User talk:east718/Archive 7

; ; Archives
	Current; Late 2004 and onwards; March 2006 and onwards; November 2006 and onwards; July 2007; August 2007; September 2007; October 2007; November 2007; December 2007; January 2008; February 2008; March 2008; April 2008; May 2008; June 2008; July 2008; August 2008; September 2008; October 2008; November 2008; December 2008; January 2009; February 2009; March 2009; April 2009; May 2009; June–July 2009; August–December 2009; January–June 2010; July 2010 and onwards;

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please contact me on my talk page.

Gah!

I copied this template from someone else and just plugged in my own text! And all I wanted to do was say thank you... :( Dppowell 02:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know

Just to let you know you put your oppose vote on Nyttend Rfa in the support section. You may want to fix that. Have a nice day.--SJP 22:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see:) Something would be wrong with you if you did not think that is a lot of mainspace edits!--SJP 22:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

out of place edit

I adjusted your edit on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Nyttend‎.--Snakese 22:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rfa should not be taken as a joke, it is a serious process, so it should be taken seriously. Avoid such edits in future.--Snakese 22:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Request for arbitration

I've been wanting to, but I've been reluctant to do so since this whole thing blew up lest someone twist it into accusing me of breaking my agreement to refrain from engaging in the activity in question while this is sorted out. I realize that that's hardly what I'm doing at all--explaining a prior "vote" is by no means the same as casting a new one--but it wouldn't surprise me if certain individuals tried to claim that it is. I realize the vast majority of people will be sane enough to realize how absurd that claim is, but it's still something that might give them ammo. I'd rather not get sidetracked fighting that; I'd rather not give them the ammunition to throw at me.

And I thought about putting it on your talk page instead, but the argument then will be that I just did that to sidestep the letter of what I offered to do, while still violating the spirit of it. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 02:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Rfa

By the way, good luck on your Rfa. I just noticed it. It looks like you will be promoted. Congrats in advanced. Have a nice day.--SJP 20:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Congratulations you are now an administrator! Secretlondon 01:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats. Daniel 01:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second that (or rather third that). Glad you passed your RFA with flying colors, best of luck in your admin duties.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 06:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! :) SQL ^{Query me!} 07:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats man! How is it having the extra buttons? :) GlassCobra 22:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, only the best wishes to you as a new admin here from my part. Cheers! Claudevsq 23:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're my first pro Rfa admin vote ever, and one of the few times where who I vote for actually makes it to become one! Bravo and glad to see someone I wanted to be promoted to admin, actually become an admin, and make it. This makes me feel like a winner too, so I celebrate with you! heheGiovanni33 06:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous me

Yes, that was me at Haunted Angel's RFA. I had been auto-logged out and changed my mind halfway through about whether it was important to attach my username to my comments. It would be cool if you could sign on while doing edits, without losing your edits. Right, I don't do RFA's very much. Usually only if I run across a link to one of them while wasting time on something else. Matchups 03:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CSD of Image:Jonouchi Linework.jpg

Hi. I was wondering why you declined the CSD of Image:Jonouchi Linework.jpg when three other images from the same set were immediately CSD. They had invalid fair use rationals, and they also appear to be copyright violations being the reproduction and selling of printed works from the studio. Thanks :) AnmaFinotera 03:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*grin* no worries. I would have grouped them together but I didn't notice the other three till after I sent in the first one. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collectonian (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your support

Thanks for your support with respect to my request for adminship, which successfully closed today with a count of 47 support, 1 oppose. If you ever see me doing anything that makes you less than pleased that you supported my request, I hope to hear about it from you. See you around Wikipedia! Accounting4Taste 05:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent request

Could you please unblock Hesperian please? He was accidentally blocked by another admin. Thanks, Auroranorth (sign) 05:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted out ;) Thanks, Auroranorth (sign) 05:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Image:DSC--Majlis5323.JPG

Dear East718, I noticed that you have removed the above-mentioned photograph. With reference to my earlier message to User_talk:BetacommandBot, just wish to let you know that on 26 October 2007 I wrote to an Office of the Majlis of Iran (mellat@majlis.ir), requesting them to inspect the photograph at issue. The following is part of my message:

26 October 2007

Dear Madam/Sir,

Hereby I should like to request you kindly to provide the Wikipedia page

pertaining to the English edition of Wikipedia with an appropriate

photograph of the Majlis; the present photograph has been marked for

deletion due to lack of an appropriate copyright statement. The

pertinent address is as follows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majlis_of_Iran

By clicking on the photograph at the top of the page, you will be led to the

photograph page where you can see that the present photograph has been

marked for deletion on Friday 2 November 2007.

...

Yours sincerely,

<My signature>.

In view of this, I should like to request you kindly to restore the photograph. Above all, they (i.e. the Majlis) cannot claim not to have known about this photograph. I have my original text sent to the Majlis, and should ever anyone claim that this photograph has been unlawfully on the Wikipedia page, I am prepared to make the full text of my e-mail to the Majlis available for proving the contrary (I have in addition a digital document showing that my e-mail to the Majlis has been received and read). With thanks in advance, Yours sincerely, --BF 15:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear East718, thank you for kindly restoring the photograph. As for the "one week" time to obtain the necessary permission, the onus rests now with Iran's Majlis — I have written to them once, and, to be frank with you, feel already affronted by not having received a response from them (and as I wrote earlier, I have a digital document indicating that they have both received my message and read it), either in the form of a written response to my e-mail, or in the form of the copyright statement being adjusted by them (that is what I asked them to do). Furthermore, I have not had anything to do with the photograph; my only involvement bagan on 26 October through my writing to the Majlis (see my previous message). The person who has uploaded the photograph is User:S_bashardoust2005; therefore if anybody has to do anything, that is the latter User not I. I shall now add a remark to the extant copyright statement, that on 26 October 2007 the Majlis has been forwarded a request to grant permission to use the photograph at issue on Wikipedia. Incidentally, this photograph is not very significant; if you inspect the website of the Majlis, you will find a host of similar photographs there and I have not been able to establish whether these photographs were copyrighted or not. Kind regards, --BF 18:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely right, but as I said before, I have had no involvement in uploading the photograph at issue; on 26 October I saw that it was marked for deletion, so tried to play the Good Samaritan and wrote to the Majlis. Now I am being chastised for that! (Not that is your fault!) Kind regards, --BF 18:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

I have clarified my wordings on question 5 of my RfA. Please read my clarifications to see if you wish to switch your stance. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for switching. I will try my best when I become an admin. Let me know if I make an mistake, ok? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orthopox 13

Hi. I also nominated two other character articles for deletion. I was wondering if you could make a decision on those (i.e. delete or tell me to AFD those in a separate disucssion). hbdragon88 19:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HNTTMM

I've placed a {{hangon}} tag on HNTTMM after the article's current author requested time to improve the article. I say let's give him some time to do so, but keep an eye on the article and see if it really does improve or not. The page is almost entirely list-cruft and table-cruft, and the remaining material would not be nearly enough to justify a full article, so my guess is that it will likely be deleted again soon. But I say let's give the guy a chance to assert its notability and improve the content. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got your reply - thanks for the info. Probably not much more to do at this point. I do have a question, though: In situations like these, I wonder if we sometimes do get a little overzealous in speedy-deleting stuff - the "recreation of deleted content" rule, combined with A7, tends to say "If we decide that a page shouldn't be here, it'll never be here, or it'll take a gargantuan effort to make it suitable." I realize that most cases are really easy to call, but some don't seem to be. How do you deal with those situations? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 07:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

future interim lightweight title bout

i made the change on that on the UFC page... so i shouldnt put "future events" on the page?

and i was the user that put "This fight was later shown on a UFC Unleashed telecast"... i shouldn't put that either? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmacko (talk • contribs) 22:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wicca page protection

Many thanks for your action! It was getting pretty boring reverting teenage silliness day after day... Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 22:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiggers

Certainly. I'm heading out for a bit, but I'll take a look at it either later tonight or tomorrow. Tuckdogg 23:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found these. (IP/User, diff#)

Baroni, just one.

72.200.23.193, 167524610

Sell, several.

Bigfanufc, 168984065

72.200.23.193, 167524484

72.200.23.193, 167523186

Ufcnumba1, 165255292

Ufcnumba1, 165253317

Mmafantic, 161185737

Mmafantic, 161012033

Mmafantic, 159969753

Serra, none.

Let me know if you need anything else. Tuckdogg 20:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IRC

I didn't add your cloak, I'll do it now :) Majorly (talk) 01:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come into #wikipedia-en and we'll sort it out. Majorly (talk) 01:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. RfA

Good luck! — H ₂O — 02:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, and good luck to you, I'm sure you'll do fine. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 03:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No problem. Congrats on the adminship. Do good out there :D. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 05:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! If you ever need any advice or whatever, my talk page or email are both always open. Although I have a feeling you will be fine. Good luck! Neil ☎ 09:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Weber

I thought you dealt with this editor's spurious oppose quite impressively, and with much more tact than I would have used. He blankets all self-noms with the same tripe, and it is time someone called him on it. Are a few self-noms power-hungry? Perhaps. Is someone that "views all self-noms as prima facie evidence of power hunger" a bit of a wikidick? I think so. I thought you dealt with the guy as best as you possibly could have, given the circumnstances. A fine start to what I'm sure will be distinguished service as an admin. Keep it up! K. Scott Bailey 03:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: email

Thanks, I certainly accept your apology. I appreciate that reexamination.--John Foxe 11:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AN

Putting "Fuck (anything) at WP:AN is hardly appropriate, especially for an admin. If you want to point an there is a bigger backlog elsewhere, fine, but disparaging another admin task is hardly appropriate. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes it did not appear as humor. Regards. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New article Psyco Gundam

In edit summary user wrote, 'I said, I'd recreate this article'. The meaning of article is beyond my grasp. Perhaps you know history because you have protected similar article RX-178 Gundam Mk-II.

Thanks. TRIRASH 14:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll field this one. The article was up for AfD months ago and it was the decision of a number of editors to let it be tossed at that time since it was of horrible quality. User:MalikCarr had plans to recreate a new version following policies, and just recently, finally got around to doing so. Jtrainor 23:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks!
Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed with 54 supports, 2 opposes and 3 neutrals. Thanks for your support, I really appreciate it. I hope to exceed expectations, If you have any advice please feel free to let me know. Thanks again!. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤

pp of Chrysler Hemi engine

Hi there. Thanks for swiftly protecting Chrysler Hemi engine. One question, though: I notice the usual advisory box ("This article is protected against editing by" etc.) does not show up. I've no especial objection to this, I'm just curious why not. --Scheinwerfermann 16:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotchya. Thanks for the pointer! --Scheinwerfermann 21:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your RfA

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. Don't forget to view the school for new admins as well. Good luck! :) Acalamari 22:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, best of luck. All hands on deck! Bearian 15:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of foreign consulates in Oklahoma City

Hi, when you close an AFD, especially a complex one like this, it's important to remove most incoming links to the deleted article(s) from other articles. A lot of these pages still have inbound article links, and even redirect pages (although now a bot deletes those). I know it's a pain... but over the years a bunch of redlinks to AFD'd articles seep into our articles... it takes continuous vigilance to curb that. --W.marsh 22:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did some

Hey, sorry if I interrupted that process. I was removing some of the linked articles and came across a few that you were doing at the same time. Okiefromokla^{talk to me} 23:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re Lacfool543

I have changed my block to indef, and reverted the talkpage to the template placed by you. When I originally blocked there had only been the vandalism to Justin Timberlake, per the report at AIV. I agree the personal attack(s) justified the indef. My practice is to block first (reduces disruption) and notify later. Cheers. LessHeard vanU 22:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contents of deleted page

Hello, East718. Can you please send me the contents of List of foreign consulates in Minneapolis so I may restore the information to Wikipedia or use it again without repeating all of the research it took to create this page? Please copy this to my talk page if you would. Thank you in advance. -Susanlesch 23:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, East718. Thank you, now I can see what was there and have copied that information to an article. Could you please delete this copy you made in my user space? Thank you in advance. Best wishes. -Susanlesch 04:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gandhi Khan

Just a quick note to say thanks for confirming the notability on this article -- DatRoot 00:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Huckabee

the same vandal you blocked earlier today, User:71.193.244.183, is back at it as User:89.21.8.105 contribs, adding the same links and so on. There's an open BIO/N report about this article; Hucksarmy forum posted an open call for attacks on the page to remove all criticism, and since them the page has been repeatedly attacked in this manner. ThuranX 00:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Thanks!

