User talk:Bonadea/Archive 7

I'm trying to add "cellint" and its deleted. Can you help me restore it? Thanks.

I'm trying to add the term "cellint" and its being deleted. Can you help me restore it? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ovnion (talk • contribs) 15:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The reason I haven't answered this is that the editor has received plenty of responses on their talk page from other editors, and so there is no reason for me to repeat what others have already said. --bonadea contributions talk 10:21, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Str8lace article

Go ahead and report the guy to ANI (or better yet the vandal board), I just reverted his removal of the tag again. Moogwrench (talk) 11:49, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I was having lunch when you wrote that - unless they return and do it again I don't think there is any point in reporting them now. Thanks for the heads-up, though. I'll keep an eye open, because it looks like they don't have much interest in respecting the rules. --bonadea contributions talk 12:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: Article recreated... --bonadea contributions talk 12:53, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

You are verry nice to new people

Hi there,

this is my first experience and what I know, deleted before I hade the time to finish writting my content.

Thanks for this great experience —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeadSeaBathSalt (talk • contribs) 17:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The article hasn't been deleted yet, from what I can see - and you were told on your talk page how to go about contesting the deletion. --bonadea contributions talk 17:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I am confused, sorry for all this, I need to read more to understand how everything works. Thanks for your reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeadSeaBathSalt (talk • contribs) 17:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Stop deleting my posts

Bonadea, I would like you to stop deleting my posts, im only trying to pay the bills, if you continue to do this, my children will have one less present under the tree, thanks, David Thorne —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walkepidia (talk • contribs) 21:47, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

If edits like this and this are what you do to pay the bills you may want to think about a change of profession. --bonadea contributions talk 08:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

What a surprise, you left for me!

Hello Bonadea, Ekabhishek has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Yes, it made my day better :-) Thank you! --bonadea contributions talk 12:28, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yes

Because they are my sockpuppets. Please delete them for me, I did them by mistake, and I didn't know they were exactly wrong or called "sockpuppets" until User:Classical Esther informed me of it kindly. Oh dear! Please delete them for me, though I think User accounts can't be deleted. Pretty Lydie (talk) 09:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

For your information

Hi Bonadea, I wanted to touch base with you to let you know that I have recently blocked a group of accounts with which you've had some interaction. I commend you for the cautious and considerate way that you dealt with this situation; working with new users in a way that is helpful and pleasant can be challenging, but I think you have exemplified best practices in this case. Thank you for your work in this area; I for one think it is very valuable to the continued growth of our project. Risker (talk) 17:53, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words! I don't always succeed in being sufficiently patient with new users, but it's very good to know I get it right occasionally :-) --bonadea contributions talk 22:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

New page patrol

Thanks for your help in new page patrol. If you tag an article for deletion (by PROD, speedy, etc.) don't forget to patrol it as well so that it is removed from the patrol list. Stifle (talk) 14:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder - I probably forget that sometimes when I find new pages from Recent Changes or New Contributors rather than from New Pages. Will try to remember that in future :-) Happy New Year! --bonadea contributions talk 16:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hello Bonadea, Thanks for fixing the vandalism on Breakup of Yugoslavia - I spent several hours on that page last week. xx 2007apm (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure! --bonadea contributions talk 09:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Bonadea. You have new messages at Hello, I'm a Wikipedian!'s talk page.
Message added 16:20 9 April 2010. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Hi, I'm a Scooby-pedian! (talk) 21:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Bonadea. You have new messages at Hello, I'm a Wikipedian!'s talk page.
Message added 18:45 9 April 2010. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Hi, I'm a Scooby-pedian! (talk) 23:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

