Revision as of 23:12, 9 September 2006

Better late than never?

Bush One Finger Salute

Regarding the "Bush One Finger Victory Salute:" What kind of section? There are several videos at the end of the article, and they are not in separate sections. Would it be called "Embarassing Video?" Seems unlikely. "Candid Camera?" ""Candid Video?" In the Clinton article the video where he denies "having relations with that woman, Monica" is just tossed in at the end. I was at a Clinton appearance once, and happened to be very near the stage. He said something and I gave a thumbs up, which he promptly returned. I have always wondered if I had given him the finger, would he have reciprocated, and what would have happened subsequently in the 1992 election! Edison 23:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Taking another look at the article, perhaps "Speeches" could be amended to "Speeches and other videos" and could then contain video of brush clearing, landing planes on carriers, jogging, bike riding or whatever as well as video moments before making a formal speech such as this one. Or a section called "Other Videos" could be added and include this and other videos of interest which are not speeches per se.Edison 00:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Like you say, to amend it to read "Speeches and other videos" would open up the section to videos covering anything. That would only make the situation worse. As far as a section labeled "Other Videos", that could work but the article is already fairly long. I say we just leave it as is. AuburnPilot 00:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

george bush article

When did you first begin editing here at Misplaced Pages? It seems you have an awful lot of theories on how it should be done. Be consistent ... no using different guidelines for sections you do not want in the article. "Duke53 | Talk" 21:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I have been editing for quite some time. Thanks for your concern. AuburnPilot 21:26, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Geez, I see that, all the way back to July 29, 2006. "Duke53 | Talk" 22:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Not that I have to explain anything to you, Duke53, but I edited anonymously before registering this name, which I now use. AuburnPilot 22:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Glad to be of any service. =3 I'll try to keep a little eye on it and see if I can jump in for anything else, but feel free to come grab me again if you need. Luna Santin 23:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Fox News Biased

Fox News is biased. To say otherwise is utterly dishonest (more like stupid). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crashdavis (talk • contribs)

That is your POV and Misplaced Pages has a policy of WP:NPOV. AuburnPilot 22:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Best

Grammar-- perhaps it is worth your five minutes to review it. You have corrected my corrections several times, and what is wrong with your changes?

I dearly apologize for having harmed and/or interrupted your day. I pledge I will not edit any more pages today. I'd say "In Christ," but you don't seem like the type of guy who would understand that, so permit me to say, "Best, Crash." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crashdavis (talk • contribs)

Not sure what that comment means, but you have been blocked for violation of the WP:3RR. AuburnPilot 22:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen this neat wikigadget?

I noticed you removing a category from that page and thought you might have use for this. You click the plus sign to expand a category

User:Pedant 06:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

George W. Bush wpbiography

Yeah, sorry about that. Green caterpillar 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem, just wanted to make sure that was correct. AuburnPilot 21:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

3rr

I've sure you're on the side of the angels, etc etc, but you've clearly broekn 3RR at Birmingham, Alabama. Please remember there is on excuse of "but I was right". Self revert now... William M. Connolley 21:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Somebody added the comment that people evacuating to Birmingham were responsible for the increase in crime. Not only is this false, as I live in Birmingham, it was unsourced and obviously a POV unsupported by fact. I clearly marked the Utilities comment, referring to government corruption, with the {{fact}} tag. As I understand it, and I quote, "In cases of simple vandalism that is clearly not a content dispute (e.g. graffiti, link spam), the three-revert rule does not apply." Being the one who reported the 3RR violation, your message here surprises me. AuburnPilot 21:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)