taskbar will be removed. Nor do I know why the Inkball game is supposedly removed. This section cites no references and these claims are the most questionable. I'm not sure as the the reasons as to why they we're removed but I can tell you that Ink Ball is not found anywhere in the beta release, I'm not sure about the classic start menu and taskbar, i don't see an option for them but I didn't look all that hard Inkball only appears in Tablet Edition windows products. Is there a tablet addition of the Windows 7 beta? Hmm... I may be wrong there. The article mentions that it also appeared in Vista Home Edition. Still, Can't imagine it's very fun with a mouse. It does indeed come with Vista Home Premium, not sure about other editions. It also comes with Ultimate. But anyway, mentioning it has been removed if the only evidence we have is it's not included in the current beta is an incredibly bad idea. We need a reliable source saying Microsoft has decided to remove it. There could be plenty of reasons why it's not in beta, only one of them is Microsoft has decided to remove it completely Beta Release The date of the release of the Beta should be January 7 (Release on MSDN to TechBeta and TechNet customers) or January 9 (Release to public) ?? - Excuse my English (talk me) 06:04, "

0

Plasma cosmology is niche field. As such, sources dismiss it with the rest of non-standard cosmologies when criticism of it is offered. Plasma cosmology is criticized specifically by Peebles in his work. Moreover, the plasma cosmology proponent Eric Lerner has only mentioned WMAP in the form of arguing for a quadrupole alignment of plasma magnetic fields: it had nothing to do with any of the WMAP variables. The standard cosmology position is opposed to plasma cosmology by virtue of its opposition.

0

With Jews You lose! 86.181.0.14

3

0

3

0

2

I have posted heavy evidences of SqueakBox fabrications and lies under the Solana page discussion. The proof is also there under SqueakBox's own entry on my own blogspot, www.cumbey.blogspot.com. I am asking that this be grounds for permanently banning SqueakBox from Wikipedia!

0

1

"==Banned sockpuppet== This guy, Zephram, is obviously addicted to Wikipedia, so I doubt he'll stop contributing. Some of his past edits have been pretty good. Instead of deleting them to piss him off, why don't we use them as leverage? We could say, ""Play nice or we'll delete all of your contributions."" "

0

1

I see you have been experimenting with Wikipedia. Your change was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. —aco

0

" non-NPOV + inaccurate information Regarding the piece of text ""Since most of those hadith are on the authority of Abu Huraira, most Shia dismiss them as a sad examples of what happens when all Sahaba are counted as trustworthy: A clear breach in Tawhid, the belief that God is above its creation."" Reasons for removal: Abu Huraira is one of the most prolific muhaddithin and a source of many of the sahih hadith. The phrase ""most shia"" does not cite any authority or text and could therefore be completely fabricated. Not to mention that there are over a dozen subsects among the shi`a. ""sad examples of what happens"" <- that's a non-NPOV (non-Neutral Point Of View) See God as one sees the full moon or the sun in the sky. Or seeing part of God on the day of judgement is not a contradiction that God is above His (not ""its"") creatures in every respect."

0

1

0

" Understood, I just responded on the talk:coleco page as well. I can certainly agree with that, and its a perfect example of why the ""Consensus needed"" situation was defined in the guidelines. In this case, consensus is being formed against, which in turn solidifies the validity of the guidelines. That's my only real concern in this rather than they just being blindly removed as was happening. "