SPI and the good doctor

Hi Bonadea, You'll find this helpful [1] for the reporting of the three accounts you did to AIV for the SPI case against the doctor accounts. There has already been a sock puppet investigation for this individual in the past and a record has been made at long term abuse (link above). Most admins should block these accounts on site and deny reconginition to this user. It may be helpful to direct the AIV clerks to the long term abuse case that was opened at the above link. Hope this extra information helps you in deciding what course of action to take about these accounts. BTW very good eye cacthing the edits :) Ottawa4ever (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear, I'm afraid I got called away from the computer and then I was distracted by something shiny and... well, anyway, it's been a few hours now. Perhaps there is still reason to create a SPI case though, especially since he's been up to this before. (I would never have found that long term abuse entry, though it really doesn't surprise me to see that it's a returning vandal. Thank you for the pointer!) --bonadea contributions talk 22:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Its hard to miss since its rather small, but the guy's damage is easily fixed, he just inserts joe castillo into articles (and its usually the same articles) so hes easy to spot. At any rate, if you need help with setting up the spi case id more than happy to contribute help. Ottawa4ever (talk) 10:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you - I did set up a case last night here - it's not been linked from WP:SPI yet but the instructions say a clerk will do that. (I didn't think Checkuser was necessary, it is too obvious.) --bonadea contributions talk 11:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for the revert on Bill Flemming. Much apprecaited. Chris (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Nobel Prize

Hello! I am currently working on the "Swedish Project" and "Award and Prizes"'s article Nobel Prize. Since it is a top importance article and not even GA class I am trying to make it a GA article and perhaps further after that. However, I'm in a state now where I could use some help. I need a new pair (several pairs in fact) of eyes to look at the article and the talk page for improving prose, debation of different things and some sourcing. Do you got any possibility to help out? BR --Esuzu 12:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Editing query

Hi i am new to wikipedia and im just wondering what was wrong on my recent edit to the fritzl case? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Respectme11 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

• Your edit to Fritzl case removed the whole article and replaced it with a nonsensical statement. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand why that is a problematic edit. If you want to know more about Wikipedia, read the introduction to find out more about what Wikipedia is and isn't. --bonadea contributions talk 13:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for editing .. Google Code

Hi, I only try to make sample of google application that i used in my site & i try to help people like me to test google apps before used in personal site... i try to make another site with apple & microsoft apps for making personal site... i know what`s your word meaning and i didn`t see you & other user notice about editing this page.. and some other page like that... thanks for your notice... & i`m sorry again. (Myshark (talk) 20:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC))

Groupons - further explanation for your deletion would be appreciated.

Just to be clear about where I'm coming from I'll start with how I came to this Wikipedia entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupon

I met with a business friend recently who told me over lunch about Groupon and that he was thinking of launching a similar service in his country. He suggested I look into doing the same in my own separate region. So, as is my habit, Wikipedia was one of the places I started to look into Groupon.

It was a very useful article and of particular interest was the "Competition" section. I emailed the article link to a friend and told them to look at the competition section. They replied the next day saying "what competition section?" You had deleted it's contents, with the exception of one entry.

I then checked all the companies it had listed and found them all to be relevant to the article. So I add them back with links to each of their web sites.

You deleted it a second time. Now you say that your reason for deleting it is: "Removing list. The issue is notability, not whether the companies exist or not. No indication of notability for any of them. The external links are inappropriate per this policy."

Following the link to "Notability" I think that having a list of imitators and competitors is highly notable. Also the "policy" you cite is ambiguous. Which of the 19 possibilities do you believe this applies to?

Lastly I'm a Wikipedia user, I've occasional contributed but I don't police it as seems to be your hobby.

As a user I found this information very useful and I believe that is the essence of Wikipedia, as a repository of knowledge. Had I read this article after you had deleted this information I would have found it significantly less useful.

Perhaps being a little less "academic", in your approach would be of benefit to all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seoras (talk • contribs) 01:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Leaving the comments directed at myself aside, there are a couple of different issues here. The notability issue is to do with whether those other companies are notable enough to be mentioned (Groupon's notability isn't in question here). There is a recurring problem with lists like that in Wikipedia articles, with people adding list items to promote companies or people, which means that the entries in the list should themselves have some indication of notability. This policy is one that applies to lists. The reason I removed the list, both times, was that none of the entries had a Wikipedia article, which means that there is no way of telling whether they are notable or not. All the entries had been added only a day or two before it was removed the first time - the list hadn't been there before, at all. For some reason the person who added them chose the heading "International imitators" for the non-US-based companies they wanted to list there. That the heading was inappropriate is obviously not a reason in itself to remove the list, but it indicated that the person who put it there may have been interested in promoting Groupon by hinting that other, similar sites are "imitators".

