Who are you? I have never sent you that message, and have never edited the Army-Navy Game article (neither have you) and never sent someone a message over it. Is this some kind of joke? Izehar (talk) 23:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm still afraid I haven't edited Army-Navy Game (I too know what I have edited). The timestamp on the copy of my post is "22:31, 8 December 2005 (UTC)". Then I made four edits:

• • diff
  • diff
  • diff
  • diff

There is a concept called vandalism, which essentially means damaging pages by defacing them, or removing proven facts and replacing them with falsehoods. This happens often, believe me; on average five pages are vandalised every minute. These bad edits are watched for and removed Whoever made them received that notice you received. I'm assuming you didn't mess up the Mahatma Gandhi page, so you must have edited the Commander in Chief's Trophy (not the Army-Navy Game). In that edit you changed the number of times the Navy have been awarded the trophy from 8 to 7. I changed it back to 8 under the impression that it fell under the definition of sneaky vandalism which is defined as:

Sneaky vandalism

Vandalism which is harder to spot. Adding misinformation, changing dates or making other sensible-appearing substitutions and typos.

If that edit of yours was a valid edit then I apologise for changing it. Be aware though that figures changed by anonymous users are not trusted for the lack of accountability. If you change it again (assuming it was a valid edit) with your account, then it probably won't be removed.

Having your edits mistaken for vandalism and receiving that notice is not tragic you know, check the top of my talk page, the same notice is there. I see you haven't received a formal welcome yet, I'll put one up now. Izehar (talk) 10:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else has removed your comment about the Deputy Dant since you left your comment to me, for the same reason I did; one of the core tenents of Wikipedia is that articles must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV) and your comment as written was non-neutral. In fact it is nearly impossible to phrase it in such a way as to achieve a NPOV which is why it just won't stay there. If you want to write about the Academy from a non-NPOV I have a standing offer to host an online version of the LOG Magazine; just email me if you're interested (I'm not hard to find online). Ray Trygstad 05:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See that you have edited a few USMC articles. We just started a USMC portal and can use all the help we can get creating and organizing article if you are interested. Hope you stick around editing and if you ever need any help please let me know--Looper5920 03:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• You wont have that much time at TBS. Enjoy it while your there. It only get 10x busier in the fleet.--Looper5920 03:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You asked a question on the talk page for Roy M. Davenport... I've answered the question on the page... (Of course the other 5-time Navy Cross recipient is Chesty Puller). —ERcheck @ 00:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey.. I'm going to go ahead and remove the photo from the pages until I can get licensing.. which I'm not so sure would be easy to do. Why do you say its from the 40s? drumguy8800 C T 04:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I will unmerge the article right...now.  :) Lenzi 23:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to you here. Pesco 22:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see what the issue was. I saw your talk page entry and thought you were referring to comments about the 28th Company croquet tradition. I realize now that it was comments about stand-alone 28th Company info, which, as you said, doesn't belong on the page. I'll check the page history better next time to avoid another mixup. Take care, best of luck. Pesco 00:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was in Djibouti back in '04 and it wasn't all that bad to be honest. The locals are good people and working with the French was a great experiance. The facilities on Camp Lemonier are good and except for the heat it was all around tolerable. Interesting food too. NeoFreak 08:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Overdosing isn't the main criteria for determining whether a drug is hard or soft. Both drugs are quite addictive, especially nicotine. And the health risks are undeniable. Alcohol screws up your liver, kidneys, and kills brain cells. Nicotine is very addictive and usually leads to an early death. How can these drugs be considered soft? And ODing on alcohol isn't as hard as you think. Just do a google search of you are confused.

Just because alcohol and nicotine are completely legal, it doesn't mean they are hard and soft. The marines may not have a zero-tolerance policy towards legal drugs, but that doesn't change things. Zachorious 22:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on John R. Ryan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. CobaltBlueTony 00:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, did you READ the text above? My tagging is a request, not an absolute. I can't delete pages as I'm not an admin. And I have every right to disagree with you without you being gross and uncivil. Follow the instructions above to try to keep your article, and make your case a little stronger. My viewpoint is that not every influential person actually deserves an article, so if you can establish more of his notability, it'll stay. Geez, it's just an encyclopedia; lighten up! - CobaltBlueTony 00:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The John R. Ryan article will stay, as being the chancellor of a major university system qualifies this person as being quite notable enough. Speedy deletion tags have been removed. Please remember to stay civil, it only took me about 30 minutes to find an administrator and establish notablity.

--Joebengo 20:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ryan_sunymaritime.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on John R. Allen, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to add more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. _SUBWAYguy 21:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I would let you know that I nominated the Herndon Monument climb picture for featured status, it can be found here Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, I just thought it may be of intrest to you, vote if you wish--Joebengo 02:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your edits and activities on Wikipedia, I'm assuming that you are somehow connected with the U.S. Military. If so, please feel free to add you name here: Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by military branch. =D Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 07:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ProdigySportsman, how are you doing? In regard to your comment:

"According to George Zamka's Wikipedia entry he is of Polish ancestry, not Hispanic." —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProdigySportsman (talk • contribs) 20:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The article is both "right", in the sense that he is of Polish ancestry and "wrong" for having omitted that he is alos of Hispanic descent. That is why Wkipedia is not a reliable source, anyone can post whatever they please at any given time. NASA is a reliable source: NASA Hispanic Astronauts, plus "Hispanic military heroes", by: Virgil Fernandez; Publisher: Austin, TX : VFJ Pub., 2006.; ISBN: 0967587611. Zamka's mother is Columbian, thereby making him of Hispanic descent on jer side, while his father is Polish, also making him of Plish ancestry. Thank you for pointing out the omission in his bio., I went and fixed it. Tony the Marine (talk) 21:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the heads up on the vandals. Wasn't online at the time, but the problems seem to have been fixed anyway. Paralympiakos (talk) 13:10, 11 January 2010 (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) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]