User talk:Darrenhusted

Hello Darrenhusted, and Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
Here are some good places to get you started:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• Template messages
• Sandbox

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes (~~~) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, you can leave a new message on my talk page, or put {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to help you. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!

— FireFox ^(talk) _{18:49, 11 August '06}

Darrenhusted has no Internet access and will be taking a wikibreak of indeterminate length.

Archives

---

Those Were The Days, I Remember Them Well, Or At Least I Did, Until My Mind Started To Go And Then I Took My Medication But That Didn't Help So I gave up trying. Then I found a new drug but that stopped working too. And this now works. I am so much happier for it.

I stand corrected. You were right to revert my edit on cherry picking. It was wordy and detracted more than it added. Thank you for your efforts in making Wikipedia a better place. I will strive to do the same. Danglingdiagnosis (talk) 16:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Darrenhusted (talk) 16:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting edits that reflect the change in name for WWE's September Pay-Per-View from Unforgiven to Breaking Point. Please see WWE.com for confirmation of the name change. Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it has been officially confirmed by the WWE. Please consult the "Upcoming Pay-Per-Views" sidebar on WWE.com. I respect and appreciate the discussion at WP:PW, however, there is no reason not to update relevant articles with the best available information. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The sidebar means nothing, wait until after SummerSlam. What is the rush? Darrenhusted (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Darren, see the WP:PW talkpage. The ticketsales page at WWE (which is what we used for changing ONS and GAB) confirms that the PPV is now "Breaking Point". TJ Spyke 21:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is: http://www.wwe.com/schedules/events/eventdetail/?id=10202442 TJ Spyke 21:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although that does not answer the question of whether it will share Unforgiven's history as The Bash, NOC and Extreme Rules do of the PPVs they replaced. Darrenhusted (talk) 21:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that point, we don't know yet if it's a new event or just the same even re-named (meaning it would carry the history of Unforgiven). TJ Spyke 21:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have reverted my edits which added proper inline citations to the Snowballing article. I am going to revert your edit. If you remove the inline citations which improve the page again, you will be reported to an admin for vandalism. Willy turner (talk) 23:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On what grounds? Seriously, do you think I'm a n00b? One revert is not vandalism. Report me to twenty admins. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

for Star Trek why did you archive some threads that had stuff in then dated as new as three days ago on 26th may. I think you should only archive when they get certain number of days old. but this is just my opinion.--Gman124 ^talk 15:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your revert [1], please read the article before reverting a edit and wrongly calling it vandalism. Neither match happened, so the editor was correct in removing those (which I and others missed somehow). TJ Spyke 21:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have apologised and removed the warning. Darrenhusted (talk) 21:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did read WP:NFF and I quote, "While satisfying these notability guidelines generally indicates a film warrants an article, failing to satisfy them is not a criterion for speedy deletion." I would also direct you to WP:IAR. What makes you think you can just delete everything without even an AfD? It's very rude. Daskill (talk) 22:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, Wikipedia:Notability (films) is a notability guideline, not policy, per your edit summary here. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 22:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does not change the fact that the page in question fails that guideline, does it? Darrenhusted (talk) 23:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, but just because it doesn't adhere to everything in the guideline, does not make it an automatic candidate for speedy deletion. Daskill (talk) 23:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]