As for the external links, they are inappropriate for more than one reason covered by this policy, primarily points 19, 13 and 1, but to some extent also 4 and 5. I appreciate that you added the links in order to show that the list entries are in fact companies that are in competition with the article's subject, and you weren't trying to spam or advertise the companies. But the links are still not appropriate, mostly because they are not in fact about the subject of the article, but only tangentially related.

Hope that explains it. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 09:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Mike Pandey

Thanks for the edits to this article. Shadowjams (talk) 09:31, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought it would be a shame to delete it, and had time to fix it, so... :-) Thank you for the note, much appreciated! --bonadea contributions talk 10:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: We Are The In Crowd

Hello Bonadea. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of We Are The In Crowd, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: signed to a label notable enough for an article is a credible assertion of notability. PROD or take to AfD. Thank you. GedUK  20:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the heads-up! I don't feel that strongly about it, so will let someone else PROD/AfD it if they feel it's needful. --bonadea contributions talk 20:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Methods of website linking

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Methods of website linking. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methods of website linking. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

My "work" on that article consists of some vandal fighting - it's a popular article for teh spammerz to include their linkspamming spamlinks on... --bonadea contributions talk 07:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for Undeletion of Article -SURESH MURUGAN

Dear Bonadea, Request UNDELETION of article -Suresh Murugan. As you have mentioned that this artist were trying to counteract the pro-Western hemisphere bias in Wikipedia, and also you have mentioned the sources in the current article do not serve to show that the subject meets. Please contact EagleVision Production in Singapore and MediaCorp Production in Singapore for live events / television show which mentioned in Filmography, for further source to undeletion request, i will provide NEWSPRESS evidence as been requested earlier date by Amelthea. Please wait for this article's source to be searched and compiled. Thank you. Sascode78 (talk) 01:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The article Suresh Murugan has not (yet) been deleted (AfD link), and even if it had been, I am not in a position to undelete articles; only Wikipedia administrators can do that, and I'm not an administrator. To request that people who read the article must contact some external agency on the other side of the world to confirm that the subject of the article is notable, is not appropriate. The sources that verify the subject's notability must be in the article. While I do think it's important that notable people outside the Western world get equal cover in Wikipedia as the Western-hemisphere peole, they still must be notable, and at the moment, there is unfortunately nothing in the article to show that this actor is notable. --bonadea contributions talk 07:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

HEY!!!

can you stop deleting the page about me.. ill keep it appropriate if u give it a chance —Preceding unsigned comment added by C-slay (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

You're not looking for me - I haven't deleted anything (but I did tag the wildly inappropriate page you had created for deletion a couple of days ago). Don't create a page about yourself, though. --bonadea contributions talk 16:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

If friends r aloud on Wikipedia, is it ok if I add you? (Please reply within an hour.) --Hi, I'm a Scooby-pedian! (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Sterling Hershey

Hi there. MuffledThud prodded Sterling Hershey, but now he's left and hasn't replied to me on my talk page. Can you have a look at it and tell me if it meets the requirements please? If not, what do I need to do? Thanks Mrkwtrs (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

To me it looks like he is sufficiently notable. Good job with the references! --bonadea contributions talk 16:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic. Thanks! Mrkwtrs (talk) 14:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem :-) This is just my opinion, and others might disagree and nominate the article for deletion through the Articles for Deletion process. More sources from reliable third parties can always be useful. --bonadea contributions talk 15:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

replay media catcher

Hi,

How come can Replay Media Catcher be of worse notability than DownloadStudio and NetXFer? Have you ever done stream recording before??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by StreamRecorder (talk • contribs) 08:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi - that other articles exist is never a good argument for why a particular article should exist. Perhaps those other pieces of software are also not notable, in which case they should not have articles, though DownloadStudio does appear to be sourced. My knowledge of the subject is utterly irrelevant; I am able to see when an article does not argue notability for its subject, and in particular when there are no reliable sources in the article. --bonadea contributions talk 15:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Dr. Judy Wood Notability

Isn't this a notable secondary source though?

