Jump to content

User talk:Berean Hunter: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
Line 128: Line 128:


Since you have now acknowleged the original programme is still in production, then immediately restore that original article to the number one position on the disambiguation page - if you are truly unbiased as to how these articles appear. The original article should retain the number one position it has held for many many years. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/64.134.189.5|64.134.189.5]] ([[User talk:64.134.189.5|talk]]) 14:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Since you have now acknowleged the original programme is still in production, then immediately restore that original article to the number one position on the disambiguation page - if you are truly unbiased as to how these articles appear. The original article should retain the number one position it has held for many many years. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/64.134.189.5|64.134.189.5]] ([[User talk:64.134.189.5|talk]]) 14:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== account deletion ==

Please delete the account 'superchargedone" I created this evening to respond and attempt to deal with users Barek, Sladen, et. al. Clearly the consensus of all Wikipedia administration parties is that the Assange article in question -- which was deliberately superimposed last month, over top of the original article of the EXACT SAME program name -- will remain at the number one spot, and in the number one position on the disambiguation page thus replacing the original article which was extant for many years.

Why don't you simply delete the original article for our broadcast of The World Tomorrow (1934) program altogether, while you are at it.

Respectfully,

Garner Ted Aukerman
The World Tomorrow Evangelistic Association
SAG-AFTRA, Hollywood Office

Revision as of 04:50, 11 May 2012

| Berean Hunter | Talk Page | Sandbox | Sandbox2 | Leave me a message |

Sticky Note: Operation Brothers at War

1949's forgotten version, or ver #2 of the now famous magic 8 ball

hey berean, first let me say that i am not a good typist i use 1 finger, lol i was saddened when my post was removed after it taking me quite a while to type, it said the reason was because i had no reference for my information, this was the entire reason for the post, there is no information on this ball, i have searched for 3 months for any info or a image, only one unofficial site that mentions its existence, it contains a lot less info than i posted, the reason i even know about it is i was cleaning out a old building and found one in great condition, it is in its orig box with a old school price stamped on the box not a sticker, i remember when they used them way back, i have tried emailing hasbro to get info but they never responded, and the various 8 ball sites sites on the net do not respond either, i even emailed noel barrett the famous toy appraiser and he sent the reply no info i also tried to find info on dixie sales inc with no luck, so i challenge you to find more info than i provided, please try i would like to know more about it my self, but everything i posted is accurate, the wiki page about the 8 ball states that the 8 ball did not exist until 1950 and that there was two non ball types made early on 1946 i think then a iridescent model in 1948 my box says patented 1948 so it must have been made after 1948 and we know the 8 ball started in 1950,my ball is not iridescent it is red and it has a name and is made by alabe crafts, so this leaves only one possibility it was made in 1949, please research it a little and let me know if i am accurate because i have spent quite a bit of time posting and explaining and researching this darn ball, they stated that they did not sell well until 1950, who knows i may have the only one in existence.. give a quick look around for any info and get back to me when you have time..Vandredi (talk) 03:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Vandredi, I have taken a cursory look with no luck. I may try to look more when I get a little more free time than I have at the moment. Your post is better made as an inquiry on the talk page to see if other editors may be able to verify its existence. It is very important to use reliable sources and cite them in the article so if you don't have that other editors might be able to help.
Have you posted pictures of what you have somewhere? Is there a patent or copyright number on the ball or box?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 13:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re Richard Coyle

