User talk:Loodog/archive2

Tallest buildings in Providence

Hey - thank you for your support of this list to reach Featured status. Just wanted to let you know, that since you have posted your Support in the opinion box, a talk page consensus has been reached to remove all opinion boxes from every entry, therefore removing your Support. So, if you are still in support, it would be great if you could write it in the discussion area. Thank you, Raime 14:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Detroit People Mover

I left my comments beneath yours on the article page. --Mikerussell 22:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Meetup

I am not sure if you live in Chicagoland, but I see you have edited Chicago quite a bit. If you are not from Chicago I apologize for the following message. A Chicago Meetup has been scheduled. I hope the time and place are convenient. Your reply would be appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I live on the East Coast.--Loodog 20:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

comments from the move request

• Strong Oppose "City, State" is a standard US convention for identifying any city and seems well established in Wikipedia. The more exceptions, the harder it is to deal with the process and the ore cross-checking is needed. Furthermore, while the cities proposed for this move are often known by city name alone, not all of them are unique city names. Determining that the non-unique name in one state is so impressivley prominent as to trump any other use of the name in another state seems to me to rather subjective and not appropriate for the Wikipedia. Pzavon 01:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment And yet we've already done it for all these places by having the base page redirect to them.--Loodog 01:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Good point, but reason does not seem to affect them. --Serge 01:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: SineBot

Hi there. SineBot got your barnstar, but he is sadly too busy as of late to send you a reply, so he told me, his personal slave, to send you one instead. He says thanks, and he wishes you the best. Cheers. :) --slakr 03:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Linkspamming

The Maddox linkspam has been removed from the E90 article. Folks have been blocked for spamming iPhone and E90 articles with it, please refrain from re-adding it. Yes, Maddox is great and funny, but the link doesn't make the article better. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

See also: WP:AGF--Loodog 04:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

What does AGF have to do with my request? - CHAIRBOY (☎) 12:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Tendtentious editing

The linkspamming issue on the Nokia page is reaching the point of disruption. Please reconsider. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 02:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Try taking this objectively

The disruption you accuse me of can only go on as long as User:Wibbble engages me for it. Only once have I posted without it being a direct response to that editor. I assure you that I do not continue my argument for the sake of ego, proving anyone wrong, or disrpution, but because I sincerely believe that this change will improve the article to those who read it.--Loodog 03:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm absolutely certain you do, I'm not accusing you of editing in bad faith. But your insistence is bordering on disruption, hence my gentle suggestion that you reconsider. You don't believe me, and that's fine, perhaps you should request external comment. I think Wibble is arguing from a point supported by policy and our style guide, and you aren't, but you're welcome to seek out another opinion. If we all agreed all the time, it'd be boring. One thing that puzzles me is the subject of your message, where does objectivity come in? You didn't mention it in your message, seems a bit like a stinky fish. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 03:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

maddox & nokia phone

I think you'll find that I found a pretty solid precedent for including the disputed info. Thanks for the head up. Mujarimojo 07:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Template removal

The NEC template was accidentally removed, sorry about that. However, the MBTA one is only meant for {{Infobox rail line}}, thus it need not be on the Providence station page. Geoking66_talk 21:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Orbitz and Maddox

I left my comment at Talk:Orbitz. I imagine you have no desire for me to enter the debate on the other article, given my position. Nothing personal, I just don't see a deep value in the material from his site. That said, I don't know the specifics of your dispute and you might well be right, so good luck with it. -Harmil 02:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Providence

Just to let you know, I submitted a request for Providence to be featured on the main page. Seeing that you worked heavily on getting the article to featured status, you may wish to comment here. New England ^{Review Me!}/Go Red Sox! 13:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC) (formerly Black Harry if you didn't know)

Nice. I apppreciate the promotion of a fine article.--Loodog 16:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Truman Show

Hi friend, you reverted my edit: [1]. I have thus modified the sentence again, maybe this time it'll appease you [2]. Have a nice weekend, bud. Scarian^Talk 20:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Outline map of Rhode Island and SE Mass

Hey, so, better late than never. I uploaded that map of the Providence metropolitan area, added an infobox, and cleaned up some things in the article a bit. Fresh perspective, right? I'm not too happy with the color scheme - I was trying to make sure the New Bedford and Providence MSAs were somewhat delineated from each other, but if I made Providence all the exact same color it was too hard to differentiate where the state line between Mass and RI was. That was the best I could come up with. Let me know what you think. Petros63 05:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Writing comments into the text at Los Angeles

Hi there, thanks for you interest in detail and correct US Census figures. I appreciate that its important to list correct, unifrom census figures, but I don't think it is necessary or desirable to enter into the HTML coded references that only limit free editing. You have no reason to insert shouting points (All capitals) that really make the article look amateurish and part of a petty fight. The talk page is the place to respond to issues. Could you make an effort to entend your desire to make census articles uniform across all articles to the actual HTML of each article. Thanks --Mikerussell 19:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Please see my response on the talk page.--Loodog 19:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)