User talk:Raryel

Welcome!

Howdy, Raryel, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions; you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles, see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting pages, visit the manual of style. For general questions, go to Wikipedia:Help or the FAQ; if you can't find your answer there, check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

Additional tips

Here are some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

For Wikipedia policies and guidelines, see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia and What Wikipedia is not.
Find everything in the Directory.
If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, the Sandbox is for you.
If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random article button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.
If you have edits from before creating an account, see the page on changing attribution for edits.
You can also upload images. Make sure you use the correct copyright tags when you do.
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Be bold

Be bold in updating pages! You can find instantaneous help any time simply by typing {{help}} anywhere on your own user or user talk page.
You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

 Joe  I 03:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Raryel, 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:

I noticed your interest in aircraft-related articles. There is a group of editors here at Wikipedia who have come together to form WikiProject Aircraft in order to improve aircraft-related articles. You are invited to check us out and, if interested, join our team. Our project page has a lot of resources as well as article guidelines that you might find helpful.

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! - BillCJ 06:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please read WP:CITE for the proper methods available to cite sources. Thanks. - BillCJ 06:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance request

If you're getting vandalism warnings on your IP's talk page, I wouldn't worry too much about them. That just means the address is shared or was used by someone else to vandalize in the past. For simple vandalism, we almost never set a block on an IP address that prohibits registered users from editing, so you'll be able to edit with this account even if the IP is blocked. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No ron... You misunderstand my goal

The point of my reversion back was to get the deletion request box back. Practically none of the article, including what you retained, was anything but speculation. I realize my caption was faulty-- I meant to say reverted to retain the deletion of the article. The page as a whole is useless and any info there that is actually correct is actually on the R160A/B pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 157.252.171.0 (talk) 05:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

railfan window

I've declined to delete the article, because if it is used by railbuffs it might be notable--and it was written by a well established WPedior on the subject, whom you didn't notify. (You aren't required to, but it would have been an appropriate courtesy in my opinion. I've put a "unsourced' and a "notability" tag on it, in the hope it will get references. -- just incidentally, you accidentally placed the speedy tag on the talk page, not the article page. Best wishes-- DGG 00:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFD Nominations

I have fixed your AFD nomination for Railfan window. Please read the nomination instructions and next time follow them exactly. You did not subst the template in step one. In step two, you added your nomination to the wrong page[1][2]. In step 3, you used the wrong page name[3]. If you have questions, please let me know. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 19:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...

Outside national anthems, it is not Wikipedia policy to copy songs word for word. Not even if they're in the public domain and the most popular song ever, never mind if they are unverifiable whose lyrics exist nowhere but on one site and on Wikipedia mirrors. All claims have to be verified. It's no use saying that it's notable because of personal experience; it has to be backed up with a neutral, respectable source for proof. Take the 1947-48 Palestinian Civil War article that I am writing, or the one about Human Rights in Bangladesh. Every claim that could be questioned had to be backed up. That is official policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability.

Incidentally, I do wish that you would stop with the on-the-side attempts to tarnish my reputation. It is unbecoming and rather insensitive, and sniffing around for dirt on me isn't exactly model Wikipedian behaviour. I have never had a conflict with a Wikipedian administrator: every contact that I have had with them has been amicable, and I can think of only one 'debate', about Charles Matthews' comments on unilateralism, and that was a friendly exchange of views in which I was entitled to participate. As for 'frequent' clashes with other Wikipedian users, well, that's another mudslung accusation. I often welcome new users; I have adopted new users to ensure that they learn the ways of Wikipedia; and, with very few exceptions, my correspondance with others, even with vandals, has been amicable. The only people to whom I take exception are those who attack me (million dollars guy), revert good faith edits, or start vanity articles and keep on removing AFD notices. Are you saying that that's excusable and that I should let this kind of thing happen? Clashes with these people are few and far between, at any rate, so much so that the last conflict other than the one that you created by calling me a vandal was back in December 2005, with a vanity editor who kept on removing AFD notices. Over 99% of the time, I work in harmony, and 99.99% of the time with people who play by the rules, which is more than can be said for most. Thus, I would that you would retract your troubling and fallacious comments about my being frequently in conflict, a statement that is a stain on my personality and patently false.

Best wishes, --It's-is-not-a-genitive 15:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your defensive reply proved my points. 15:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Raryel

You stated that I was in constant conflict with other users. That is not true, and my sticking up for myself proves nothing but my loathing of being mislabeled. The only way that such a spurious claim can be substantiated is to show that I am in constant conflict, which is impossible, because I'm not. I barely have one conflict per year, never mind constantly, and all of them are caused by people who think that they know better than official Wikipedia rules. I consider such a mislabelling to be a denigrating ad hominem attack and strongly suggest that you retract it, otherwise I will have no further option than to take your comments as harrassment into the administrative process. I am thoroughly upset about how you continue to lie about me and belittle me. It is unpleasant to say the least.

--It's-is-not-a-genitive

Hi Prodego; Edit reverted on B2 article

Prodego, I would appreciate your researching a subject first before removing material. It's helpful to avoiding acts of vandalism.

00:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)Raryel

What exactly do you have a problem with in my edit? My edit made two changes, one, it fixed a coding error you introduced in this edit, and two, it removed information that was uncited (in the case of the F117 info), and that had nothing to do with the B2, beyond a minor trivia like relationship (Pyotr Ufimtsev). I do not see how either of these changes constitutes vandalism. Please explain, Prodego ^talk 00:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should have been clearer, what does Pyotr Ufimtsev's having worked for Northrop have to do with the B-2? Prodego ^talk 05:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Not sure what you mean? this is fan production - it is not notable that it requires it's own section. --Killerofcruft (talk) 14:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your posts

Please sign your posts by using --~~~~ or by clicking on the signature button (tenth from the left on the toolbar). --Killerofcruft (talk) 14:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek Dicussion

Please comment here, if you think you can provide a policy based reason why a fan production should be given such a promiment mention in the Star Trek article. --Killerofcruft (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have breached 3rr and will be blocked if you persist

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Article. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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 that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Killerofcruft (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]