Dr. Wood was invited to present her research on the very popular radio show, 'We Ourselves', hosted by Ambrose Lane. The radio station is WPFW 89.3 - Washington, D.C. The interview is all over the internet, but a direct link to it is here: http://www.weourselves.org/wpfw/052308.html

Please let me know. Thank you.

The two reasons given for the deletion of the content was: 1. She is not notable. 2. Copyright violation. I have copy right permission from her personally, and I was going to have her email the permissions list until all this happened. As for a notability, Dr. Wood is the only 9/11 researcher ever to file her evidence in a court of law, and her court case made it all the way to the Supreme court. She discusses her research and the court cases on the very popular Washington DC Radio Station WPFW 89.3, on the Ambrose Lane 'We Ourselves' show. There are many other places she has presented, but this is one of the most mainstream and credible places. Considering that Dr. Wood has done more to bring about truth and justice regarding 9/11 than many other 9/11 researchers who are mentioned in the 9/11 Truth Movement, I think some information about her should be added to the 9/11 Truth Movement wikipedia page. '''Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez''' (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:35, 10 April 2010 (UTC).

It is not a good idea to ask the same question in seven or eight different places. You appear to have posted this exact question to the talk pages of everybody who has been involved in the discussion. Having a discussion in each place is a waste of time as you'd get the same response phrased in different ways, and frankly, I'm getting disappointed in the fact that you don't seem to listen to the answers you have already been given. I'm not continuing this discussion here; I refer you to the excellent responses you've been given to this same question on Niteshift's talk page. bonadea contributions talk 06:38, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Consider it done

Adding a link won't kill, Not adding it won't either. So ok. I actually was gonna participate in wikipedia for long topics later on not just by adding links. And by the way, i see many useless links in many topics, i wonder why they didn't get removed. Dun matter now anyway. No more additions from my side. Fair enough i guess. Regards.

Boggabilla

Excuse me Bonadea, how dare you say that I am vandalising the page of my own home town? And what would you know about Boggabilla, you come from Sweden! Boggabilla is a tiny aboriginal village on the other side of the world!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billo94 (talk • contribs)

You changed the name of the town to a nickname.[2] That isn't only inappropriate, but it also breaks links to images and other pages with the real name of the town in it. If "Boggs" is a frequently used nickname of the town, you could very well insert that information (with a reliable source for the info) in the article, but changing the name to the nickname throughout is obviously not constructive. --bonadea contributions talk 09:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

St. Marys "Vandalism".

Considering I'm in the school and that if you watched the news you'd have seen him, its very rude of you to remove my updates. He was also charged for a attacking a sausage factory in Naas, Co. Kildare. Thanks. Oh and it is ridiculous that you spend your day doing this. Get a real job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.32.144 (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

If the information about a teacher who moved to Ghana to start a brothel was on the news, I'm sure you can provide a source for it. --bonadea contributions talk 20:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Read it and weep. http://swoplv.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/ghana-160-prostitutes-arrested-in-accra-brothel-raid/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.38.48 (talk) 23:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Exactly how is that joke source relevant to the point you are making? --bonadea contributions talk 06:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Betway

Hi. Could I request further details on the reasons behind the proposal for the speedy deletion of the Betway wikipedia article please.

Lkelly10 (talk) 15:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It's about notability (which is a reasonably objective criterion), not importance (which is subjective). If, as you claim on the talk page, Betway is one of Europe's largest online betting firms, there are surely third-party sources that confirm that - and that fact should go in the article, because at the moment there is no such claim there. --bonadea contributions talk 20:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Bonadea you're a hell of a gal!

Why can't I meet more broads like you? Broad-minded broads with bread to spare, eh?

Oh well, fine I'll stop for a while, or be more subtle, or improve articles far beyond the limits of possibility. Or I'll give up contributing to wikipedia, give up trying to make it a better place.