No doubt man, congrats. I know you'll be great, especially with protecting the MMA pages. good job.

The Anti-Vandalism King 00:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GlassCobra's RfA

		My RFA
		Hey man! I wanted to drop you a line to say thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. Hopefully I'll do as well in my first few days as you have! Feel free to call on me if you ever need any backup! Let's go whack some vandals, eh? GlassCobra 01:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closing AfDs

Please note that when closing AfDs, the {{afdb}} template goes above the section header, not below. Putting it below will screw things up. Thanks! —Kurykh 05:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it confuses the bot that counts and links to open discussions, but I think Kurykh means the top ('at') template. --Tikiwont 10:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for something to close and malformed AfDs, I'd say I fixed most, but you certainly were productive:-) Another thing to check and ideally remove in case of deletion are incoming links. Anyway, welcome aboard!--Tikiwont 11:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA which unfortunately did not pass at (47/23/5). I will be sure to improve my editing skills and wait till someone nominates me next time. Have a great day(or night)! --Hdt83 ^Chat 05:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring of PalestineRemembered

Hi East ... you might have supposed that offering to mentor another editor was an interesting and useful thing to do. I have to warn you that this is not the case here. If the mentee (ie me) has editing problems, then it's been found nearly impossible to define what they are in dozens(?) of un-structured and largely evidence-free "disciplinaries" on me. And being my mentor and not finding problems is a quick way to get yourself into huge trouble. User:Geni suffered a great deal of harassment (see the deletion long on this "Attack Page" on her) - but her successor has had even more trouble.

Having said which, I'm only asking for someone prepared to do the thing honestly, so you'd be entirely acceptable to me. Since the terms of the mentorship were that I got to choose my own mentor, I'm prepared to accept you forthwith. Preferably with User:Kendrick7 who seems to be experienced but otherwise of whom I know very little, or on your own if you prefer. PR^talk 12:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on User:UBeR RE: Global Warming and 3RR

Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with this: "Editors may still be blocked even if they have made three or fewer reverts in a 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive. Efforts to game the system, for example by persistently making three reverts each day or three reverts on each of a group of pages, cast an editor in a poor light and may result in blocks." If you had done your homework, you may have perhaps noticed that those last 4 reverts by User:UBeR were only the latest in a long, LONG series of essentially the same reverts that are evidently part of a continual effort on his part, as well as a few others, to block any major updates or improvements to the politically sensitive global warming article, and its related wikis. He's been adamant, for instance, about keeping "Solar Variation" listed one of the "Causes" despite it having been rendered inconsequential by climate researchers as being a factor in current global warming. He even went so far as to have an RFC on the matter and then tried to ignore the results when they weren't what he wanted. I've had multiple issues dealing with troublesome editors like UBeR in politically touchy wiki articles -- not to mention a virtual army of sockpuppets, meatpuppets and anonymous IP's -- and it would be nice to have more admins involved in preventing such gaming, but instead I tend to have to deal with stuff like this. -BC aka Callmebc 13:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

??? He did 3 reverts in less than 24 hrs, I gave him a warning, and he did his 4th a day later (and there were a couple of very convenient, in-between reverts by another.) So exactly what part involves you calling things as you see them? Whatever.... -BC aka Callmebc 16:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am actually engaged in a complex sockpuppet/meatpuppet hunt that's inappropriate for WP:RFCU for the time being. I'm just getting a little tired of having to do admin/Arbcom work when all I'm technically is some random dude on the Internet who would like to even once in a while update/improve an article without having to take on a bunch of puppeteering right wingers by myself. But like I said (too many times), whatever.... -BC aka Callmebc 16:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IF YOU COULD HELP ME IN ANY WAY

Hi! First I would really thank wikipedia and, foremost, the people that make it going -- people like you. I come from a village in Herzegovina, and throughout this century it has vittnesed many atrosities. So I desided to make a page about it, on wikipedia. Among the thing that I wrote is the genocide aginst the Serbs in 1941, in Prebilovci. And on the title I used genocide -- a user named rijeka, from croatia, has just removed that bit.

600 women and children from my village, were in 1941 slaughtered and thrown into pits near surmanci, the place were virgin mary is said to have apeared. I wrote abut this -- and rijeca removed that bit. Maby he just doesn't want people knowing about it -- that virgin maty alledgedy apears to some Croats were they cilled Serbs during the genocide.

I've also created a page called Prebilovci Massacre, and because of that, he claims, has removed a great bit of my article on Prebilovci. Among that article, he has removed of what happended in 1991; the bodies of thoose who were massacred in 1941 were blown up by a bomb placed there by Croats.

I just think this is unfair. I see it this way: that's he's missusing his power on wikipedia. Chek it put yourself, then contact me and say what do you think.

Yours Very Thruly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WebsterMasters (talk • contribs) 15:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nash closing and redirect

Just a note in case you were unaware. I see that you closed the deletion discussion for Nash and redirected it the the book. However, the younger Nash is not mentioned in that article, whereas he is mentioned in the elder Nash article. Given that, wouldn't it make more sense to redirect to the elder Nash article? --Ramsey2006 16:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St Matthews University protection

Thank you for your incredibly speedy protection! Wow! I am impressed! Bstone 17:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the protection was placed only after the most recent vandalism by User:Jfdietrich. Since I have already reverted the article several times, might you be able to as I do not wish to violate 3RR. Thank you. Bstone 20:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Henrik's RfA thanks!

Thanks for supporting my RfA, it closed today with a final tally of 39 supports, 1 oppose and 1 neutral. As always, if you ever see me doing anything which would cause you to regret giving me your support, let me know. henrik•talk 18:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The six million dollar deletion

Noted that you went with consensus for a deletion on Six Million, but I think there was one user who had a logical idea - revert it back to what it was (an explanation of the number with a brief mention of the holocaust numbers and (I think) Jewish population). Is there a reason you didn't just do this? --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can do this, I think. If you could do this to my main account (user:DennisTheTiger), I can do the work from there. Thanks~ --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, revision history and everything. Thanks! --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you bunches!

Thank you so much for suppporting my RfA. I was promoted with a total of (44/1/0) - a vote of confidence from the community that I find humbling and motivating. I will not abuse your trust. Look forward to working with you! (Esprit15d 21:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hello

Hello there! I heard from Runewiki777 that you made an MD5 hash string for him (or helped him). Could you help me on that? Thank you.-- Vintei talk 21:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch man!-- Vintei talk 22:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 00:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support.

Remember, remember, the fifth of November?
Thank you to everyone who participated in my Request for adminship, which was successful at 50/5/0 on November 5th, 2007.
It became, as you may know, rather contentious toward the end (though fortunately no gunpowder was involved), and I appreciate the work of other Wikipedians to keep it focused. --Thespian 02:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: {{MMArecordbox}}

See Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira. Carlosguitar 04:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL thanks, you was very fast. Carlosguitar 04:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Blocking Barnstar
		As soon as you got promoted to sysop, I see that you suddenly blocked hundreds of username violation usernames and vandals, every time I patrol special:ipblocklist. For that reason, I am giving you this Blocking Barnstar. NHRHS2010 talk 04:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lock of Royal Burial Ground

Thank you for locking the page, but what, might I ask, do you mean about blocking for 3RR violation? --G2bambino 05:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I appreciate your ability to judge each situation individually (a seemingly rare trait sometimes), however (and I've just checked the revision history again) I really don't see more than three reverts: 1, 2 & 3. My final edit today (4) didn't revert to anything. I know the main point of 3RR is to avoid edit warring, but am I missing something about a violation here? --G2bambino 05:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'm glad it was clarified, none-the-less. --G2bambino 05:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I would like to know...

...how long are my pages semi-protected? It's because I actually wanted it semi'd for 24 hours because most of the vandalism are coming from registered users. -Go od sh op ed 06:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK, sweet, but I just want my /Main Page to be semi'd for probably 48 hours, or something... -Go od sh op ed 06:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, can I have it semi'd for 48 hours? -Go od sh op ed 06:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK. Thanks! -Go od sh op ed 03:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proof (alcohol) under attack again

The vandal is back with IP 78.111.64.114 . He's again attacking Proof (alcohol).-- Mumia-w-18 06:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again.-- Mumia-w-18 06:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meke It How It Was Before.

Sourly there must be someway we can solve this issue. My sugestion is that we get rid of the Prebilovci Massacre page, bacause the Prebilovci page was created first and what was written about the massacre was written on that page to begin with.

What the user Rijeca did, when he took away the mantion of genocide, was missuse of his power on Wikipedia -- The Free Encyclopedia. He himself is from Croatia, you can see that on his page. He also took away what was written about the atrosities committed in the Bosnien Civil War, when Croats blew up the remains of those who had been massacrd in World War Two -- which was not a genocide according to his oppinion but every one elses.

Make everything how it was before Rijeca came and deleted half the page -- who's clearly done all this because he himself is a Croat.

Not only this, he also deleted the mention of virgin Mary, who in the 1980's is said to have appered to some Croat teenager, at the very same location where they massacred Serbs in World War Two. Thet I think is very relevant to this article. And it is very clear why he did so! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Battlrefielders (talk • contribs) 10:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User: Randy Blackamoor

Thank you for your assistance with dealing with this editor. I was hoping it wouldn't come to that, but when he replaied to my edits in such a way, it was clear this person wasn't going to listen to me, and that they were getting intentionally beligerent.

I'm not sure if you checked all of the correspondence I wrote in relation to this, but if you did, I could use the following input: I very much tried to not inflame the situation, and tried not to antagonize this person. If you were to give advice: did I handle this situation the right way, or could you give me advice on how to better handle it in the future? I tried to go through the policies regarding reporting this incident, but being somewhat new to this, I am always looking for advice. Thanks again! LonelyBeacon 14:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Killian documents authenticity issues

Yes, something is likely to happen there. User:Callmebc has promised to do more 3RR violations on it, but then he stopped talking. We'll just have to see what happens next. (SEWilco 14:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Dove Falconhand

Hi East718. While I can't argue that the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dove Falconhand was to delete, I note that the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qilué Veladorn resulted in a merge to Seven Sisters (Forgotten Realms). I believe that Dove is at least as notable/well-known as Qilué, and probably more so; I thus believe a merger is more appropriate. As such, I'd like to ask you to userfy the deleted page so I can merge it into Seven Sisters (Forgotten Realms). Thanks in advance! Powers ^T 16:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The text has been merged, though not, of course, the history. Would you be willing to restore the article and redirect it so as to preserve the editing history (for GFDL reasons)? Powers ^T 16:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, East 718

Dear East718:

Thanks so much for putting a halt to the madness!

