User talk:Username nought/Archive 1
Note to people wishing to give this bloke advice
Don't bother. To date has shown no willingness to explain or discuss his inflammatory edits and is most likely a sock puppet. Cheers, DNFTT.--Yeti Hunter 13:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop.
Do you really have nothing better to do that going around to all pages related to St. Mark's College, SAAUCC, and the High Table Cup/Douglas Irving Cup? Could you please respond, stating why you have obviously targeted these articles and images? If you have no reason, please refrain from vandalising the pages many have put so much work into. Please feel free to respond on my Talk page. ABVS1936 15:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Mate, if you took half the time you do adding templates to these pages and instead added the imbedded links to the references already listed on each page (down the bottom in a separate section), it would save us all a lot of grief. I am trying to appreciate what you're doing, because it is forcing us to improve the articles, but why only St Marks, AUBC, Sport at Adelaide Uni and SAAUCC? You could try being less hostile.--Yeti Hunter 01:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
AUBC
Hold your horses friend. You don't need to add such inflamatory comments.All the details for the citations you want are included in the web links on the page. Ozdaren 03:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Signing
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! User talk:Poppy1989
Ozdaren 08:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from AB (food), which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Od Mishehu 08:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Afd for AB (food)
The Afd listing was not complete, and thus did not appear on today's Afd's. I have fixed the listing, but it does not include your reasons for wishing AB (food) to be deleted. As such, I would like to ask you to stop by and comment. Charlie 14:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Trolling, anyone?
Care to engage in discussion rather than drive-by tagging all these articles?--Yeti Hunter 11:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Good faith
Your tagging is not constructive and is rather juvenile in nature. One of the principles of W/P is to assume good faith. I'm afraid you have not demonstrated any reason for me to go down that path. Ozdaren 13:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
The template states that it can be removed if references are provided, which I have done. It is not neologism; e.g.: "Thiele's parents spoke German rather than English. Thiele claimed that he spoke nothing but German until he went to school, where the children of German descent communicated in English for the first time. Thiele frequently referred to "Barossa Deutsch", described in Barossa Valley Sketchbook as "that quaintly inbred and hybrid language evolved from a century of linguistic isolation".[1] Grant | Talk 12:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why we all even want to type things here. This person is obviously revelling in the attention he/she is getting from our frantic scurrying to ensure the survival of articles. In the case of Barossa German 'Lusername nought' is totally wrong about it being a neologism. He/she has only done this to stir us all up. The term Barossa German has been around for over 40 years [2], it is more than likely that it is even older than that. Ozdaren 15:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
AFDs
I think you are being premature in bringing articles to AFD. If you think the article lacks references, then perhaps search for a few and add them. Also remember WP:AGF, as a number of other editors have commented upon this issue. Recurring dreams 12:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Three-revert rule
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on St. Mark's College (University of Adelaide). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. --cj | talk 14:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism Warning
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.
- Your consistent Abuse of Tags on the St Mark's College page is in contravention of Wikipedia's vandalism policy. Ryan Oceros 17:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
St Marks College
Id actually found the article because of the RfC, and monitored it for quite some time before making comment. I personally think the article needs a peer-review to try to redirect the efforts of many of the editors associated with the college in a more positive direction (to get away from all of the other issues). Thoughts? Twenty Years 09:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
You do that.--Yeti Hunter 11:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunate time of the month?
Hey Noughty, is it that unfortunate time of the month again? Hope you get better soon. Ozdaren 14:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
-Easy Daz, NPA.--Yeti Hunter 14:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)