0

" Oddly enough, I am truly agnostic on this particular bit of software. It's always been my position that it should have a fair trial, but it seems that at every step things have been problematic. First off, there was the fact it was introduced immediately on the heels of two other major UI changes (the addition of revision deletion to the admin toolkit, and the switchover to Vector). Then there was the fact that the version on the test wiki was *not* the version to be introduced here, so nobody could even test it properly on the testwiki. The trial criteria were not developed until just days before the trial itself, and there were no benchmarks set to determine whether or not there was any change over time, or whether that change was positive or negative. The majority of early supporters in the original PC poll wanted it to be focused on BLPs, but for some reason at the end of the poll it was decided that PC should be applied to currently protected or semi-protected articles instead, and those were the articles targeted in the trial. The WMF press on the subject specifically referred to the ability for anonymous and newly-registered users to edit long-time semi-protected articles of high profile topics (the George W. Bush article was specifically mentioned), without discussing this in advance with the community. (It lasted less than 2 days on pending changes, with mountains of vandalism during that period.) Then there was the promise by the lead developer that PC would be shut off at the end of 60 days unless the community clearly requested otherwise. Four days later, when lead developer responsibility changed hands, the new lead developer announced that he would rather keep things running during any review, on a quiet page with only the most interested editors watching. Even with all of this disarray, I still hoped that we could get a reasonable trial of the tool. It was agreed that we'd start off with 2000 articles in the trial, starting with just a few and ramping up so that we'd hit the 2K articles around 2 weeks into the trial, with the expectation that if things went well, we'd add more incrementally, perhaps up to 10K; however, only a handful of administrators participated in adding articles to the trial, and I don't think we ever got above 1500. Further, at that point, we'd pretty well added all of the articles that were eligible under the criteria for the trial, except for ones in categories where one or more administrator had objected to inclusion; as best I can tell, their objections were based on the articles being honey pots for socks. I was one of the most active admins in adding articles to the trial, and I confess I sneaked in a pile of BLPs that technically didn't meet the criteria (they had been semi-protected in the previous 6 months and had fewer than 10 watchers). Indeed, one of the most telling factors on this trial was the fact that very, very few administrators appeared to be interested in using the tool as currently configured. I also note that the time that it has taken edits to be reviewed has continued to lengthen as time has gone on. A few weeks ago, I led a panel on the topic of Pending changes at the New York City Wiki-conference. Thanks to DGG, Becksguy and Jamesofur, who were also on the panel. That same day, keynote speaker Clay Shirky talked about the fact that once a culture is ""broken"", it is not able to rebound back to its prior state. In my own closing statement, I reflected on that comment, and wondered if pending changes might be the ""culture-breaker"" for Wikipedia and, if it was, whether or not that would be a good or bad thing. Certainly the manner in which this entire trial has proceeded has shown that there are some pretty huge differences in what people perceive as the way we do things around here. I don't think the pending changes software or its use will be the culture breaker, but the manner in which it is being integrated and promoted into the project might very well be. I am very considerably concerned that this pressure to keep a bit of trial software running has resulted in a level of divisiveness between good-faith Wikipedians from which the community may not recover. "

0

Rollback restored, per your explanation.

0

I agree the enlisting of ministry would be a good idea, analogous to Michelle Lensink. See what I can do.192.43.227.18

0

" Fair use rationale for Image:LarryClarksCameoInKenPark.gif Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:LarryClarksCameoInKenPark.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the ""my contributions"" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting ""Image"" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. "

0

2006 Season Will they stay in Toronto or will they move?, and what about added the 2006 Season to the article? anyone help thanks.

0

Removed parent categories. What's so unexceptionable about that ?!

0

I also would like to thank you for that as well. I have found an official document on this matter on the Legislative web site speaking to the name of the Parliament Buildings. Perhaps we should include information about this in the main document?

0

Is this drug really that expensive? You can get it over the counter for about ten dollars...

0

There isn't a reason. Someone claimed some false authority by adding a hidden note into the article. this is not acceptable.

0

1

" Fixed, thanks. talk ♦ contribs "

0

" Depends on what it means to do an admin action at the behest of a third party. Asking an administrator ""Please block User X, he is a vandalism-only account, here is the evidence."" seems fine to me, especially since it would be up to the administrator to indeed determine the validity of the person's claim and then take responsibility for it themselves. @'''''' "

0

Why? Why do you get soo offended when i call you an airhead? It isn't even offensive!! I love them, they always make me laugh and i try and befriend them LOL!!!!!!! (real life obv) god knows why you find it offensive, and blocked me before due to it. jeez.