Clearly, we need an authority figure to step in and arbitrate this situation, which has been fueled by conflicts of interest on both sides (yes, I admit it).

I very much want an arbitration to get to an NPOV wiki containing only the facts. And I have tried. That said, other Parties are using Wiki to try to claim that what they are selling is FDA approved. This is entirely false (and the FDA has said as much!). The problem is that these guys are selling this drug everyday, so they have a profound financial incentive to use Wiki as a platform to claim that what they are selling is legitimate. Neither me nor the organization I work for sells ANYTHING. We only want these offenders to tell the truth and abide by the laws governing drug development.

In short, this is the origin of the conflict(s). I wish to help in any way I can in getting to an NPOV wiki.

Thanks,

A —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agincourtboy (talk • contribs) 22:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need a hand, please

I got it. :) GlassCobra 01:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thnx, beau coup! —72.75.79.128 10:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lipodissolve / Agincourtboy

Thanks for your help and getting NPOV process started again at Lipodissolve. Observed discussions with Agincourtboy but he is part of a smear campaign by a drug company that is trying to make a bundle of money of this same drug they are saying is not safe (till they are approved I guess). Note the links to "lipotreatmentfacts" - an annonymous site and many FDA references that have nothing to do with the procedure as a scare tactic and constant screaming headlines - gets old fast.

Agree many of the people involved (if not all) have a commercial interest - but this debate between the expremes is really undermining what should be a useful reference wiki. Just read through the comments from several doctors on the site to get a sense.

Anything I can do to help let me know,

Chrraymond 03:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Good work East718, will try and keep the quality up. A page I wrote about a CG animator Bernard Edlington from Japan was deleted, actually rightly so by yourself, the comment was something about that a link to IMDB does not warrant Wikipedia entry. I do agree as IMDB is a paid service so I would have liked to include the original film database links from Japan so the external links I have are all in Japanese. Should I rewrite the page with all relevant (verifiable) links? My miss, should I rewrite? Nexusb 12:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image correction vandal

Hello East, I spoke with you the other day about Yamla going out of his way to remove perfectly good license corrections (at the time in regards to Cock Sparrer covers). A bot has requested the same, title corrections on other images... I corrected it, and like clockwork Yamla has trollishly reverted all of the corrections again in an act intented to antagonise and stop the maximisation of Wikipedia, in violation of WP:POINT "bad faith Wikilawyering". As you said you warned him the other day and are familiar with the situation, here are the images he is up to the same tricks on, if you could provide assistance and maybe make the warning a little clearer to him.[1] Regards. - Sirenseven 16:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The guy has now removed all the corrections once again and this time protected on an unfixed, violative version of the images. I mean, I was fully aware that the guy is a troll and a blithering idiot, but is this kind of blatant abuse of sysop powers really acceptable? He has gone out of his way to troll these images, and remove the simple fixes, his sole purpose of stopping them getting fixed and ultemetly deleted, trying to minimize the quality of the encyclopedia. Is there anywhere higher that I can report this moron to? I mean I've got a long and extensive log on his abuse, trolling, using sysop status in an incorrect manner. - Theguyhasnobrain 21:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: heads up

Responded via email. --Yamla 16:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:216.235.145.178

Thank you for your support in the battle against spammers. TerriersFan 17:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:ALein

This user stopped vandalising long before their final warning. TigerShark 20:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "it doesn't matter"? The user had stopped vandalising and you still indefinitely blocked them. As for them being a vandalism only account, they have only made a total of 12 edits, in just over an hour. Almost any account that performs vandalism will start off with a similar pattern. This block is clearly outside of the blocking policy. TigerShark 20:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the edits were vandalism, of course they were. Anybody can post to AIV, your role is to verify that the user's action warrant a block. 12 vandalism edits over a period of an hour cannot be considered persistent vandalism, it is a very minor incidence of vandalism. Blocks are meant to be preventative rather than punitive. How was this block preventative if the user had stopped long before the final warning? It is at the admin's discretion to block indefinitely, but that discretion needs to be used carefully. On the criteria of blocking a user who has made 12 edits, and stopped before a final warning, almost all vandals would be indefinitely blocked. That is not what we do. TigerShark 21:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am not too concerned about this specific block, but I am still a little concerned that you might feel this block was made within the blocking policy or was otherwise justified. Blocking when a user has stopped, especially when they stopped before a final warning is really not good, unless there are strong grounds. A very small amount of vandalism over a very small period of time are really not strong grounds because, again, that applies to almost every vandal. It would be good to hear any further thoughts you might have on this. Cheers TigerShark 21:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Thanks for the note. I understand and please don't think that I am trying to criticise, I just wanted to mention it to you. Congratulations on becoming an admin and good luck. Cheers TigerShark 22:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Trainunion

I'm a little puzzled by the block of this user. Reviewing his edits, he appears to have been blocked for removing {prod} templates. But, users are allowed to remove {prod} templates, so I can't figure out what the vandalism is that got this user blocked. I did find one personal attack, but we wouldn't normally block people for one personal attack. Am I missing something? In my opinion, an indefinite block is excessive for a single personal attack, and removing {prod}s isn't an offense at all. Would you consider unblocking, or shortening the duration? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I acknowledge that this may well be a user who ends up ultimately indeffed anyway, and who is certainly not innocent, but I always prefer to hope for the best. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

7th Chamber

Thank you for vote! You're probably the only person who got that. --EndlessDan 02:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hey this template looks familiar :-) its funny I always though you were a admin already, must be because of the quality of your edits, congrats on adminship and take good care of that galleon! - Caribbean~H.Q. 04:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me, too. Congrats. Had I known about the RfA (I don't normally monitor them), you'd most certainly have received my vote. We may not necessarily always agree but your points are always well thought-out. Congrats on the mop! --Yamla 21:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OhanaUnited's RfA

Thanks for voting at my RfA. Unfortunately, the result stands at 51 support, 21 oppose and 7 neutral which means that I did not succeed. As many expressed their appreciation of my works in featured portals during my RfA, I will fill up the vacuum position of director in featured portal candidates to maintain the standards of featured contents in addition to my active role in Good articles. Have a great day. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A token of thanks

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For only a short while you have been an admin, and you have done exellent work with the tools. Thanks! Marlith ^T/C 04:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFP

Thanks for the protection of my user page. I appreciate the indefinite protection. No reason of any other length of time on user pages. - Rjd0060 04:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one expects a Pigman admin!

		Wallowing in my RfA: This time it's personal...
		My sincere thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 51 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. Doubtless it was an error to put one of the government-bred race of pigmen in any position of authority, but I hope your confidence in me proves justified. Even a man pure of heart and who says his prayers at night can become a were-boar when the moon is full and sweet. Fortunately, I'm neither a were-pig nor pure of heart so this doesn't appear to be an imminent danger to Wikipedia for the moment. Fortunate as well because were-pig hooves are hell on keyboards and none too dexterous with computer mice. If ever I should offend, act uncivil, misstep, overstep, annoy, violate policy, or attempt to topple the fascist leadership of Wikipedia, please let me know so I can improve my behaviour and/or my aim. I am not an animal; I am an admin. And, of course, if there is any way in which I can help you on Wikipedia, please do not hesitate to ask me. Despite my japes, I am indeed dedicated to protecting and serving Wikipedia to the best of my foppish and impudent abilities. I will strive to be an admirable admin, shiny and cool, reasonable and beatific. Pigman^what?/trail 05:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply] Post Scriptum: I believe my collaged graphic at left, which incorporates the WP globe and mop image, falls under the rubric of parody for my purposes here. Or is it satire? Regardless, it's a legitimate and legally protected First Amendment usage under US law. Complaints and allegations that this is an improper "fair use" image will be entertained on my talk page, probably with fruit juice, finger food and exotic coffees.

Georgetown, Massachusetts

Today you unprotected Georgetown, Massachusetts which had previously been protected for edit warring. Would you mind taking a look at the discussion on the talk page there and then review my actions following your unprotection? I removed a large chuck of text that many established Wikipedia editors felt was inappropriate. I have a strong feeling, though, that these questions will be called into question by newer users who instigated this edit war by adding what they felt was notable about their own town to the article. Thanks, Metros 20:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recently successful WP:FL. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient to change the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. You can voice your thoughts on its talk page. Basically, what the proposal entails is attempting to run an official trial, and then vote after the trial run on whether to change the main page. Support to run a trial requires much less consensus than support to change the main page. Should we succeed at eventually getting such a feature on the main page it would tentatively look like this. Whether or not you support an experimental trial or not you should come discuss the matter at WP:LOTDP's talk page. I apologize if you have either already voiced your opinion on this matter or already tired of hearing about it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

another thing as well

I think the Prebilovci Massacre page should be removed. I don't know who acctuallt created it, but since I come from the village of Prebilovci, I know that there isn't anything callaed the Prebilovci Massacre. Not everyone Serb was from that village but from other places as well. Check it out yourself. The Prebilovci Page was also written first, and the context as well. Yours Sincerely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justiceinwiki (talk • contribs) 12:16, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If You Can Help...

The user Rijeca isn't stoping. He's just deleting and i'm forced to make it how it was before every time. He has no right what so ever. First: there is nothing refered to as the Prebilovci Massacre.

I myself come from Prebilovci so I know that. The Serbs hwo were massacred in 1941 at surmanci, where Virgin Mary then alledgely appeared to some Croation teenagers in the 1980's, were not just from Prebilovci. I have never heared anyting refered to as the prebilovci Massacre, maby just someone misunderstood somethin and created the page. Now Rijeca, an user from Crotion, ceeps deleting parts of the Prebilovci page and the part thet talks about the atrosities committed by Croats in 1992; The bodies of thoose who had been massacred were blown to bits by a bomb.

