User talk:Samtheboy

This user may have left Wikipedia. Samtheboy has not edited Wikipedia since 6 January 2019. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Can you please help defend me against the trolls? They're in Full Attack mode. JAF1970 (talk) 16:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering why you returned the neutrality tag to this page. The tag was originally added a long time ago and much work has been done to make the page more neutral. Please can you comment? --Samtheboy ^(t/c) 15:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page very much reads like it advocates their positions and views, which is not a NPOV state, and will be removed (by me, when I have time soon)... we can talk about their positions of views, but NOT ever advocate them even slightly. Especially not bigotry and hate speech towards homosexuals which that Europeon gang of trolls keeps adding (also why I requested semi-protection). - Denny 15:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. How long do protections last for as I would like to trawl through the article and remove as much NPOV as I can. --Samtheboy ^(t/c) 15:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think just a day or three(ish) or until concensus is sorted a bit on the talk page. That article definitely needs to stay under semi-protection for a long while however to keep those related trolls/vandals out. - Denny 15:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heya Samtheboy. On the Talk:Christadelphians page you said that 'Christian redirects to Christianity' as evidence that Christadelphians should be changed to Christadelphianism - I've just check, and it doesn't redirect to 'Christianity'; it has it's own entry (so it's not evidence in favour of a name change for the Christadelphians article). Was going to comment on the Talk:Christadelphians page, but figured I'd do it here first. Hope you are well. God bless. --Woofboy 19:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tee hee. What a babe! Thanks for that. Where you on Cov. Camp this year? If so, hope you had a fantastic time. --Woofboy 09:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to thank you for moving my comments. Sorry, I was a little oblivious to which page I was on when I wrote it! Got it right this time at least. Thanks a lot for the help and advice! Whiskey in the Jar 12:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Same situation here. Appreciate you "setting me straight", such as it were. Thanks for your guidance. DarthCat 14:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, sorry about that--12345ak 23:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: "

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to 1 Night in Paris. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Samtheboy ^(t/c) 12:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)"[reply]

I don't know where you got the idea that I edited 1 Night in Paris. I did not edit it and a cursory viewing of the page's edit history would have revealed this information. --(3ditor88 16:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Well, that is odd, my apologies for the confusion. --3ditor88 17:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you are a Delph. What ecclesia are you from? I'm from Rugby. Cls14 11:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You must know Josh Baines then? Cls14 22:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(To Samtheboy/Cls14: I am Anita and I have removed my name for the third time from this section now as I do not wish to be associated with Joshua Baines or Rugby Christadelphian Church. I thought this as the best way to make my intentions perfectly clear, you may delete this message but please to not put my name back on here!!!)

Thanks for that, never even noticed! Whiskey in the Jar 13:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so mean to me? All i want to do is have my own wikipedia page! How could you be so cruel! And you say American English is crude, so all i have to say to that is this - hey guys, want some candy at the gasoline station on the freeway? Then we can walk on the sidewalk! Reevesgla1919 15:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You r mean to me and my free toast, matey! Reevesgla1919 15:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YOU ARE SOOO CRUEL. I'm not going to be bossed about by a cyber-dictator like you! I am going to stand up for my beliefs, and me and my friends are going to lead a revolution against you and your team of Wikipedian authoritarians. Reevesgla1919 15:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

category "High schools in the Philippines pls. put up Lord's Shepherds Academy in this category...

--Shepherds 17:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please put up Lord's Shepherds Academy in this category... this school offers both elementary,and secondary schooling. tnx.

--Shepherds 17:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the assist. — Deckiller 08:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my goodness, I was so shocked when I saw my Userpage being blanked. Thank goodness you helped me! Thanks a lot! I spent a lot of time, so I was practically dead when I saw my blank Userpage!

Also, I had just checked on my friend's Userpage, User:WPholic, and she also had a partially blanked page too! Do you know who could have done this horrible deed?

Littleghostboo[ talk ] (Win an argument and leave your mark in history.) 07:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't monitor or revert my userpage again. Thanks. - DarkPrime