0

1

0

" Again, I don't think this is productive, but I'll make my position clear anyway. Oppose. There are some sources here that support the idea that various types of nuclear power have been considered as sustainable, but that wasn't the only reason the IPs edits were reverted. This is one reason tying this into the above discussion is a bad idea, because this isn't just about the academic consensus on a loosely defined ""type of nuclear fission"". Using the article to explain in context that nuclear power is in some ways sustainable, according to some points of view, would be fine. The edits introduced large quantities relatively weakly sourced material to present nuclear as being a primary and uncontroversial source of sustainable energy. The above sources support mentioning nuclear as one aspect of sustainability. They do not warrant altering the article to make nuclear energy the first specific section, nor do they warrant excessive ref-bombing to support that perspective, while using similarly selective tactics to undermine those who hold a more critical perspective. This isn't just about verifiability, this is also about WP:WEIGHT. Even the sources presented here indicate that nuclear's sustainability is under-researched and hinges on too many unknowns to be accepted without further comment. This is true for many areas of sustainable energy research, but especially nuclear. It is an active area of research (or areas, rather) which has a relatively small but extremely vocal core of active supporters. This should not be used to diminish that perspective or the potentially revolutionary research, but major context was being selectively left-out from the proposed edits. "

0

For the 2005 race, DARPA has said the course will be at most 175 miles. As for roads, because of environmental restrictions outside of their control (the desert tortoise for example), all or most of the course is over dirt roads. The course can and most likely will cross active roads. In last year's competition, one team was paused to allow a truck to cross the road. The only external control allowed (actually, its required) is a 3-way control, RUN, PAUSE, and STOP. If the vehicle is paused, the timer stops running for that team until they start running again. 12:08, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

0

" Speedy deletion of Derek Schoiack A tag has been placed on Derek Schoiack requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. (talk) "

0

When you can't come up with a genuine reason to block, you make one up. Classic admin abuse. Fuck you. -CoM

0

1

hey what r u doin after school baby .i love blake crase abunch -)

0

Happy New Year to you too! Yes, I did find the spider article interesting; I tidied it a bit and added more on the choice of name.

0

REDIRECT Talk:Right There (Nicole Scherzinger song)

0

Good Call Whoever organized the external links - good call!

0

" Conspiracy theory In my interpretation removing the {npov} template from an article when an in good faith dispute exists is a form of vandalism, so I am merely correcting vandalism. It is your right to choose not to debate the neutrality merits of ""conspiracy theory"" within presentation contexts but please stop pretending there isn't a dispute. T "

0

Why don't we put this matter up for arbitration and let others figure out the motivations for your edits both here and on the Sweetest Day page. After all, it is in the best interests of Wikipedia to determine whether or not industry is using Wikipedia for profit.

0

. Because the first is archived, it may be better to go to the original (not archived) items - for those items that are linked

0

Ok, so we agree she said it, just you suggest it is out of context. could you provide a link to a source with the full context?

0

I didn't vandalise it you cockface! I just told you shut up and sit down.

0

1

I did so. Thnx for the review!

0

Similarly did he die at Kings Cross or Torquay?

0

That's good but I still think the article should talk about the United Arab Emirates unfair treatment of the Israelis swimmers.68.5.214.41

0

Another mention, this timke as Hardy-cum-chorlton, in Beyond Our Ken from 1960. It seems that decade was the high-point [or nadir] for comic usage of the name. 86.12.129.2

0

Also have a look at Talk:Main Page/Archive 74#American-centricity

0

" heh. Well, I (And all the Thomas articles) refer to just being there, and not doing anything to be a cameo. It's also pretty hard to find a reliable source saying that they cameoed in Season whatever. Since, I'm trying to revamp those articles with proper sources, and what not, I figured, hey, it's not like cameos are that notable, according to AMIB, Rob, TTN, and the rest of 'em, and I can see where they're coming from. Better off for a Wikia. Skeletal Soul teh Hedgie "

0

Whitman and SWAT Thank you Gilliam for bringing my attention to WP not being used as a source. I had used other sources before, but they did not deal with John Nelson exclusively. I have found a source that meets WP standards (I assume), and will revert with that source. Personally, I think the paragraph should be removed, because it implies that Whitman was the impetus for SWAT, he wasn't, and is dramatizing the article and unnecessary. I also appreciate the link to the rule you cited. I found it fascinating and will be useful for my lectures, as to the use of WP as a source. Thanks again!2001:558:6007:27:7992:7DA3:D702:EE6A

0

n ig ger nig ger Hi n i g g e r

3

0

Elizabeth Ivanov What happened to Igor's wife, Elizabeth?Mattster

0

(speak to the Llama!)

0

What the fuck happened to my article bitches?!