Please, do something. Rijeca is just missusing wikipedia, at least threw my point of view. Try do sort this out somehow beetween me and rijeca. My suggestion is that we get rid of the prebilovci Massacre page, since there's no one exept someone hwo created -- probably missunderstood something about the massacre -- the page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justiceinwiki (talk • contribs) 18:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it worked a little

Your unprotection of that Killian documents article did help some. The silent user responded on the Talk page well enough to make a little progress in the discussion. For several reasons he got himself blocked for a month, so we'll see eventually if he has further changes which he can explain. (SEWilco 03:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Need some help

Hi! I just need some help with a physics stuff:
1,000 KW (kilowatt) = ? J (joule) Hope you know this. Thanks.-- Vintei talk 18:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thank you very much.-- Vintei talk 20:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright buddy, go get some sleep :)-- Vintei talk 23:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And do you know why the StatusBot lags so much?-- Vintei talk 23:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK. Thanks.-- Vintei talk 01:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: scorched earth moves

Why dont you mention these [2], [3] which also made move revertion impossible? Is the right to make such moves reserved to the one party only?--Dojarca 08:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It prevented the move. It is fact. We may guess was it a typo or was made intentionally - we dont know, but it effectively prevented the move.--Dojarca 20:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing

;-/ O.K. - No prob. Cheers! Claudevsq 03:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fellowship of Friends article

Hello East718, I am an editor of the Fellowship of Friends article. Yamla (an admin) stubbed the article and protected it for supposed COI (no vandalism or edit wars going on). Could you take a look to the Talk page? I would like to be sure that Yamla is doing the right job as an admin, since it seems to me he is being a bit to active. Thanks! Love-in-ark 16:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking, I just wanted to be sure. Love-in-ark 22:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quick help

Block user:The_JPFidla, please. Thanks. Gscshoyru 02:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind... sorry for being so curt then. I was busy reverting him so did not have much time. But it seems another admin finally did get him as I was writing the message. Thanks anyways, though!! Gscshoyru 02:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. The things people do in their free time though... it's so sad. And they think we have no lives. Gscshoyru 02:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Liking your newly-acquired powers, I see? Congrats, by the way :) I like your comment. Normally I'd say something along the lines of Don't feed the trolls... but seeing as he isn't giving up anyways, it probably does not matter :) Gscshoyru 02:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to remove the comments placed on the newly-blocked user's page, though... which somehow got in after the protection? I can't, 'cause it's protected. Gscshoyru 02:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. He appears to have stopped. Seriously though... who makes several thousand socks in April and continues using them when its six months later? Doesn't he have anything productive to do with his time? Like, say, sleep, for instance, if its two in the morning? Sigh... Gscshoyru 02:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? Gscshoyru 02:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. I'd suggest protecting your page but that would... kinda defeat the point, would it not? We seem to have jumped to June, too... which is good 'cause his socks have been from April for as long as I remember. Gscshoyru 02:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My talk page

No problem, hopefully he'll be running out of sleepers soon. Kesac 02:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Garden Grove

I hate to ask this, but could you please intervene on the West Garden Grove Request for Deletion page? Myself and CelticGreen are having an unproductive arguement, and I was wondering if you could help end it since you were a voter on the request CelticGreen made to ban me from Wikipedia. I would appreciate it if you could do this. Marinidil 03:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I appreciate it :) Marinidil 04:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

indef block on user:Section 230 Expert

Hi East,

What's the deal with the indefinite block on 230? It's clear the account hasn't made any productive edits, but the user received no warnings and you blocked indefinitely. While blocks are supposed to prevent disruption to the encyclopedia, they're also supposed to start at 24 hours. Will you consider unblocking, or blocking for a shorter period? Firsfron of Ronchester 05:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. The url isn't exactly clear that it is Mr. Kohs, just that he reported it on WR. I won't undo the hard work of other admins, but I really wish everyone would assume more good faith of other editors, despite suspicions. Well, thanks for your response. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

		The Special Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page, I have to admit though, excluding the first line, that has to be the most random vandalizing I have ever seen, I mean I started reading it, and I was like "is this a pure copy of Earth, haha. Well thanks again! Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 07:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Hey, Congratulations on your RfA. I see you frequently at WP:RFPP. Cool signature, how do you get it to change colours? --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 18:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was. Your sig is groovy, I was just curious to know how you did it. Anyway, see you around!. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would actually recommend not including the date in such a way - forcing the US date style is confusing for thousands of editors that use dd/mm/yy. violet/riga (t) 20:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile phone culture

The category you deleted as a C1 speedy (Category:Mobile phone culture) has been listed at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 12 - I'd be grateful if you could comment there. violet/riga (t) 20:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For (For outstanding contribution to my monobook, your contribution has saved much time for me. I, Mercury, award you this barnstar. You have brought great credit upon yourself, English Wikipedia, and Wikimedia!), Mercury 21:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MMA CSD

FYI...Talk:UFC Fight Night 12. Tuckdogg 02:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EpicFlame

Hey man, thanks for declining that guy's unblock, but it might have been a little hasty on my part. He created some pretty nasty userboxes, including re-creating one after it was deleted at MFD, but other than that, he seemed to be a good-faith editor for the most part. I think some other admins are looking into it, but I wanted to tell you that I appreciate you backing me up. GlassCobra 02:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. His unblock request was rather uncivil. Well, thanks all the same. GlassCobra 02:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, he's not handling the situation well. It also looks like he's made a sock, User:PartyVan. GlassCobra 03:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really? I had no idea; well, it looks like the sock's been banned. Even EpicFlame's adopter, User:Mschel, acknowledges that his behavior has been pretty disappointing. GlassCobra 03:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:GuruAskew

Moments after you rejected his block appeal, he left this post in which he promises that he will continue to edit war when he returns and be a disruptive user. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hiey can you please not use CSD#G6 when an article has been deleted via AfD please link to summary as it makes it easier for people to understand. Point of not I almost recreated an started another AfD it was only because Hesperian had put "AfD notice" in an edit summary of the article I didnt. Gnan garra 04:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry didnt realise your new to this for afd and edit summary like -- deleted as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Route 1A Curse makes it easy for others to see why, especially when you close discussions where the article gets recreated. Trawling through AfD logs to find the right discussion can be difficult, when multiple article are deleted in the one discussion. Gnan garra 04:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My (Remember the dot)'s RfA

I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then.

Thanks again! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of current world boxing champions

Hey, east718! As I just saw on fightnews, they wrote that the WBC have added Manny Pacquiao as emeritus champion in superfeatherweight. But they write that there are also Klitschko, Mayweather, Morales, and 2 or 3 more others. Therefore, I would recommend only to add those to our list that appear on the official WBC website under "Champions", just like Mayweather. Anyway, with six or seven more emeritus champions, you have to admit that then, it would be better to let them out... Cheers! claudevsq 16:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HAYE LAID DOWN HIS BELTS!!!

It has just been confirmed that David Haye isn't champion any longer. He stated in an interview yesterday evening that he would definitely move up to heavyweight, having been offered a good ranking by the WBA, and that he would lay down his belts... claudevsq 19:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emeritus champs

I reverted it in fact because I think we should mention them only when the official WBC website mentions them too. It's getting too much otherwise... or put a question on the discussion page to see who is pro/contra. Cheers, claudevsq 19:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haye

You're right about the Ring mag's title for Haye. My fault! ;-) claudevsq 19:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link

Here's the link, by the way (read beyond the photo):

http://www.laprovence.fr/articles/2007/11/11/153534-FRANCE-Foudroyant-David-Haye.php claudevsq 19:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DRVNote Jim Jagielski

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jim Jagielski. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ⇔ ChristTrekker 23:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Administrivia

Heya, I just closed off that DRV on Jim Jagelski (whatever!). Wanted to let you know that for that kind of ancillary, 'paperwork' request, it's fine for you to close it off yourself once you've dealt with it. There's no conflicts of interest in such a simple thing, and you're not actually making any decision you didn't already make. I've done it anyway, but just for future reference. Splash - tk 23:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankspam

Thank you...

...for your participation, criticism, and support in my recent RfA, which succeeded with a final count of 90/1/1. I appreciate all of your kind words, criticism, and suggestions. I extend a special thanks to Acalamari for his nomination, and Dihydrogen Monoxide and Husond for their coaching and nominations. If you need help in any administrative matters, please contact me.

Thank you again and, best regards,
Neranei
This RfA thanks inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.

Re: Image:MUSHAGamecover.jpg

Sorry, didnt release the edit was by an admin until after.

Only did it because your Edit summary "bot is sick" wasn't really relevent to what you were doing. Salavat 06:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, just wondering what "I1s" is abbreviated from? Salavat 06:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see now, thanks. Salavat 06:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - goodbye

I'm quitting Wikipedia. Please delete all my subpages http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3APrefixindex&from=Vintei&namespace=2 and drop down the semi-protection. Thank you. Goodbye.-- Vintei talk 21:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Haye

I se he's in the list again as WBA/WBC champion. I think meanwhile that it was maybe indeed a little too early to take him out, even though he said that he would relinquish his belts, he may not yet have done so. I'll change the talk on the discussion page from "Haye vacates belts" to "Haye will relinquish titles to move up"... Cheers! claudevsq 05:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for the emeritus champions, the WBC published their report yesterday about rankings and mandatories, as you may have seen. It seems uncertain that Pacman stays at superfeatherweight or if he will move up. Let's just wait 2 or 3 more days for the smoke to clear up, 'cause until then, the WBC website will be done updating their rankings 'til October included, and we'll add Pac and Hopkins if they appear in the WBC website's champions list. You know I've never been too much of a friend to emeritus champions, espeially now that there are that much, I simply cannot see why B-Hop is Ring's champ at LHW and emeritus champ at MW, and he doesn't even have a belt and fights maybe once per year, who wants to see him fight anymore anyway? But if they list him, we're gonna list him too. I saw you had him as eme-champ in MW... is that because of his former accomplishments in MW, or why since he's at LHW now, it seems? Too much questions, I know... Let me just handle this, OK? You've got enough other work... ;-))) CHEERS! claudevsq 05:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of how the average Wikipedia reader is currently moving

Just curious how this discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of how the average Wikipedia reader is currently moving) ended in deletion since clearly no "consensus" was reached with a large minority of users calling for clean/merge/rename/userfy with a lot more even split after numerous sources were added? I truly am just curious how this process works. Thanks. Ojh and one more thing, just curious if I could get a copy of the article code especially from the "cells" section as I had some unique sources already worked out for inclusion in either a user page or existing articles which lacked sources for those. I have most of the code saved on my computer but not that section. Thanks for your time. Earthdirt 21:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to disagree that most of the votes for keeping where "intersting" though many people did comment on the interestingness of the article. I am planning on merging most of the information to Orders of magnitude (speed) which is definitely a very similar, though unsourced article. I would consider hosting the "essay", but I'm not sure that it's worth the time or effort to post an essay on user space, as who would read it? Do you know of any notable user essays which get any meaningful traffic? Also, could I get a copy of the article code for the "cells" section as I had some unique sources already worked out for inclusion in either a user page and/or existing articles which lacked sources for those. I have most of the code saved on my computer but not that section. Thanks for your time. Earthdirt 22:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Usually, when dismissing a significant number of keep arguments (even if they are just "interesting" or "useful" ones) there should be some clear policy-based reason for deletion. Did you believe the discussion established that the article was original research, not notable, or what? Also, even though he isn't clearly requesting it, I think it would be best to userfy the article in Earthdirt's user space, since he is requesting parts of it anyway. Finally, since many people argued that the content might be appropriate in some form or another (though with a clear consensus that the title was awful), is there anything that you believe could be done to make the article, or some derivative of it, more suitable for inclusion in the mainspace? DHowell 22:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User talk:DHowell#Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of how the average Wikipedia reader is currently moving

Let me just say that I completely disagree with your interpretation of the synthesis policy, especially as it specifically says "serving to advance a position" and you specifically admitted that the article "didn't really advance any position". If we had to delete articles which simply collect information in novel ways even if they don't advance a position, we'd have to get rid of a huge amount of Wikipedia content. "Unencyclopedic" is not usually a valid reason to delete unless one can show a clear violation of What Wikipedia is not, and duplication of content is not usually a good reason to delete (though it could be a valid reason to merge or redirect). Since you also admitted there were valid reasons to keep, I think these alone should be reason enough to reverse your deletion. As far as finding sources which do collect information in this way, there is mostly educational material such as this and this, and I'm sure published printed versions of this type could be found, though these don't include the internal motions of the body. (Of course, there's also that song from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life!). Trying to find stuff which presents both the cosmological motion and internal body and microscopic motion led me to more new-age-ish type sites, such as this and this. There is at least a prima facie case to be made for this, and given more time and more thorough research more appropriate sources could probably be found, though again I don't think the synthesis policy really requires it when no position is being advanced. DHowell 23:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 01:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Privatemusings (talk · contribs)

Can you point to the consensus to unblock PM? He's had his unblock request rejected, and it's also been rejected on the unblock mailing list. Also I see rather strong support for the block on AN/I. I strongly suggest you reapply the block. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of people on AN/I want PM blocked from all accounts and there's a fairly strong consensus for an indef block all round. This has got to the point of being more than sockpuppetry. I'm not sure I saw David Gerrerd support the unblock and he was the blocking admin. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The unblock of Privatemusing is inexplicable. He's making serious trouble wherever he goes. He continuously fails to take the interests of the project into account and engages in aggressive behavior that promises to damage us. We simply don't have the millions of dollars for litigation which his actions may result in. Please see Talk:Giovanni di Stefano, especially the deleted versions. Fred Bauder 02:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miletich

East.718,

I am asking you to please remove the litigation note at the bottom of miletich fighting systems and lock the page indefinately. I have been being harrassed for almost a year by a man who has filed lawsuits against many in the sport of mma.