Hello! Im not really sure how exactly to edit my page so Im glad you contacted me! Im Richard Coyle, and I was trying to amend a few inaccuracies that are on the page, for instance my birth date. These things are mentioned in a magazine piece or misquoted in an interview and seem to become gospel. My birthday is 06/02/74. I cant really provide citations short of sending you my birth cert! But I would appreciate this being corrected, I think the other inaccuracies I can probably manage myself.! Many thanks (Caquesteere (talk) 09:05, 1 May 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you very much for responding. I understand your frustration at getting this corrected and I will be happy to help. Wikipedia is driven by what is in published sources and not necessarily the truth. Even the article subjects can not self-reference.
If you happen to have an official public website or other public relations channel where you could publish relevant biographical details that may make it easier on you to correct this and other media errors. I tried unsuccessfully to find an official site. Another option would be to give this information in your next media interview and we could use that once it is published.
A novel approach would be to have yourself photographed holding a sign stating your birthday.
On that topic, a photograph or two would be an excellent improvement to the article. If you are willing to have one donated as a non-copyrighted work, we have a couple of ways in which that may be accomplished. First, you would probably want to set up an email account associated with your Wikipedia editing account so that the Wikimedia Foundation could give confirmations to you.
Looking forward to your response,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 12:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the purpose of that link was not to advertise. I'm an avid blogger and have just recently made an attempt to begin making wikipedia contributions. The info I got was from one of my favorite blogs and the most relevant link was to their online store section. Would it be better if I linked to the store's blog in the future? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonhabtemariam (talkcontribs) 20:08, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. No, we don't link to commercial endeavors unless they are a particular article subject. It would be better to support with citations from published mainstream sources. For example, using Charlie Papazian's books or Zymurgy would be great. We can't use blogs as sources generally.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 20:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A neat new gadget you might find useful

I recently asked on Village pump (technical) if someone could write a script that would allow the corresponding talk page or main page to be displayed when viewing articles in a category. User:Equazcion was kind enough to build it. The script can be found here. The script also shows in red if the corresponding page has not been created yet. I have found it to be very useful and wanted to share it. Kumioko (talk) 14:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is very cool; thank you for letting me know. I'll have a look at his other scripts. :)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 18:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Teddy bear

Why did you take my conterbution to the teadybeare page down it is trou so u must be a full on downie to not realise that. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rory1616 (talkcontribs) 13:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speak english?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 17:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my change. Do you have any objections or did you simply mean that status quo trumps one user's opinion? Lophotrochozoa (talk) 16:58, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On policies, it would be best to get consensus first before making changes. That's all.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 17:45, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That was my second suggestion. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 18:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Hopkins

there is nothing inaccurate about edits I have made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmonasco (talkcontribs) 03:37, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked 24 hours for edit-warring. You will need to discuss on the article talk page and attempt to gain consensus there.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 11:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Julian Assange Show

Won't you please watch the show? It's now called "The Julian Assange Show" as of it's second episode. By all means, feel free to contact the attorney for Assange and his production and RT, should you need further clarification.

<obscured to protect> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.189.137 (talk) 02:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the intro of tonight's show which still uses the World Tomorrow. The 2nd & 3rd shows also do. What you are saying is not correct. You will need to show us a ref...we won't be calling his attorney.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 02:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.hulu.com/the-julian-assange-show

Watch the USA feed of the program as it airs on Russia Today television network. The program is called "The Julian Assange Show". That is irrefutable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.148.127.131 (talk) 02:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted this on the article talk page. This is where editors should discuss and reach a consensus. In the future, this is what you should do and you will come much closer to getting results than edit-warring. Okay?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 03:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I'll take a look later today.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 13:25, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the New Yorker link ... the title of their article is "The Julian Assange Show"; but within the body of the article, it clearly references "The World Tomorrow" as the title of the television program. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 15:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Barek. I was out longer than I thought I would be. I've seen the article talk page and agree. Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 21:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Since you have now acknowleged the original programme is still in production, then immediately restore that original article to the number one position on the disambiguation page - if you are truly unbiased as to how these articles appear. The original article should retain the number one position it has held for many many years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.189.5 (talk) 14:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

account deletion

Please delete the account 'superchargedone" I created this evening to respond and attempt to deal with users Barek, Sladen, et. al. Clearly the consensus of all Wikipedia administration parties is that the Assange article in question -- which was deliberately superimposed last month, over top of the original article of the EXACT SAME program name -- will remain at the number one spot, and in the number one position on the disambiguation page thus replacing the original article which was extant for many years.

Why don't you simply delete the original article for our broadcast of The World Tomorrow (1934) program altogether, while you are at it.

Respectfully,

Garner Ted Aukerman The World Tomorrow Evangelistic Association SAG-AFTRA, Hollywood Office