Welcome!

Hello, Zenswashbuckler, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for L. Ron Hubbard. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Cirt (talk) 22:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Good luck getting a bot to revert intelligently. Enigma^msg 16:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it were only bots reverting unintelligently, that would be one thing. Alas, it's something else entirely. ☯ Z.S. ☠ ......(talk) 21:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for the advice on the Page. Please see the changes I made (my talkpage) ([[2]]) Fuzi12 (talk) 11:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zenswashbuckler! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 03:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the earlier discussion in Talk:Ina_Garten. I wish people read posts before responding. As a test, a blogger had an article with a balanced discussion of a controversy and towards the end of the article he asked comments to include "banana" to show that they had read the whole thing before responding. Go here to see the dismal results.

Well of course you know talking is always more important than listening. "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 01:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zen, thanks... working on it. Well, more accurately, passed it on to an admin who I believe has the revdel tools. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 18:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's all gone now. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 19:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zenswashbuckler. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

UOJComm (talk) 05:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know you only had good intentions, but you might want to read WP:DIVA.—Chowbok ☠ 02:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Zenswashbuckler. Just for your info, you can revert multiple changes as follows:

1. Go to the article's history list (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tommyjb/Sandbox&action=history).
2. Click one of the date stamps (e.g., "08:37, 16 June 2011").
3. Click 'Edit' at the top of the page.
4. Click 'Save page'.

This reverts the page to the revision you clicked. Of course, rollback would make this easier — as long as the edits have been made by a single user — but even rollbackers sometimes use this function, so I thought I'd mention it.

Regards, —Tommyjb (talk) 17:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's something I'd never tried before. Thanks for the info! ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 17:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think I want to continue commenting although I thought that if people like you and I can treat each other with respect, why can't everyone else? This may sound poloyanaish but I will tell you my unWiki opinion is that if one wants to defeat Rich Santorum they will do better by going to the Rick Santorum article and mention this incident and his words which are anti-gay along with all of the other reasons why they do not think he would be a good president. That might seem trivial to some but I think it would have more power. The exasperating thing is I really really do not like the man yet I am seeming to be defending him or at least some see it that way. As far as Wiki reasons go, I really do believe that it could be libelous, a definite BLP violation. I also believe that a tiny amount of people would vote for him because he is representative of a very small group of small-minded people. I would love to see a good strong article showing all of his statements, anti-gay and others. It is my opinion that this would be less inflammatory and ultimately more powerful because it will be read by a greater number of people. It is not so much that I am bailing on the article discussion as that I am tired of being archived, insulted or hatted every time I bring my point of view forward. Hope to see you on another article discussion page. Good Luck! Mugginsx (talk) 21:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]