He keeps trying to copyright and trademark logo's for my clothing, and with the use of my name. He was denied on a trademark application already. please help me to control this man's abuse of my name.

Please contact me thru my website at mfselite.com and I can give you all of my attorneys info so they can fill you in.

Thank you, Pat Miletich —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pj miletich (talk • contribs) 02:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

131.215.220.112

This IP, which you recently blocked, is the IP for the entire campus wireless network at Caltech. Additionally, I can't seem to find any evidence of a Tor exit node running behind it, but I know that there have been several occasions where it has been banned as one, and so I would greatly appreciate it if you could tell me how you came to that conclusion. Is it on a list somewhere? --Constantine 10:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

नमस्ते

आपने हाल ही में, एक आई पी एड्रेस को ब्लाक किया था : 131.215.220.112. उसे ब्लाक करने का कारन आपने उसका एक ओपन प्रोक्सी होना बताया था, परन्तु ऑनलाइन टूल के मुताबिक, ये ओपन प्रोक्सी नही है. क्या आप बता सकते हैं, आपको क्यों ऐसा लगा की यह टोर प्रोक्सी है? धन्यवाद. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 10:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BOTREQ#Template transcluding bot

I can do it, but I have a couple questions, see that page. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 16:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signature date

I mentioned this before, but just to ask again... Could you please remove the date from your signature as it can be somewhat confusing. violet/riga (t) 18:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Browsers and server lag

You may be partially right. Did you see the reply to my question at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Server Lag. I'd not seen the different browsers do that before. Usually they both show the lag. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 19:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard hopkins articles

Hi. I recently added a new source to the light heavyweight article about Bernard Hopkins {making 2 total} claiming he was the first middleweight in history to jump 2 divisions and win the light heavyweight title in 1 fight. A feat Sugar Ray Robinsom failed to accomplish. Someone deletes it every time I put it up even though it it sourced from 2 places. The guy is also leaving me messages swearing at me and calling me a fucking retard. I would like this part of the article locked from vandalism and also would like to know how many sources I need before it stays up for good . Thanks in advance, Jason. Ps. Here's what it looks like.

Light Heavyweight

On June 10, 2006, Hopkins defeated The Ring Magazine Light Heavyweight champion and Roy Jones Jr. conqueror Antonio Tarver in a completely one-sided fight by a unanimous decision to win Tarver's Light Heavyweight Title. Hopkins knocked Tarver down in Round 5. Hopkins played to the crowd (made up mostly of Hopkins fans) throughout the fight including one moment, in round 10, where Hopkins turned his back to Tarver, raised his arms, and then turned back around and ran after Tarver, hitting him with a flurry of punches before the bell rang. Hopkins stated after the fight that he was "done."[4] All three judges had him winning the bout 118-109.Hopkins became the first middleweight in history to jump to the light heavyweight division and capture the title in 1 fight. He succeeded where the great Sugar Ray Robinson had failed.<ref>{{cite news | first=bert | last=sugar | coauthors= | title=RECAP: TARVER VS. HOPKINS | date=June 13, 2006 | publisher=hbo | url =http://www.hbo.com/boxing/events/2006/0610_tarver_hopkins/columns/postfight_sugar.html | work =hbo boxing website | pages = | accessdate = 2007-10-07 | language = }}</ref> <ref>{{cite news | first=Ron | last=Borges | coauthors= | title=fighting for history | date=2006-6-8 | publisher= | url =http://www.hbo.com/boxing/events/2006/0610_tarver_hopkins/columns/fighterstory_hopkins.html | work = | pages = | accessdate = 2007-11-16 | language = }}</ref> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xman52 (talk • contribs)

Hi, I also just added a third source.

<ref>{{cite news | first=dan | last=rapheal | coauthors= | title='Executioner' ruthlessly efficient in final bout | date=2006-6-10 | publisher=espn | url =http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=2478678 | work = | pages = | accessdate = 2007-11-16 | language = }}</ref>

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Xman52 (talk • contribs)

Hi, I just left my case on the talk page. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xman52 (talk • contribs)

Your userpage

Hey, I noticed that your name and status at the top of your page does not cover the original text. If you like, try the code in User:The-G-Unit-Boss/Sandbox as that covers it up. It may not be the case in your browser but I just thought i'd let you know! --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 21:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard hopkins article

Anthony Robbins is again making personal attacks on me after your final warning. He is doing this on the talk page of the bernard hopkins article. I would like him banned for repeated personal attacks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xman52 (talk • contribs)

What about my edit request? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xman52 (talk • contribs)

Tuf 6 Bracket

Matt arroyo and richie hightower are on team hughes because on the newer episode they were swithched to the opppsite team for rebalancing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmacko (talk • contribs)

203.220.106.29

Thanks for blocking the user above. I was about to make an AIV report, actually. It's probably obvious to you, but the user contested their block, asserting that the edits they made to the Twinkle page were good faith; the unblock was declined by Sandstein. The block expires in 24 hours, though, and I have a hunch that the user will bounce right back. I probably won't be back online, but I'm guessing you've got them on your watchlist so the block can be reinstated ASAP in the event of post-release vandalism? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 09:00, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Battletoads

Your most recent edit to that article apparently restored the vandalism that led to its blocking in the first place. Would you mind removing that? Just64helpin (talk) 12:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, someone else got it. Just64helpin (talk) 13:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Hopkins talk page

Hi, It's xman52 again. Anthony Robbins is back and again attacking me personally and swearing on the bottom of the Talk page of Bernard Hopkins. I've taken to your warnings and have been doing the right thing by not replying. I've stated my arguements and listed sources when needed top back them up without personal attacks. Please ban Anthonny Robbins again to stop these personal attacks against me.Xman52 (talk) 16:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tuf 6

Well, on Tuf 2 episode 8, Team Franklins heavyweights were beating all of Team Hughes' heavyweights to a point where Franklin had to transfer Brad Imes to Team Hughes, and at the finale, Imes was considered Team Hughes' heavyweight because of the change... but maybe its only that one fight due to them might actually fighting their teamate again in the semi-finals... take care... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmacko (talk • contribs)

Anthonny Robbins on the Hopkins talk page

I don't want to be a pain but this guy Anthony Robbins is constantly swearing at and insulting me. Can you do something as soon as you get a chance please? I shouldn't have to put up with this. Thank's in advance, Xman52. Xman52 (talk) 22:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Sanger

Hi - I wanted you to know that I have semi-protected this page, because I disagree with your reasoning that there is insufficient activity to justify protection. I tend to be REALLY gun-shy with BLP issues, and there were a series of pretty egregious BLP issues by IPs - enough to make me nervous anyway. I hope you don't mind, and please feel free to revert if you seriously disagree. - Philippe | Talk 00:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Hopkins page

xman52 is vandalising both the main & talk page with his biased nonsense. He's nothing more than an ignorant Hopkins cheerleader. Don't let him edit any pages or edit them for him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.242.89 (talk)

Re: SALTing pages

Good man. I wasn't quite sure about salting. I will revise now, however. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk)

Content dispute

A content dispute would require two sides arguing. The anonymous doesn't discuss at all, simply reverts. What should I do next? I don't want to engage in a revert war but the edits are ghastly. JuJube (talk) 02:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:East718/NaCl

Why is the Main Page on there? – Gurch 13:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ImposeMag (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Oh dear. I am tripping up all over the place, it seems! I was getting confused between blocking for 'spam' and blocking for an inappropriate username... Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give that a try now, thanks! Twinkle is all very well and good, but doesn't allow me to block in one click, I don't think... Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Terry Pratchett at the Carpet People launch party.jpg

"Speedy deleted per (CSD I7), was an image with an invalid fair use rationale and the uploader was notified more than 48 hours ago." That's funny because I wasn't notified at all. Also, what was wrong with the fair-use rationale?--Svetovid (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Danilo Network Deletion

For one, I'm sick of people deleting my articles. I do not advertise just simply inform. Your the kind of people that make me sick because they cant do their jobs right. Enough said. Frankythedoggy (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again..

Sorry to bother you, but could you restore my userspace (is it possible)? Wikipedia is just too much an addiction to me. Thanks man! -- Vintei talk 01:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back! And is it possible that you re-semi-protect my userpage again? Thanks!-- Vintei talk 17:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nuking userspace

I have an approved sock that I was going to use. If you nuke the userspace, will it erase all record of the linkage between the two accounts? I made no big deal of it, and was in contact with only one admin when I created it, so no one should know it is me, unless I tell them. And what is the RTV policy on that? It's okay to tell wikifriends I trust what name I'm under now, correct? K. Scott Bailey (talk) 04:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To request a username change, you need to go to WP:CHU, sorry, but the 'crats won't rename a user because one admin says so. When the account is renamed (should you put a request in), all contribs will be moved to your new account. Ryan Postlethwaite 04:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to an approved sock I opened a few weeks back, to edit on completely different articles than I was currently focused on. I was simply going to let this name pass into oblivion, and edit under the approved sock account, if that's alright. I can e-mail you the name of the account, if you'd like. K. Scott Bailey (talk) 04:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it's fine unless you wanted to. But to stop your RL name being linked on wikipedia, your best bet is to request a name change at WP:CHU. It's easy to do and will mean that google searches of your name don't link to wikipedia. If privacy is your concern, I'd strongly suggest doing that. Ryan Postlethwaite 04:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail to East, per his statement that his e-mail wasn't working very well tonight
- Is it okay to have it renamed to something other than <approved sock name blanked for privacy>, like say a nonsense name of some type? I want absolutely no connection between <approved sock name blanked for privacy> and the KSB account, for some on WP whom I have no interest in ever finding out where I work, live, etc. I'm not concerned with my employer knowing what I've contributed to the project. They would probably like to see it in fact, as I'm proud of my contributions to WP. I don't even want a WP:CHU request that links my new account with my account under my RL name.