You have posted the same IP to WP:AIV 4 times now, it is there, it will be responded too. No need to post the same report more than once. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I tried to revert it back but encountered an Edit Conflict from you..Thanks anyway..--Cometstyles 13:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually while blanking one's own talk page is discouraged, it does not constitute vandalism. —dgies^t_c 06:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? Seems a slightly odd way of going about things especially as there is the {{subst:uw-tpv1}} warning message. Surely blanking out recent warnings to avoid other editors doling out the appropriate warning does constitute vandalism as per any other form of blanking? Maybe that's just my opinion, but as I detest vandalism, I would see it that way! --Samtheboy ^(t/c) 06:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I don't like it when people blank their own talk page, but the uw-tpv series templates are intended more for use on article and project talk pages. The reason blanking one's own user page is allowed is that people sometimes leave warnings for what the editor considers a constructive edit. They then blank the warning which they feel was uncalled-for. If talk page blanking is considered vandalism, then then get an escalated warning for what might not have been vandalism in the first place, and this could lead to a block. Imagine if I left you a totally bogus warning, then you blank it, then I leave you a {{uw-tpv4}} warning, you blank that, then I report you to WP:AIV and get you blocked. Not very fair, huh? Admins patrolling AIV are generally alert enough to check talk page histories to find legit warnings if need be. —dgies^t_c 06:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Sam about the blanking, but perhaps you'd also like to take a read over the content of Matsui 1409T and then decide how it should proceed. I was going to log in and nominate it for deletion, but I realised that I really should be studying. So I got petty instead, whoops. 193.1.172.104 15:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for reverting vandalism to my userpage, turns out the user was creating pages and adding speedy deletion tags on himself and I asked him not to and he was not best pleased, anyway; thank you and happy editing! The Sunshine Man 16:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page, too. =) -- Gogo Dodo 20:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pablo flores has violated my civil rights deleting my discussion on elisa carrio. That imbecil is overseas so he does not need to worry that much about my civil rights. This abusive behavious, knowing he is immune to the law in the US must not be tolerated by wikipedia. He must not work as a censor, he must not be allowed to do anything to whatever was produced in the territory of the US, he should refrain from invading our territoriality, he should remain concentrated in the articles produced in his own country. Now i understand why he cared so little about my warnings regarding our bill of rights. also, his english is as good as my dog's, he can't add comentary in a language he has so poor command of.

Thanks for your kind words and thanks for starting the article Statute on Jews, long overdue. FYI, I listed it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history/New article announcements. Cheers. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 20:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Samtheboy,

I must confess to being a little confused and insulted when you suggested I should have to change my username.

I am not familiar with all the myriad rules of wikipedia, or the reasons for them, but having checked the link you gave I agree that my username currently falls foul of the clause in section 5 which prohibits "Usernames that include slurs, or references to reproductive or excretory bodily functions."

You are absolutely right to pull me up, and I apologise if I have caused you distress. I shall read the username policy thoroughly and then try to invent one which is both available and possible for me to remember.

The reason I chose that username is because it is the one that randomly / telepathically sprung into my head when I was trying to find an account name which had not been taken to set up my yahoo email account.

Since then, to make it easier for me to remember what is going on, I use it for just about all the accounts I open, since no-one else seems to have taken to it.

In my humble opinion, what I would describe as the pedantic attitude of the wikipedia community and its doctrines is likely to deter all but hardened tech-heads from contributing, hence creating an elitism which is based on access to net-time, rather than cognitive skills, which an academic meritocracy would seem to benefit more from.

Truce?

x

René Thomas

i've removed all the vandalism he's left on other people's pages today...it's like he's got a weird obsession with a body part. Anyways, thanks for the help with Maverick423's page, and thanks for putting some warnings on this anonymous user's page Jru Gordon 06:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you replied: I've reported him now as well, so that should be the end of it. --Samtheboy (t/c) 06:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

so i now say: i hope so. I'm new to having to report people. Is this where WP:AIV would have been useful? Jru Gordon 07:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for reverting my talk page back to normal. I never did get to see the vandalism when it was there, I saw it when I checked my talk page's history.--Jru Gordon 07:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for reverting the vandalism on my talk page =) i was gone for quite a while so i wouldnt of been able to catch it for a while! Maverick423 Says Im in ur science steeling ur gravities 06:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

speaking of which wow i just noticed how bad it got they even got my main page and stuff. i here there is a program here for protection against vandels but i dont know where can you help me find it =) thanks Maverick423 Says Im in ur science steeling ur gravities 06:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so I know, whats wrong with short pages and why do you delete them? How can I avoid them being deleted?

Sorry - I thought I WAS leaving the message on the discussion page. My cursor must have slipped... SoniaUK 16:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next question, how did this one escape you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonelygirl15 Shes a youtube user as well, so why does she have a wiki page? I know shes fake and some sort of advertising scam, but still... --Vorkagen 16:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also why did you delte PS WII BOX it meets the requirments for a stub. What was wrong with my refrences. I stated clearly that it was a rumour and I think it is incredibly rude you delted it before consulting me so I could not save my work to better it!

