This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.

Gon4z is back again

Hi Prodego
After quite some time away indef blocked vandal user:Gon4z has returned. First as User:82.35.33.72 and than he changed from the IP to User:GB-UK-BI. All our favorite Gon4z vandalisms are there again: deleting things from Serbian military articles, inserting Albanian nationalist bogus claims into all kinds of articles: example 1, example 2, example 3. Than there is the blanking of his talkpage again ( like this) plus his trying to blank the block notice from user:Gon4zs site ( here) and him trying to delete the list of Gon4z socks ( here). Plus edit warring, insulting users (mostly me), uploading of images without license, or uploading images and claiming to be the copyright holder, or uploading images again that have just been deleted as copyvio... not to forget his his love for sources that talk about all kind of things but not the things he claims they talk about, preferably in a language other than English and all the other Gon4z behavior... Any further discussion is a waste of time; please just block him. -- noclador 01:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like its been done, let me know if you need anything else. Prodego ^talk 20:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Prodego - User:MastCell dealt with Gon4z, for the moment all is well :-) If Gon4z returns I will inform you about it. Thanks again in the meantime. -- noclador 21:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Unblock of 81.157.180.56

I blocked the account (for 1 hour) before trying to revert the vandalism at GameFAQS and then edit conflicted with you on the block message. I'm fine with the unblock. Hopefully they chill. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 22:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I figure since it was just an hour, being unblocked might actually have a greater affect then being blocked might. Hopefully we won't have anymore problems there, but in case... Happy editing! Prodego ^talk 22:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Protection conflict

Heh. :) Acalamari 00:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Your protection is the one in place, so the protection ends after the week. The second protection always overrides the first. Acalamari 00:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What old system was that? I've only been an admin since July 4th of this year and haven't seen much change to the administrator interface. Acalamari 01:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for telling me that! :) Before I became an admin, I always wondered what would happen if two administrators blocked a user at the same time: I didn't realize that a system message came up to say that they had already been blocked; and I didn't know until now that that hadn't always been the case! I also always wondered what the odd 1 second blocks were in the block logs of accounts active long before I even registered. Thanks! Acalamari 01:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The biggest change I've seen to the admin interface is diffs in deleted revisions (which I think came a few weeks ago, unless I only noticed them them). E-mail blocking is something I know should only be used in certain circumstances (such as editors sending harassing E-mails) in accordance with the block policy. In fact, I might be wrong, but I'm sure I read in a signpost archive somewhere that semi-protection is a feature that was introduced in 2005 (I think anyway). In fact, when I first registered, things like the number of bytes in an edit and in the history, as well as certain features in the contributions logs, weren't around, so it shows how much the overall interface has changed since I've been here! Acalamari 01:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

RE

He had been getting on everyones nerves, sometimes blatant un-civil comments are needed, not that I am trying to justify my actions. I know of Civilality rules, but eveyone gets hot under the collar sometimes, i'm sure many of the other users were not far from where I was with Green Kirby, I doubt that if the page hadn't been protected we'd have a whole mess of angry users, good thing Alison protected it. Cheers. Atomic Religione 01:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for yesterday's history lesson regarding the past interfaces of Wikipedia. It is fun to learn about Wikipedia's past. Acalamari 19:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

AFD

Hello I saw your name pop up on recent changes and I see you deal with closing AFD's could you do me a favour and close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chippy Charles, the subject article clearly doesn't exsist. The sunder king 17:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay I've tagged it. The sunder king 17:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks Like I've read about this "RFA" on WP:BN now. The sunder king 18:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plant (Dungeons & Dragons)

Delete? Really? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plant (Dungeons & Dragons) seems to have been fairly evenly split between the keep/merge and delete camp. In terms of consensus (since AfD isn't about voting, but achieving consensus), I'm curious why you felt that the consensus was delete. - Harmil 14:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Though I wrote delete, I essentially closed it as merge/delete, with the comment I tacked on. The article itself was almost entirely a list, there was very little info to merge. The idea is that this information can easily be rewritten into the Creature type article without needing to see the original page. In this way, the data will be merged, avoiding GFDL issues, and making everyone happy :). That said, if you want the original intro to the page, I will get it for you, though that does cause some legal problems (the aforementioned GFDL issues). Prodego ^talk 20:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I didn't see any GFDL issues that were brought up during the AfD. What were they? - Harmil 20:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

PS: Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying deleting the article was any great loss (other than the redirect, which I might add if you don't think it's a problem). - Harmil 20:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see your point. I've always thought that including the original page name in the edit summary (where the original history still lives) was sufficient, there, since the same concerns could be brought up any time content is copied around Wikipedia, regardless of what happens to the original. Still, I see your point. Do you have a problem with my re-creating just the redirect? - Harmil 20:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, and that is what is usually done (and why that is done). About the redirect: I don't have a problem with it, though I do question the likelihood of "Plant (Dungeons & Dragons)" ever being typed in the search box. Prodego ^talk 20:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

omg vandalism

lolz, thought I was gone eh? Eh?! Imposter of Puppets ^{Prodego sux!} 03:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Blast. Transform into... The Anti-Prodego ^{Like Sauron, only with more evil} 03:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and I made some changes to your userpage. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 03:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Your skills are impressive, youngling. P.S. sweet Christ that RFA was a failure, haha... Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 03:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Please don't break the main page. You've already broken my beautiful eye-killing userpage (I'm going to change the color right now, heh). And I doubt I'd pass an RFA since I've been gone for about 1 year. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 04:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

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)} 06:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

New article

Hi, qe just uploaded a new article, Amecameca We think it is part of the wikiproject Mexico. We would be glad if you can take a look a it. Thank you for your time. Please if you have any suggestion do it on our grouo page, the nick es From the south —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsvargas ( talk • contribs) 19:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Funny

I think you'll laugh at this. :P Have a great day, Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 20:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I hope someone brings this up if I ever run for admin again. Then I can post this link and we can all laugh. And then I will fail. Again. :( Cheers, Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 22:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 10:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Mentoring Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		message thanks for helping out my students! You made a lasting impression on them! Thelmadatter ( talk) 17:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)