Thanks a ton! K. Scott Bailey (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heading over to CHU now. Thanks again! K. Scott Bailey (talk) 05:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything else I need to do regarding this issue? If not, I could really use some sleep! :) K. Scott Bailey (talk) 05:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done and all pages deleted including the redirects when we move the pages. Secretlondon (talk) 07:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection request World War II Online

Thank you for acting on my request. The version that's up now is the one that they reverted out all of all of my contributions. I guess I don't understand. If I had reverted it again and made the request wouldn't I have been in violation of the 3RR?. I didn't know how to make clear I was requesting protection of a prior version. Now it's just the way it was when all this started. this is just very discouraging even though I guess it's part of participating. Awotter (talk) 00:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

user nergaal

User was blocked for 3RR edit warring and repeated disruption. If you like trolls, good lick. I will not hesitate top block him again whet he resumes disruption. Your wheel warring without looking into the matter is poor judgement of wikilawyering. Your opinion that it is better to protect an article and halt to grind productive work of many other editors than to block a pesky disruptor is a rather poor judgement. `'Míkka >t 01:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Hopkins page

Anthony Robbins is back again. He's insulting me and swearing even worse then before. Can you please do something about this? He is making the conflict very difficult to resolve. Thanks. Xman52 (talk) 01:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Caytiera

I notice you recently deleted this article... I don't particularly agree, but understand the reasoning behind it... as a major contributor though I was wondering if it would be possible to get a copy of the last version of the article before it was deleted. Thanks. --Selquest (talk) 02:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy reply. You're correct in that I am newly registered, this having been the first article to which I felt I was contributing enough to have a name for myself. I don't necessarily want it permanently userfied for me though so much as I'd just like a copy of my contribution for personal record. After the first prod to the article had been removed by another user, I had assumed the article was safe for at least a few days and didn't make a safety copy of the text then. The flag mentioning five days, and all. If this remains I problem I understand, and will hope to contact the original creator... I gather that it should not take much convincing to have it userfied to him/her.--Selquest (talk) 03:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much! --Selquest (talk) 03:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Say there

Why did you revert my speedy nomination of Doong Spank? If you are declining the nomination, please at least state a reason. The article contains no prose at all, just a list of songs. I think A1 easily applies. Reverting me just makes it look like I'm vandalising or something. --Bloodzombie (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco Xavier Castellanos

I could have sworn I put a speedy on this, and that you then deleted it: no refs, no notability. Was I dreaming, or is this a recreation? I confuse easily. Thanks Bielle (talk) 05:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't yet entered the lists at AfD, and don't intend to get that enmeshed in the nasty side of Wikipedia. I do some editing, answer questions at the Ref Desks and engage in some patrolling of NewPages to make modest repayment for the enormous entertainment the encyclopedia affords me. If the article is okay by your standards, not a "Speedy", in other words, then I shall leave it for someone who likes arguing more than I do. Thanks for your help, and the speed with which it came. Bielle (talk) 05:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks. - Jehochman ^Talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:58, November 20, 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Invisible Barnstar
		For being with us for so many years, and for many years to come, raise a glass. Marlith ^T/C 05:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To thwart the evil miszabot

Did you remove the date so it won't get archived? Why shouldn't it? If I understand the bot correctly, it needs two sigs to know what to archive, anyway. — Sebastian 07:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your encouragement! I agree with all you say. In addition to the discussion on WT:AN#Frequent abuse of AN for personal vendetta, which triggered the moves, I see your points as another advantage of subpages. They will just remain where they are and links to them will never change. — Sebastian 07:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This "reply on your page" thing is really confusing: I was waiting for your reply here, and did not realize that your message on my talk page was meant as a reply to this question, especially since you changed the title to a nondescript "AN/I". If you wanted to change the title, it would have been helpful to keep a link to this message with its original title.

I don't see how your reply is answering my question. What does the date of a maintenance message have to do with the link to a subpage, such as Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Deeceevoice?

Please reply here, I really prefer to keep conversations in one place - among other reasons, for one reason that you just described is important to you, too: To be able to refer to it. I'll be watching it for a while, which also protects you from vandalism. — Sebastian 07:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(moved from User talk:SebastianHelm) Now I'm really confused as to where you want me to reply. Just shoot me an email. east.718 at 07:59, November 20, 2007

I simply prefer to keep a thread together. My question is here, so I prefer to have the reply here, as well. I really don't see what's confusing about that. I don't mind using e-mail, but in this case, that would just spread out the conversation to yet another place. — Sebastian 08:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see; I prefer my discussions fractured (the "new messages bar" is there for a reason). As for your question, the reason why timestamps should be removed from subpages is because the bot will archive the "this thread has been moved to a subpage at blah blah blah" message prematurely; nobody will be able to find the discussion then. Removing the timestamp allows the message to stay live as long as the subpage discussion does, at which point it can be archived manually. For example, when Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Give us your fucking money runs its course, I'd just add a blank post to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Give us your fucking money, which would then let the thread get moved off the main page. east.718 at 08:20, November 20, 2007

OK, I see. I read somewhere that either this bot or a similar one only archives conversations that have at least two signed contributions, but I can't find that on User:MiszaBot II. Would it help if only the time, and not the date was removed? That would make it easier to archive old threads: When people aren't as thorough as you are and forget to add the blank post, then someone (or maybe even a modified version of the bot) can see that a thread is already over two weeks old and archive it. (Regarding the "new messages bar": I have a "keep thread together box" on my talk page for a reason, too, so I guess we both were ignoring the other's request.) — Sebastian 08:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting the entry regarding Mega AS Consulting

Hi,

I have entered the Mega AS Consulting information yesterday.

The information that was there before, was also entered by me. That in formation, as stated is relevant and factual about an innovative company and technology, same as other companies in that industry.

Unknown to me, another Administrator has decided to remove the same entry. Since I did not know about it, I did not have a chance to respond to his allegations and that abuse of administrator power has caused me real harm as it hurt my credibility which is an asset.

I have no idea who User:STLMatt is. He does not work for Mega AS. What ever he has done is his own responsibility and I have no clue about it. It has nothing to do AT ALL with Mega AS Consulting Ltd and thus the value of the entry should be on the face of it and NOT on someone else's actions.

Once I discovered (yesterday) that the company was removed I created it again, as before, in the same format as other companies in the same industry.

I believe I'm correct in saying that there is no Spam in this removed page, just facts about an interesting company with innovative technology. That technology is different enough to be interesting to many people who are looking for alternative. If you agree that other companies, in the same industry have the right to their entry, then the same should apply to Mega AS Consulting Ltd.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

Arnnei —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnneisp1 (talk • contribs) 11:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SOLO

You don't believe that this is advertising, perhaps you would say why?Paste (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK so not Spam, but rather than just trying to be clever how about a suggestion for what to put on an article that just advertises a company?Paste (talk) 19:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate the suggestions.Paste (talk) 20:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THX!

I used Twinkle to report a user to an administrator's noticeboard, and you blocked the user! Many thanks go out to you. Dalekusa 22:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

User:hopiakuta

If message something like I posted do not remain there, other users will get confused, report it on WP:ANI and cycle will continue. sharara 22:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woah!

		The Original Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for being the most active admin at WP:RPP!--Phoenix-wiki ^{(talk · contribs)} 23:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For posting the content. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cheering me up

lol ;) --Oxymoron⁸³ 02:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gründerzeit

Hi there, I saw you had taken an interest in the Gründerzeit article which was recently up for deletion. I have translated most of the original article (it has since been revised in the original, but there we go ....) and it seems to be better. Would you cast an eye over it and let me know if you think it is up to scratch? I do think it deserves a place in the encyclopaedia. Many thanks. docboat (talk) 04:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monobook

I've published my monobook now so that you can easily add importScript('User:DerHexer/monobook.js');. Regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 21:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll drop you a line. Regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Funguszeppelin block

For the sake of neutrality, I'm going to ask you to do it but I wonder if you think User:Funguszeppelin deserves to have his 24-hour block extended. I can't imagine he'll be more productive when his block is done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Diesel on RFPP

It appears I semi'd the article, and got edit conflicted when posting {{RFPP|s}} to see that you declined the request ;) Feel free to undo the protection if you really felt it was uneccessary. Spebi 06:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coffelt

Heya - I'm the one who keeps trying to uplaod that photo of Jon Coffelt - I have permission to use it, but I'm obviously doing something wrong. What do I have to do to not have it deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathaniels (talk • contribs) 08:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting pages for 20 years?

I noticed on WP:RPP that User talk:Funguszeppelin was protected by you for TWENTY YEARS. Surely one year would have been a more appropriate amount of time? 20 years just seems like an incredibly long amount of time to protect a page for... what was the thinking behind that? I'm just curious.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 10:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skippie.jpg and Skippykiller

FYI: Skippykiller (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) -- I tagged this username to WP:UAA. since the username itself appears to be an extension of the attack page (Image:Skippie.jpg). --Ssbohio (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Taken care of. --Ssbohio (talk) 12:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1.fm

1.FM is a free internet radio network broadcast by the Energy Group Radio LLC[5], with currently 29 different music channels from club to classics. The radio channels are available for real-time streaming over the Internet.

In October 2006, Andomedia ranked the 1.fm network as #2 on its Webcast Metrics ratings. For that month 1.fm had an Average Quarter Hour listenership of nearly 20,000 concurrent listeners, more than ABC Radio & ESPN Radio [6] --Tboogie937 (talk) 13:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a violation of WP:NOT's advertisement section. I've notified the above user about this policy. Dalekusa 16:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalekusa (talk • contribs)

Your questions!

... have answers :)

They're here. Please read them and let me know if you have any follow-on questions, either on that page or privately as you wish.

Best,

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 01:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thanks for helping out with the image backlog today. It is very appreciated, since I have many less images to nuke tonight. Thanks again, Maxim 01:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UFC Fight Night 12

Lordvader2009 keeps removing the AfD link for this page while the discussion is still ongoing. I've warned him about it a couple of times, but he just blanks his talk page and does it again without addressing the problem. The last time, right after he blanked his talk page an anon user made the same deletion from the UFC Fight Night 12 page, which I'd suspect was him. This is getting irritating; anything an admin can do to help out here? Tuckdogg (talk) 05:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sig

Hey there. Recently at ANI, I noticed your signature includes the timestamp within a box. May I ask how you do that? I tried including {{CURRENTDATE}} etc and signing with three tildes, but SineBot came after me... I dorftrottel I talk I 07:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you're obviously adept at that stuff. Um, I don't really understand the part where you transclude the subpage with </div> two times? Also, how the heck does this mirror trick on your userpage work? I've never seen anything like it. I dorftrottel I talk I 07:44, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also don't get the function of <includeonly>subst:</includeonly>. Why the includeonly brackets? I dorftrottel I talk I 07:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[7]. So it only substitutes the content between the includeonly tags when the page is transcluded :) Spebi 07:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks a lot so far. I still have no clue how the Unicode thing works. But I'll try to figure it out on my own, makes for a good exercise. My first question was about the {{user:east718/include}} which appears twice in the code. Is that necessary? You see, I like to understand the function of code before I employ it, that's why I'm asking. I dorftrottel I talk I 08:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I'll go fiddle about with the code. I dorftrottel I talk I 08:11, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So the border of your sig changes colors based on the total number of edits as sort of a random number generator? Pure genius. So good that I wouldn't even steal it. I dorftrottel I talk I 09:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Zappadappadoo

What the heck is GP? Could you possibly reblock this user under a better edit summary? He's requesting unblock, and it's kind of hard to determine if the block was proper without knowing what it was talking about in the first place. The Evil Spartan (talk) 07:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

This was going to get ugly if not closed tomorrow. BTW, what does the red "e" on delete stand for? Miranda 07:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Miranda 07:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing SD tag at Explosive forming

I don't mind saying that I agree that the current state of the article provides the necessary context to warrant a tag to expand. Perhaps you didn't observe the state of the article when I nominated for speedy deletion? It was a single line, with no templates. I'm a bit offended that you call my nomination abusive. If you disagree, I'd like to discuss it. Otherwise, please be more considerate. Bsherr (talk) 09:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I really appreciate the reply. I understand the source of the frustration. Bsherr (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help

You've deleted the picture of John Chapman that I added to his profile. Did I do something wrong? I have permission to submit the picture - he has asked me to add him to Wiki. I'm new to wiki :o) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stegboy (talk • contribs)

LL/Kool Moe Dee battle

This was never resolved, yet you took it down. Collectonian and one other person decided that it was "interpretation", "rumor", etc. and I challenged them to show me what was interpretation; they stop responding (except to reiterate the baseless claim); yet they win the dispute by default? Collectonian's whole premise was that it was "not notable", and even you said it was notable! (And I noticed a lot of people started complaining about his deletions in other subjects in one day!)