And did you edit the References section to find where the source text was? Victuallers 20:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had looked at the school page and the main problem to getting a better grade was lack of refs. I assumed the problem might be education required so I left the cryptic guide. If you can create a ref on that school page then it may show others what is required Victuallers 20:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is more .... the text is a bit light as for instance you cover a lot of time in few words in your history... however I have to move to other work. Oh and the info box is a bug I can fix, Can someone get a camera? <== another cryptic hint Victuallers 21:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T Can you tag this as a school IP adress? Thanks.. - 216.73.66.42 16:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-Duke of Marlborough School, Churchill, Manitoba, Canada. - 216.73.66.42 16:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops! I completely missed that I'd placed them on the user page direct. I've issued an apology to the user in question on the talk page. It totally escaped my notice because the user page hadn't been created. Coldmachine^Talk 19:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I'm awarding you this barnstar of diligence for your combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service to wikipedia. Wikidudeman (talk) 13:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i just edited the Weakest link page to remove a double posting which was correct?

You should really become an administrator. You're work around Wikipedia is awesome and you help out with stopping vandals especially on the page Yohoho! Puzzle Pirates. If you ever apply, you should get in because you're awesome and you help out all over the place. YOU GOT MY VOTE!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by GoaliesRUS (talk • contribs) 21:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article doesn't meet any of the three basic criteria at the top of WP:BIO, which clearly states that all three of those criteria must be met to establish notability. Propaniac 23:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's set aside the first two criteria for now. The biggest problem is that the article definitely doesn't link to "published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." It links to the guy's own website, which is inherently not independent of the subject. To prove notability, he basically needs to show that he's been noted by other people. This typically means newspaper or magazine articles about the subject. Linking to the website of one of the awards wouldn't be sufficient, because anyone could make up an award and create a website for it; that's the point of the "published" stipulation. If there were some independent articles ABOUT him winning the award, that would be better.

As for criteria #1, about the article asserting notability, I don't think just saying that he won the award is enough to show he's notable enough for his own article (there are lots of award winners who don't have articles), but in concert with independent published coverage, that would probably suffice. And I don't think it meets criteria #2, WP:BLP, because nothing in the article is cited to sources (which is necessary to show both verifiability and that it's not original research).

I don't have any vendetta against you or the article, so if you want more time to work on it (or if you still think it doesn't need improvement to comply with WP policy), I don't mind leaving it as is for now. But if I come across it in a month or two and it hasn't been improved I may put it up on AFD. Propaniac 00:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that you need proof that he won the award, it's that, to put it bluntly, you need proof that anyone cares. I'm not disparaging Mr. Brown, but, for example, if I decide to make up an award called the Propaniac Award For Awesome Shoes, and I give it to my best friend because I think his shoes are awesome, and I make a website that describes the award and names my friend as the recipient, that doesn't mean my friend is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Even if I were a notable person myself, and I gave out an award, that doesn't automatically mean that the recipient qualifies for a Wikipedia article, any more than it would make my spouse or sibling or neighbor notable. But if there are multiple newspaper articles about my giving the award to this person, that shows that people think it's significant. It doesn't necessarily mean that the recipient is any more talented or deserving of recognition than someone who hasn't won an award, or someone who won an award that wasn't highly publicized. But at some point it was decided that Wikipedia shouldn't have an article on every single thing under the sun, and requiring secondary sources for articles serves both as a way to delineate between what should be included and what should not, and as a way to verify the information that is included. Propaniac (talk) 21:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, I probably wouldn't try to prod or delete the article now that the second link and the reference to the second award has been added. I still think it probably wouldn't meet Wikipedia requirements 100%, and if it went up on AFD against a bunch of hardliners it might not pass, but it doesn't raise red flags for me anymore. Propaniac (talk) 22:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is an administrator at Mantua Township Schools,

Our kids are learning about Wikis and Wikipedia in class, we have set up an internal Wiki for them to play on, but I've noticed some of them are still coming over to Wikipedia to delete or vandalize articles here. The account for our IP: 209.204.99.3 seems to have a number of warnings.

I would appreciate it if you could disable anonymous editing from this IP: 209.204.99.3 (which should also be the one I'm posting from).

Once again, thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.204.99.3 (talk) 17:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked discretionly (my spellchecker does not believe that to be a word - and I tend to agree) as we usually don't do self requested blocks. I did a week as I hope the lesson will be finished by then, or at least the novelty worn off. I would also comment that you can put the school ip template on the page yourself, as this is a wiki, but would confirm that I checked that the ip did return to that school. Template away! Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 21:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Well this is a test from me to me.... Samtheboy ^(t/c) 00:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hey there i didn't feel it was vandalism,

i just thought it was a neat way they mightve come up with the name why are you so harsh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.253.247.111 (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, now i understand i <3 wiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.253.247.111 (talk) 02:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Samtheboy,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Elmidae and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Cludo should be deleted. Your comments are welcome over Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cludo .

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Elmidae}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]