User talk:Surv1v4l1st

Leave a new message.

WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF (talk) 03:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I look forward to helping with the project. :) Surv1v4l1st(Talk|Contribs) 03:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit to "Van Buren Boys"

While I appreciate your vigilance on vandalism, my edit was neither vandalism nor incorrect. In the quote you relabeled George is speaking about Jerry's girlfriend Ellen in the quote, comparing her role in her group to Elaine's role in their own group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.7.242.177 (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The current parenthetical statement is ambiguous. Depending on how you read it, it could refer to either person. I'm going to reword it to avoid confusion. Thanks for your note. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 00:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Bob Ross

I have started a discussion on the Bob Ross page concerning bringing back a trivia section ("Bob Ross in Popular Culture"). Please visit the Bob Ross Discussion page and contribute your opinion. Proxy User (talk) 22:14, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. :) Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 22:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to categorise your new articles

Greetings, thanks for the FAMAE revolver article! But don't forget to add categories to your new articles, otherwise they disappear into WP:UNCAT and someone else (who might not know much about guns) will have to jam them into a category and hope it fits. I've added the following cats to your article, feel free to refine them: Category:Revolvers Category:Weapons of Chile Category:Police weapons Looking forward to seeing more (categorised ;) ) gun articles! MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Oops! Forgot the category on that one. Thanks for catching it and adding them. I appreciate the assistance.  :) Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 02:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Ganglion Cyst article

I removed comments calling the use of a family Bible to treat Bible cysts an "urban legend." An urban legend, by definition, is something untrue that has been told as truth.

In fact, hitting the cyst with a Bible HAS been used successfully in patients as an actual treatment for ganglion cysts. I myself have treated some cysts by simply giving them a firm squeeze, rupturing the cyst. So although we don't have statistics cerca 1900 (and never will), it stands to reason that using the family Bible would be a common practice 50, 100, or 300 years ago when surgical options were not widely available. In addition, I have heard firsthand from patients and several older physicians that they have seen this work in actual practice.

So, calling it an urban legend is an error that I corrected. I'm not sure why you took it upon yourself to revert the article, since--as you noted--it was a minor change. But I was right in saying that it is not an urban legend. I feel it is somewhat silly for me to have to spend 15 minutes clarifying all of this to one individual over a few words in a simple article contribution, and I (like most people) will no longer want to contribute to the knowledgebase if all of my contributions are micro-managed or over-scrutinized.

216.186.224.74 (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)Dr. Barry Jordan, MD, Evans, Ga.

Thank you for your note. The reason why your revision was reverted was that you changed a sourced statement, but left the source intact. The article says one thing, while the source something completely different. If you would like to change the article, please provide a reliable source for the information. Also, please be aware that your own experiences are considered original sources which would not meet verifiability.

Parenthetically, I do believe you are correct in that it was once a common practice. I don't, however, have a source at the moment. I can think of at least one medical text in my library that might, but that's about it. If you have one, please feel free to change the article in question.

Here is hoping you stick around and contribute. If I can be of any assistance, please drop me a note. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 17:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Mennonites in Puerto Rico

Your wish is my command, it is Done! I added some info. in regard to the Mennonites in Puerto Rico in the article which I wrote German immigration to Puerto Rico. Thank you for the suggestion. Tony the Marine (talk) 06:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind note and the additions. :) --Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 13:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

thank you for pointing out the mistake

yes your right. it was an error on my part. i had just got home from work, and was extremely tired when i checked that edit. in my state, i must have read it the other way around and thought i was removing the vandalism. ty for correcting that

Thanks for the kind note and clarification. Also, please be sure to sign your posts on talk pages. :) Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 16:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: 216.73.149.66

Thanks for the note. It's bizarre - there are two IPs who seem obsessed with making that same edit over and over again, for almost a year now. I put in a block as there has certainly been plenty of warning.--Kubigula (talk) 03:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for handling them. Indeed, it is nothing short of bizarre that the IP editors persists with those edits. Thanks again. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 03:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Melodic Death Metal

What part of that 'article' is convincing to you? Do you somehow think you are intellectual by entertaining such nonsense? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.89.46 (talk) 04:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

See WP:PN. The article does need a clean up, but the tag you added was totally inappropriate. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 13:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Superduty

Hello, I have been trying to edit the Superduty article as best I can. I seen you have also been helping cleaning it up. Would you care to assist me in this effort? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana60Cummins (talk • contribs) 17:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello. I assume you mean the Ford Super Duty article. I did a little clean up a while back and will try to help if I can. Is there any area that you think needs improvement? By the way, please be sure to sign your posts on talk pages. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 22:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

this is not vandalism

that picture is deneaning and racist racist towards white women. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.225.163 (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

The picture is included in the article based upon consensus and your removal is indeed vandalism. Please stop your disruptive edits or you will be blocked. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 16:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

what consensus? I don't see any consensus, just you being racist! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.225.163 (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks have no place on Wikipedia. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 17:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Images for the Zombie Panic! Source page

Surv1v4l1st,

I do not have a problem with you uploading images of ZPS to wikipedia. However, if you could use an official screenshot (found on our website and on our ModDB page), that would work best. Preferably one without any chat in it, I would think.