I don't know what other type of sources they want for that, then. It was a lyrical battle; not a real life personal beef, and this article was really no different than any of the others on hip hop rivalries (e.g. they all use the same sort of references. That is they type of info you find for rap history).And yes, please restore to my space.Eric B (talk) 14:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I guess I'll have to take your offer, then. Even though I have been here almost 3 years, I am still "new" in some respects, as overall, I have not edited that frequently. So I just do not know what exactly you all want for that article. It was a battle of lyrics (diss records aimed back and forth at each other). This was clearly mentioned in nearly all of those links, but they were all ruled out for being blog articles. Since it is about lyrics, all one needs to know is that there was an exchange of diss records, and the lyrics prove it, and so do the blog commentaries. I do not understand what else is required for it to be considered "verified". If it's only published magazine and books, then please look into those those books you have. Apparently, they are not available online, because I searched dozens and dozens od websites, and pretty much all I found were those blog type articles. I had commented in the discussion that the battle was so old, (from well before the internet age), so it will be hard to find those types of references. And I checked, and those blogs are the same type of source used by most rap articles; especially battles. That's why I could not understand why this one was being scruninized.

Like what happened to "cleanup" tags, or "this article needs sources" tags, if it was so questionable?

I also found it fishy how the delete tag went up four minutes after I first posted it! I mean; I had just clicked post, then went and added a short comment to the discussion page, and when I click back to the article, there the tag is! What is that about? The only thing I could imagine how someone could find, then read, and then make that decision and tag it in that amount of time was that they had it on a watchlist. There used to be an article titles "LL Cool J vs Kool Moe Dee; which I saw on a mirror site while doing my research, but it appeared to be a copy and paste of a website; so I couuld see why that was deleted. Then, all mention of the battle was completely removed from the LL Cool J article! And then, for them to claim it was not notable. So I just thought all of this suspicious, like someone doesn't want there to be an article on this battle.Eric B (talk) 00:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT NOW?!

why is it that now my second attempt at creating a page is being attempted to be messed up by someone as well!

why did you delete my article on 'GHD'?! Do you not realise it is the largest hair iron brand in the UK?!

Iamandrewrice (talk) 14:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you... but why is it up for speedy deletion? Oo

x Iamandrewrice (talk) 15:07, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek N.V.

I think this article went too soon. This is genuinely a prominent Dutch law firm, of the same standing as those law firms that have existing articles, even if it needed rewriting for tone. Please can you undelete it so that at least it gets a chance to be considered at AfD? HeartofaDog (talk) 15:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK - I'll have to think whether I feel that strongly about it, but thanks for showing willing! HeartofaDog (talk) 15:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hybrid

Thanks for speedy deleting Hybrid per G6 per my request. However, I also meant to have Talk:Hybrid deleted. I didn't know I should have asked for this seperately. Now I've moved Hybrid (disambiguation) to Hybrid, but Talk:Hybrid (disambiguation) got left behind. i'm no computer whiz, and I don't know how to fix this at this point. Can you help again?--Yannick (talk) 16:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Yannick (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Bots

Hi! Um, do you know how to build a bot? Thanks!-- Vintei talk 17:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, am uh, I was thinking for a bot that could remove non-free images from userpages or one that'll revert page blanking (99,9% of them are vandalisms). Is it possible? Thank you!-- Vintei talk 02:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, great. Thanks. I just need to get a better bot-idea.-- Vintei talk 15:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GnomeBot doesn't seem to be working. I can't find a user under the name User:GnomeBot.-- Vintei talk 21:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...

I am confused, how can a cartoon dog from family guy create a biography of himself but i can not create a page about modern artwork? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezartan (talk • contribs) 17:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do not consider Computer Arts Magazine, the #1 selling digital arts magazine in the world, a good 3rd party source? Did you even bother to read my article? I uploaded the image, but i guess I have to upload the magazine image as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezartan (talk • contribs) 17:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know/Next update/Time

Do you actually know what the purpose of Template:Did you know/Next update/Time is? Apparently based on your previous edits to this page, I do not get a sense you do. It is to remind people when was the last time that the DYK main page template has been updated, so it can be changed after six hours with a list of new articles.

Therefore, please do not reset the clock unless the DYK have been updated. I noticed that you reset the clock at 12:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC) [8] when the DYK main page template was not changed. Therefore, the list put on at 03:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[9] was on the main page for longer than it should have.[10] Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the red means that it is overdue for an update. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CelticGreen

He saying that i should not do DAYS soaps. can you talk to him on his discussion for me? Car5ly858 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Car5ly858 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One, I'm a her. Two, all I said was to stop vandalizing pages and moving pages that shouldn't be move. That's not saying someone shouldn't edit pages, it's saying someone should do it correctly, with correct grammar and MOS additions. Look at the grammar, you might see what I meant. No caps, bad grammar. Those types of edits make Wiki look bad. Regardless, the minor warnings I gave were because of unwarranted page moves and unwarranted edits. That's all. CelticGreen (talk) 01:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be advised that User:Car5ly858 is not new, and has been warned numerous times for various transgressions. He or she has blanked his/her user talk page in an apparent effort to hide these warnings, but the record of the warnings is easily seen by viewing the user talk page history. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to have defended myself. I didn't realize that was stalking. Generally when I'm being repeatedly asked odd questions on my talk page, I will look at a users contributes. If that's stalking, so be it, but I was just defending myself and explaining that I didn't say not to edit the Days pages, just do it correctly and don't move pages against consensus. I had no clue fixing errors by other editors was stalking. The soap project seems to get many a vandal, some of us are on heightened patrol of certain articles. If we didn't have watch lists, full pages would be being blanked as happened this morning on a page I watch. Not by the above user, but it happened all the same. CelticGreen (talk) 15:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

one I had talk to to Realykick because he makes no sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Car5ly858 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

East, what is the reason for this protection?. the_undertow ^talk 06:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, and all I had to do was go through the edit history. Yeah, I don't think anyone was unblocking him anytime soon. Thanks. the_undertow ^talk 06:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Hoge

Since you fixed the page, does that mean it won't be deleted? --Cammyzcool (talk) 07:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

heh

Thanks :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I noticed you deleted the images from articles Edwin Valero, Bobby Pacquiao and Z Gorres. Aren't the reasons I gave in the dispute convincing enough? Duke17 (talk) 09:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for showing sympathy. Because of what happened, I almost wanted to engage myself in some extreme measures. Duke17 (talk) 10:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Qn

Awfully sorry to bother you, but could you explain why you thought the Taslima Nasreen article didn't need semi-protection? Relata refero (talk) 10:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, riots in Calcutta that drove her to leave her home there, and a political controversy about her visa status and whether she should be permitted to stay in India. Controversy currently ongoing. Relata refero (talk) 10:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton! I wish all admins were as accessible. Relata refero (talk) 10:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explain image deletion

Could you explain why you deleted the British Worker front cover image on the Solidarity UK page? I designed the cover and therefore have copyright.Doublethink64 (talk) 12:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)doublethink64[reply]

help with vandal

Didn't realize that was you that left a message, thought it was the vandal. Anyways, can you help me with this User name:Briancutajar ? I used the wrong template on their talk page as it was supposed to be a further warning. Anyways its been removed. Grande13 (talk) 15:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova and Jehochman/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 18:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your evidence at this ArbCom case, the e-mail was not oversighted everywhere. It still exists in deleted edits such as at the bottom of this. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU!

Thanks for the unblock! My edit count was 666, and didn't want it to stay that way for 31 hrs!!

Once again...thanks!,

L337p4wn (talk) 04:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Scaleneed

User:Scaleneed, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Scaleneed and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Scaleneed during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Marlith ^T/C 05:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:222.155.45.249

Perhaps this diff will give you reason to extend the 3 day block to indef? Obvious sock, as he's been harassing the user every day for at least a week from different IP's. - Rjd0060 (talk) 06:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Hopefully that range works. Thanks - Rjd0060 (talk) 06:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI on deeceevoice

What on earth does this[11] mean? And doesn't something like this call for some sort of notification? What's the deal? (Please reply under the appropriate subhead on my talk page. Thanks.) deeceevoice (talk) 16:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brand New

Why did you remove the image of Brand New off the page? I gave a reason that it can be used for Wikipedia under fair use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericstrategy (talk • contribs) 18:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if I could not find a free alternative anywhere online? The band put it up for promotional use on their myspace and it wouldn't harm their sales of the image or their use of it at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericstrategy (talk • contribs) 00:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Bayne

I have permission from the actress/writer/director/producer to create/edit information about her and can forward her email to me so that you know that the information I had put up was with permission and I have copyright permission to distribute to Wikipedia. I was told that was the reason why the information I had put up previously had been deleted, thinking it was copyright information I didn't have permission to distribute/publish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spfoley (talk • contribs) 19:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As stated prior, permission was granted for fair use. The information you're citing from the scifi wiki is the information the actress gave permission to use on the web for anyone that wanted to use the info. I have an email with permission from the actress if needed. How should I approach from here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.31.225 (talk • contribs)

CelticGreen

hello, there was this girl who yelled at me for taking the DAYS OF OUR LIVES cast box out of a link and put it on the main page. I only did that because it was easier to view and that was how it was for the longest time until about this summer and i like it better the other way and im sure a lot of other people do. and she is being wiked jerky and needs to leave everyone alone because she is being mean about what ever people edit and i don't like it.

CelticGreen <<that is her username

please get her like revoked..thank you for listening —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drnorth16 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm a big meany. Here's what I wrote: Your recent edits to Days of our Lives articles

It is considered vandalism to remove complete sections of an article as you did on the List of Days of our Lives cast members. The list is separate from the main article for a reason. Do not continue to edit in such a manner, removing sections as you did. It will be reported.

Interesting how both Drnorth16 and Car5ly came to you rather than reporting my "meanness" in the proper project page. Removing full sections of an article can be considered vandalism. The "warning" didn't even say "warning" it was a simple statement and nothing that could be considered a "revokable" offense. It's not like I called Drnorth16 names, just made a statement. A factual one at that. CelticGreen (talk) 00:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I'm sure Drnorth's readdition of the cast lists was in good faith, but they were moved to separate articles because of their length and to keep the main Days article more stable. Cast lists for soaps change so often that this is a common procedure for larger and better-developed soap articles (and other series, for that matter). In an article's quality assessment, frequent edits/updates and the inclusion of lists reflect badly on overall quality. Drnorth should not be surprised to be reverted or reprimanded when making such a large change without discussion. In any case, CelticGreen is an invaluable and knowledgable editor and this should certainly go no further. — TAnthony^Talk 01:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

She is very importent

I dont feel you give "Sophia "Sonya" Esman" enough credit. She has a very bright future and was recently accepted by a record compan, please put back the page. I would really appreicate it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollerbird (talk • contribs) 01:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

British monarchy

Hello East718. TharkunColl has thrown in the towel; Though I think the page should remain 'protected' for awhile -- would you move it back to the consensus preferred Monarchy of the United Kingdom? Thanks. GoodDay (talk) 01:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. GoodDay (talk) 01:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

I would give you a barnstar for being especially helpful in my first fortnight as an administrator. However, you only got one four days ago, so you can wait a bit long. In the meantime, have a tiny picture of where I work, to keep you warm in the wee hours. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Durham AfD

Thanks for closing this AfD: I was pitying the poor admin who was going to have to close it! One thing: there were four articles co-nominated (three forks of County Durham, plus a redirect), but you only deleted one of them. Can you fix this please..... --RFBailey (talk) 02:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deleting my article

you had deleted my article on david gonzales. i felt that it was unnecessary due to the fact that the article is relevant and contributes greatly to wikipedia. for example there are many articles that are about professional skateboarders like Andrew Reynolds and Dustin Dollin, so why not David Gonzales? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samhasim (talk • contribs) 04:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AudioStreet.net article deletion

Good evening,

I was wondering why my article on AudioStreet.net was deleted? I setup a page describing the services the site offers and what is it about. I was given a notice that it was a blatant advertisement. How can I describe a site without it sounding like an advertisement?