No, really, I'll stop, because I don't want to be banned. All I needed was some attention, someone to put me in my place, someone with a firm hand and sleek moustache to say 'no', in a vindictively compassionate attempt to teach the young the ways of the..... 93.97.150.77 (talk) 19:35, 2 May 2010 (UTC)tilde

Bonadea, Champion Wikipedian

In the short time I've interfaced with Bonadea, I've borne witness to the relentless passion with which Bonadea pursues Truth. I can stoutly confirm that this user is gold, and should not be undervalued. Bonadea, here's to you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.150.77 (talk • contribs) 19:37, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Full marks for constructive use of sarcasm! I especially appreciated the sleek moustache bit, it's almost as if you could see me. Seriously though, if you do start to work to improve Wikipedia instead of what you were doing yesterday, we'll all be happier for it. --bonadea contributions talk 11:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

.

That was not vandalism! Your a troll —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onaga11 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

This edit (the one you were warned for) changed information in the article to something that's incorrect according to the sources. Since you didn't explain why your version was right and the sources wrong, and since all your other edits have been vandalism, the conclusion that you were vandalising wasn't all that far-fetched. bonadea contributions talk 18:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Patrolling

I see you're patrolling articles, too, but are you using any sort of tool? I couldn't tell if you were; twinkle and others may help you do your patrolling more efficiently. Nice work — Timneu22 · talk 18:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Nope, not using any tool. For some reason I thought Twinkle was a Windows application, but when I look at Wikipedia:Twinkle I see that it isn't. I should look into using it, actually. --bonadea contributions talk 18:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muir Skate Longboard Shop (2nd nomination)

Hi, Bonadea. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muir Skate Longboard Shop, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muir Skate Longboard Shop (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 02:02, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

That sock

Hi Bonadea. FYI I've deleted your tagged page here under G10. Although it's the same vandal who used User:Pittimann DE, that account was itself an impersonation of the German admin, an impersonation I'd rather not see propagated. This vandal has many names, most of which are not worth repeating - you can find some examples at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bitte ohne Seawolf!. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:43, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, right. Sorry about that - I did think when I tagged it that it looked like somebody with a huge grudge who'd probably been here for much longer than just a couple of socks. Thanks for the heads-up! --bonadea contributions talk 07:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

From 95.133.166.128

‘chaitanya-mangala’ shune yadi pashandi, yavana seha maha-vaishnava haya tatakshana If even a great atheist hears Shri Chaitanya-mangala, he immediately becomes a great devotee. I offer millions of obeisances unto the lotus feet of Vrindavana dasa Thakura. No one else could write such a wonderful book for the deliverance of all fallen souls.

If even a person equal to Lord Siva offends a Vaishnava, the offender will perish. This the scriptures say. They who will not follow these instructions and blaspheme good people are sinners. They will suffer birth after birth. A person who calls one Vaishnava a `big Vaishnava' and another Vaishnava a `little Vaishnava' may be peaceful and happy for now, but for how long will he remain peaceful and happy? On the preText of rebuking His mother, Lord Chaitanya, the supreme teacher (siksha-guru), taught everyone to carefully avoid offending a Vaishnava. Anyone who jumps over lionlike Lord Chaitanya's order and foolishly offends a Vaishnava will be punished for his offense. Please give me your attention and hear why Lord Chaitanya spoke as He did. Lord Chaitanya knows everything that happens in all three phases (past, present, and future, of time. He knows that in the future some demoniac people will serve Lord Advaita. They will refer to Lord Advaita by the name "Shri Krishna". In this way they will reject the words of the true Vaishnavas. These sinners will thus disobey the devotees who affirm that Advaita is "the greatest Vaishnava". Many persons will consider themselves the followers of Lord Advaita, but they will not have the power to see how in the future they will be punished. Lord Chaitanya, the crest jewel of they who know everything, knew all this. Therefore He did something to try to stop this from happening. By punishing His mother, Lord Chaitanya showed the result that comes from offending Lord Advaita or any other Vaishnava. No one can protect a person who has offended a Vaishnava. Therefore one should avoid persons who offend Vaishnava. One should avoid an offender, even if the offender is otherwise very qualified. A little association with an offender will make one fall down. Anyone who blasphemes they who use the word `Vaishnava" to address Lord Advaita will be punished. He will perish.