--Frikazoyd (talk) 03:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the permission. If you can help with selecting and preparing the fair use verbiage, that would be great too. Also, totally agree we should have the official logo and the screenshots should not have any chat in it. I'm thinking one of the human and one of the zombie HUD would work well. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 17:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit to anal oral sex

I didn't change anything, and didn't vandalize anything —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.172.239.39 (talk) 05:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Someone from your IP most certainly did. Hence the warning. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 14:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Templating

Please to not template people unless you know what you are talking about. This could be considered rude by some people. --91.55.218.42 (talk) 07:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

You blanked the References section on Transuranium element twice. Not to mention your use of the word "Idiots" in the edit summary might also be considered rude. The warning was more than justified. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 14:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hello Surv1v4l1st, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 01:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. I'll check out the link. :) Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 02:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

including subst: with warning templates

The warnings you have been leaving do not appear to use the subst: function marker as per WP:warn. I think it's required and just to let you know you might have forgotten. Nasnema  Chat  23:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note and heads up. I'll double check the formatting on WP:WARN per your request. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 23:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Pacific War

I've noticed your edits in Allies of World War II and I'm seeking a second opinion regarding the combatants template. I'm trying to keep it consistent with the heading at "Allies" as well as with other theatres of the war (like Western Front (World War II) where Luxembourg is listed). Unfortunately, some editors keep reverting my edits apparently with bias. I'm hoping you could give a second opinion regarding Canada, New Zealand, India, and the Philippines. Thanks.--119.95.7.96 (talk) 08:10, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I will check out the discussion page. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 14:10, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Political Effect of Hurricane Katrina

The fact that these articles are allowed to continue to exist on Wikipedia is frustrating enough; even more so since people know about the existence of the articles and there shortcomings. Then, they make suggestions on how to better a page or merge it with another to make Wikipedia more concise, and it seems that nothing was taken seriously. As far as the Political Effect of Hurricane Katrina goes I have tried to allow for time for people to come forward and defend the article against my suggestion for deletion, but noone has done that. I am afraid that sometimes people become apathetic on topics after a short time. Thus, leading to articles with no clear reason for existing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kschmidt831 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I think the article you referenced (Political Effect of Hurricane Katrina) certainly has some value. I suggested on it's talk page of adding a short reference to a piece of legislation that was passed in the aftermath. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 23:56, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Quakers

There are some problems with your recent set of edits to this list:

• I guess you've been using an automatic search/replace to change hyphens to em dashes, with the result that you've unintentionally messed up a whole bunch of urls, in addition to changing some hyphens in text that should not be changed, for example in ISBNs.
• MOS:DASH indicates that em dashes are incorrect in every case (as far as I can see) where you have used them (plus I think they look terrible). It is, however, fine to use en dashes in place of hyphens to separate dates.

There are so many changes that need to be put back that it may be best to revert the whole lot and start again, but I'll leave it up to you how you want to disentangle the good changes from the bad.

Good luck!

--NSH001 (talk) 21:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notes. Indeed, I used a text editing tool, and that is likely the cause of the issue. My main concern was to make the dates consistent as there were at least five different formats being used. I think the emdash would be the best for the dates.

I will go ahead and do a rollback to correct the aforementioned issues. After which, I can correct the date formatting the old fashioned way; one at a time. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 21:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Just an update. The issue has been corrected. I'm moving forward with other clean up on the article too. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 03:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Duane Whitaker.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Duane Whitaker.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

You forgot to put a license tag on the image... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I believe it is on there now. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 19:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Duane_Whitaker.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Duane_Whitaker.JPG. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

DONE NOTHING WRONG

i didnt say anything that wasnt true :) so why have i been banned ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.1.190 (talk) 19:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Your vandalism is pretty self explanatory. Though you weren't "banned," you most certainly can be blocked for repeatedly vandalizing Wikipedia. Have a nice day. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 19:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Rabies in popular culture

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Rabies in popular culture. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Rabies. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Rabies - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions.  IShadowed  ✰  20:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Contested and talk page entry added. Thanks for the note. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 20:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Climatic Research Unit hacking incident

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Climatic Research Unit hacking incident, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. --TS 14:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)