0

1

[corr. archive page numbers. ]

0

Sourcing? Why are you using http://howtopickagreatcollege.com as a source for your edits instead of directly citing the original source?

0

[Both posted before the #request by Gnan/garra, which went into an archived talk page, not this current talk page inadvertently it appears now. ]

0

" Well for starters it might help if you wrote it in English, this being the English Wikipedia and all that. Second there were no actual references to demonstrate any notability Talk "

1

0

At any rate, I still think you are a fuck face.

0

1

Easy to Understand Message: Politely: Please don't edit my work again. Not so polite: Back off asshole.

0

2

" I think it should go under its own section, such as ""Soundtrack"" or ""Film score"" depending on what the film project prefers. "

0

Drug use belongs in lead Winehouse's status as a celebrity drug user is often and persistently noted in reliable sources. In fact, she gets more prominent publicity for her substance abuse than her music. The numerous media references are certainly enough to outweigh any BLP concerns.

0

Thank you Thank you for the unblocking of the article (Bulgarian vocabulary). I hope this doesn't come too late - but I don't come here so often any more. Regards and have a good weekend!

0

NAVS says: If Mason disagrees, I guess we have conflicting sources. Is it possible that there are some old copies of these editions somewhere?

0

" : would be my idea. Of course, there would be more information and of course sources, but you get the general idea. - • Talk • @Powergate: I thought I said to remove yourself from my talk page. I could be wrong, it has been known to happen. You aren't helping things and I would rather discuss this with admins and other editors who don't have a interest in seeing these pages go. - • Talk • "

0

1

Dude you're gay, now seriously STFU and get the fuck off my warning page you little fag. You've 'warned me' now get the fuck off and act gay somewhere else.

0

3

0

2

Well... I also meant rationales. Usually, non-admins have closed discussions that have unilateral consensus.

0

Sometimes they even watchlist your talkpage!

0

Hi Guys...Am very happy to be officially Back after being block for some weeks!I am ready to come back to work!!!Hi Avnfx and the other new guys here!!

0

Removal of LA Times and New York Times reference URLs It seems to me that keeping the URLs is most consistent with WP:V. I'd like to put them back in.

0

Ancestor Hey Ed, I was browsing the internet and found a picture of one of your early ancestors. 68.203.13.249

0

Mikhail Bocharov (singer) ( )

0

" July 2007 (UTC) Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Tibet are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. Please refrain from doing this in the future. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk Retrieved from ""http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:81.155.103.36"" I have received your message above and looked at the page suggested. I don't know what you are trying to say, but if you are saying what I think you are saying, then there is nothing in Wiki to back up what I think you are trying to say. If you wish to be an editor and contribute, then please refrain from making up your own Wiki policies and rules and deleting other people's contribution in the discussion part of Wikipedia. And yes, you should read the bit about deletions. If you follow your own made up rules, then you should delete a very large chunk of your own (Tangerines) and Nat Krause's discussions in the discussion section of the article. 02:51, 30"

0

" and ironically enough, the true answer really is ""yes"""

0

Floor need what the scoundrel, everything just rolls back, and silent in a rag, I complain to you, all you're there insolent77.51.60.183

0

1

" Funnier still is how I dismissed you like a jerk initially, thought about it, and now we are working well together to improve the article (and no one is objecting because it's obvious it is being improved). You've got a thick skin, , and your edits are accurate and true. We should keep analyzing and ""culling"" this article, methinks... "

0

No. The way to avoid edit wars in a contentious articles is to establish a consensus on the talk page first and then edit the article.

0

From Depleted Uranium in Urine of Soldiers by the WISE Uranium Project: Is DU more hazardous than natural uranium, since it contains contaminants such as uranium-236, plutonium-239, etc.? No. Depleted uranium used for bullets has been found to contain trace amounts of artificial radionuclides, such as uranium-236, neptunium-237, and plutonium-239. The presence of these radionuclides can be explained by contamination from recycling of spent fuel introduced in the manufacturing process; for details, see [Diehl 2002]. The radiation dose from exposure to such contaminated DU is only a fraction of a percent higher than from pure DU - and thus still is lower than from natural uranium; for details, see [Diehl 2001].

0

. Zico - clean up external links

0

Welcome! Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Help pages Tutorial How to write a great article Manual of Style I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

0