AudioStreet.net is mentioned a few times in Wiki articles. Do I have to just limit to say "Free music hosting service & music community?" with nothing more?

Thank you, Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmanchu (talk • contribs) 04:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at this...........

Resolved

– im not crazy, no medication needed Tiptoety (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so as strange as it may sound, i think that an edit is not showing up in the edit history. If you go to my userpage you will see that it says "die" on it (i know who did it, because they wrote the same thing on the talk page), but the odd thing is it is not showing any recent edits in edit history. If you look way back there is no edit where the word "die" is added to my userpage. Also a template has been removed. Have i gone mad? Tiptoety (talk) 06:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it out, he changed the template i had on my user page, and he changed it to "die" which then showed up on my user page. good....i havent gone crazy, thanks for letting me rant! Tiptoety (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OH, you are the one that did the vandal revert......thanks! Tiptoety (talk) 06:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Tiptoety (talk) 06:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD closure

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Character appearances in Rome

Could you clarify your reasons for determining a consensus of "delete"? - jc37 09:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I "thought" I had responded to those concerns in my comments (and as this information is of the type allowed at WP:OR). If I was in some way unclear, I would be happy to clarify.

As an aside, I think that in deleting this we removed a rather useful navigation tool. (Not to mention what seems to me to be an excellent tool for helping teach the topic of classical history to students.) I'm having a hard time not seeing this as "encyclopedic". - jc37 01:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheryl Bentov

The Cheryl Bentov article was developed over 2-3 years with dozens of edits by a half-dozen editors. To delete it after a non-debate scheduled during American Thanksgiving is ill-considered at best. It seems to me you should have contacted some of the editors of the article so they could weigh in, or at least have waited for the holiday to be over. Moreover, rather than deleting the article, which is appropriate only if the article is useless, you should have changed it to a redirect so that your (again, ill-considered) actions could be undone.

I restored the article before I realized that you had actually deleted the article on purpose. If you truly believe that the data in the Bentov article fits better in the Mordechai Vanunu article, then you should move it into that article. But removing valuable information from Wikipedia that fits nowhere else, about a legitimate subject with multiple extant newspaper articles online with her as the main subject, is... heck, let's call a spade a spade: boneheaded.

As I mentioned in Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Cheryl_Bentov, the rationale for deleting the Bentov article could be used to delete the Seung-Hui Cho article, since he is "only" famous for the Virginia Tech massacre.

-Rjyanco (talk) 14:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 209.68.98.241

Yeap, I'm watching the contribution log. There were two unblock requests that came in at the same time and one was created a few weeks back. I'll keep my eyes open. --Yamla (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lizz Robbins

I was wondering why the page "Lizz Robbins" was deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knicksfan4ever (talk • contribs) 17:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lizz_Robbins. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Knicksfan4ever (talk • contribs) 20:15, 27 November 2007

I deleted the recreation of the deleted page and have endorsed my deletion and yours for good measure! Bencherlite ^Talk 00:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I hope this will be over soon. I guess the shit is starting to hit the fan. :-/ Miranda 04:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO

well i am just trying to do something for my school okay so i am just trying to get an A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdub123 (talk • contribs) 19:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please

Hello my name is Walter Melon i am doing a research project and was wondering if you could please leave your name and age that would be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdub123 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dirt sheet

Why was the above article deleted? Lex ^T/_C Guest Book 04:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dancing with the Stars (US season 5)

Do you think you could up this to a full protection? It's actually autoconfirmed editors who make edits like this. Or do I need to do it formally? I (talk) 04:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But would you mind restoring the correct table? The table when you initally protected it is the correct one (for now). I suppose it will have to be amended when the results are announced, but I'd rather it not say someone won when it's not for sure. I (talk) 04:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melorama Club

Please remove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Rugby_Club for the same reasons
Please remove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnaby_Lake_Rugby_Club for the same reasons —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meraloma (talk • contribs) 04:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don Mattingly Promotional

Wait wait wait wait. What happened the the dispute I put there? What happened to the discussion over the image? What happened to some sort of discussion before it was deleted? The free image was not a replacement for the fair use one. It was a completely different subject. If you disagreed, or thought it didn't conform with policy, or something like that, then you should have just said something to me, rather than deleting it. -Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 04:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was Image:MattinglyPromotional.jpg. I've never come across this issue before, so I most likely broke protocol or misapplied the template, but I still think that the image is not replacable by the free version. - Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 04:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Teremoana

I would like to know why you removed the entry I made to the Administrator Intervention Against Vandalism. The user has on numerous occasions inserted uncited and likely false information regarding unaired episodes of several reality shows, has ignored final warnings (and also erased them from his/her talk page) and has also been blocked once before for the same behaviour. To my mind, that constitutes obvious vandalism. ... discospinster _talk 04:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Houston Voice

Can you tell me if Talk:Houston Voice had the LGBT project banner on it? Just curious because my bot should have noticed that it was prodded and it didn't. Many thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 05:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you get a chance, could you userfy Genre (magazine) to my userspace? Or at least on my talk page. And I know you weren't the "closing admin", but can I get David Atlanta as well? Thanks!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SatyrTN (talk • contribs) 23:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing links to deleted articles

I've noticed you clean-up links to articles you delete, thanks! One quick thing though you have sometimes just the link from and left the text from articles listed in 'see also' sections or the List of martial arts when the whole entry should be removed, hope this helps --Nate1481(^t/_c) 10:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a complaint

I am writing to inform my displeasure of you deleting 'timmyland'. The japanese theme park. It is a real place, so why delete it? Get your facts right, and double check before deleting something. --Dantheman555 (talk) 13:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New image

East, is the image I added to Paper Tapes here appropriately tagged? I don't think I've gotten the hang of doing that, yet. It's hard, to me, because there is {{Non-free album cover}} AND {{Non-free use rationale}}, and my brain tells me that I should really only need one of them at a time. Thanks. —Scouter Sig 16:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really??!?! You could undelete the old image? That would be awesome, because it's higher quality (though not TOO much) than the one I (re)uploaded. In fact, google image search's highest hits for the cover are the Wikipedia article! If you would undelete it, I would retag it. —Scouter Sig 16:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello. Thanks for your swift response to RS1900's harassment on my talk page. The efficiency with which this problem was addressed astoundes me, and I am grateful for the efforts that you and others took to deal with this. Again, thank you. Nick Graves (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ultranationalists?

Excuse me? [12]. The self made pic Image:Teutonic takeover.PNG‎ you defend is used at Pomerelia to push away the sourced map Image:Pommerellen.png by edit warring. Please explain your stance, and use of words. -- Matthead DisOuß 18:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Hiya. You deleted Sernpidalians after closing this AFD, but not Myrkr strike team, which was also nominated on that page. --EEMIV (talk) 19:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANOTHER complaint

WHY AM I HAVING TO WRITE AGAIN? SOPHIA "SONYA" ESMAN IS A VERY FAMOUS HUMAN BEING. YOU REALLY SHOULD BE BANNED FROM WIKIPEDIA, SINCE YOU DELETED 5 HOURS OF INTERVEIWING AND WRITING.. WHY DIDNT YOU RESPOND??!! I THINK YOU ARE THE WORST PERSON EVER. DELETING TIMMYLAND.. HE'S RIGHT, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT MISTER!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollerbird (talk • contribs) 01:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Range block

Hey East, thanks for blocking the 67.55.6.0/24 range. You can see all the throwaway IPs at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check#Europebound2007. I wish I knew more about range blocks to deal with this stuff. Spellcast (talk) 03:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't know if you can help out here but I've been encountering another bounce hopping IP. Check out the block log of User:Extraordinary Machine and you'll see all these disruptive IPs from Israel. If you can help out there, that'd be great. Otherwise, an abuse report or check user will probably be filed. Spellcast (talk) 03:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Google Pack

Hi East718, you responded to my request at WP:RFPP for semi protection on this article stating the IP was blocked. But blocking an IP doesn't address the issue on the Google Pack page since the poster is IP hoping and has returned again [13]. Any chance you could semi the page for a short time? I find this frequently gets spammers to give up and find some other website to abuse. Thanks. -- SiobhanHansa 04:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- SiobhanHansa 04:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've also semi-protected Raffle, Her Name Is Nicole, Counting Crows, and Saturday Nights, Sunday Mornings as they're being spammed by the same user. Spellcast (talk) 17:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already blacklisted the URLs on MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. They are countingcrowsnew.blogspot.com, freemodlife.blogspot.com, googlepackdownload.blogspot.com, 5050-raffle.blogspot.com, gpd2008.blogspot.com, and itsleaked.blogspot.com. After blacklisting them, these two accounts popped up: Hithere999 and Spoilcast. If you type in the full URL, it doesn't let you continue. But they just avoid the spam filter by leaving out the "https://". I just hope that checkuser works out. Spellcast (talk) 17:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

s.f greek american deletion

Why did you delete that article it was 100% correct my grandfather Jim ( Dimitrious ) Rally was co-founder of the team with is brother John. If you don't believe me look it up for yourself. Look up the Lamar Hunt tournament and you will see they won it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.241.127 (talk) 06:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

User:Space Cadet has agreed to work on the place names in the maps; I don't see any need for deletion at this time.—Random832 16:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete the original research image Image:Teutonic_takeover.PNG is used in edit wars at Teutonic takeover of Danzig (Gdańsk), History of Gdańsk (Danzig), Pomerelia in order to supersede the proper sourced map Image:Pommerellen.png. It is part of a compaingn by some Poles to deny the 600y years of history of Danzig. They also make an attempt to rally a posse to overthrow the results of the Gdansk/Danzig vote, see also Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_November_30#Template:Gdansk-Vote-Results. -- Matthead DisOuß 14:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Metric height suggestion

Since you're also a member of the WikiProject Boxing, I'd like to tell you something. In some media, I noticed for some time that the height of a person in metric terms is usually measured in centimeters (cm) not meters. Perhaps this is because meters are too long and less accurate. Thus, I suggest this should apply to those boxing biographies here that currently using meters for metric height. Do you agree? FoxLad (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hi! You're the only Admin I know so uh, how do I get into an IRC channel? IE or Firefox can't open the protocol and I can't seem to find an answer. Could you help me? Thank you very much!-- Vintei talk 02:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Asian fetish

I have not violated the 3RR rule, that is why I was not blocked.—Christopher Mann McKay^talk 07:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]