The kalpa is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā (8.17): sahasra-yuga-paryantam ahar yad brahmaṇo viduḥ. One day of Brahmā is called a kalpa. A yuga, or mahā-yuga, consists of 4,320,000 years, and one thousand such mahā-yugas constitute one kalpa. The author of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta says that if one does not take advantage of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, he cannot be delivered for millions of such kalpas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.133.166.128 (talk) 14:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand what this message is intended to communicate to me or why you posted it here. --bonadea contributions talk 14:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

This means: there are countless atheists in this world moving towards death every moment, and one who is not supporting Krishna consciousness is going to suffer in hell birth after birth. But everyone who hears Sri Caitanya Bhagavata immediately becomes devotee, even if he was atheist. So don't worry, you are not going to be sent to hell, but this is note that offenses to vaisnavas must be avoided. If you think that Scriptures is just 'original research' it means you are speculating and your philosophy degree didn't help you much. Philosophers may study Absolute Truth for many lives, even Sokrates after millions of lifetimes comes to Krishna consciousness. It is not a cheap thing. Please, try understand this. No offenses. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.133.166.128 (talk) 14:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for catching the vandalism on my talk page and swiftly reverting it. It was a very rude thing to wake up to. Thank you for intervening. Basket of Puppies 14:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. Some vandalism makes me more upset than other vandalism - this was definitely a case of "some" rather than "other". --bonadea contributions talk 19:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Fast!

Wow, you are fast! I created a link before I saved a new article and you caught it in between. :) I will recreate the link. Please let me know if there are any problems with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew.g.miller (talk • contribs) 22:24, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Ooops! I was going through the contributions of those people who had been getting warnings by that IP based vandal - that's how I noticed your edit. Please restore at will :-) --bonadea contributions talk 06:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting the spam. The IP chose the wrong target there as it gave me a chance to exercise my banhammer (gets rusty if it don't get used). . Mjroots (talk) 08:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's to the mighty banhammer! :-) --bonadea contributions talk 08:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Redlink?

Hi there. I made a edit on the page Web search engine, but you reverted it and you said 'Redlink'. What is that, what does it mean? Why did you revert anyway? --Gaming&Computing (talk) 14:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Reply on my talk please —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaming&Computing (talk • contribs) 14:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

External Links

Hi Bonadea,

Adding the external links was to provide the visitor with industry examples of an affiliate tracking system. It would be very difficult to only explain a affiliate tracking system and all its intricacies without providing the visitor with some kind of sample. So instead of adding my idea of the best system example, I felt it necessary to add a few of the most prominent systems in the industry. In the end, aren't we trying to educate the visitor in the quickest and most in depth manner as possible?

I understand that the example systems that were provided could eventually go out of business or change over time but because wikipedia is 'alive', people can update the information as they come across it.

Fouimette (talk) 04:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

No Problems

You're Welcome :D James'ööders 09:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

FIFA

Hi there,

I will happily accept the criticism that my paragraph on FIFA could be worded better, and that I failed to source my claims. I do not spend a large amount of my time on the internet and am thus potentially unfamiliar with the appropriate tone desireable for wikipedia, or however you like to put it. Nevertheless, I would appreciate it if you would not refer to my edits as vandalism when they so clearly aren't. Vandalism to me implies the deliberate posting of garbage. And while what I said might have been unsourced, it obviously wasn't garbage. I have now added said sources, and I would just like to suggest that instead of heavy handedly dishing out warnings and slurring people with unfounded accusations of vandalism, it might be better to assume good faith and educate people politely and firmly about what is required.95.144.3.100 (talk) 20:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Your wiki fun

Why do you actually go around spending your time on wiki deleting and amending other peoples articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.236.76 (talk) 09:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "other people's articles". No article belongs to anybody; all articles belong to everybody. Why do you actually go around spending your time on wiki inserting nonsense in articles[3], when there is so much constructive work to be done? (Also, for the record, I do not delete articles.) --bonadea contributions talk 09:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Woodside School, Ooty

I am trying my best to write the entry applying to this School as impartially as possible, but you insist on assuming I have some interest in the place other than my knowledge of the establishment. Perhaps you would be kind enough to delete the offending passages or phrases and I will then consider whether it is worth the effort of further editing. The reason for the original re-write was simply because the page had been created by a student whose grasp of English and detail was not as accurate as it might have been!

Nilgiris (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)westbury

Replied on your talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 19:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)