![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
This is an archive for User talk:AuburnPilot. Comments made between 21 January 2007 and 5 June 2007 are archived here.
Hi. Did you know that may be deleted? I don't think it's fair, but can't seem to change anyone's minds. Could you please take a look? Thanks. Xiner ( talk, email) 23:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the recognition! It's most definitely my pleasure to contribute in a positive fashion to the project, and it is always rewarding to have those contributions recognized. Have a good one! Ginsengbomb 06:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for talking to me about vandilism. Now I'm REALLY going to mess up your freakin page.
Corndog117
21:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
By the way, youre the slowest ive ever met. People talked to my other guy,
Targon142 within 5 seconds. I mean, come on.
Hello. I saw your posting on the Admin board to get one of these fixed and just wanted to pop in and show you this in case you were not aware. It will usually do the job except when you need something done "right now". I think most requests are usually filled in less than a day. -- After Midnight 0001 16:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Wow! Thanks! That was fast! I responded back in the Talk:Fox_News_Channel again on the topic. ZacBowling 01:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your advice! Sasha best February 08 2007
Ah, missed it. I check in on the commonly hit pages every so often, but it usually seems like somebody else spots him first and lets me know about it. Thanks! Luna Santin 04:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm putting together a story on the challenges involved in keeping ideologically charged Wikipedia pages up, open and unlocked. I'm really interested in tracking down people that monitor and manage such pages. Examples include: George W. Bush's page, the page on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the page on The Armenian Genocide and pages on creationism and evolution. I see that you’ve worked on the Bush page a lot. I was wondering if you might be willing to talk to me about the challenges of keeping pages like this up and unlocked. If you have any thoughts on tracking down the right person to talk to for a story like this, please shoot them my way. I hope to get in contact with you. You can email me here: matt.phillips@wsj.com
Thanks much, Matt —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MattPhillips33 ( talk • contribs) 15:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Auburn Pilot,
I'm terribly confused about copyright and the Lucien Durosoir image I uploaded. I took a photo of this picture, which is over 100 years old and is owned by Lucien Durosoir's son. I have his full permission to use it on Wikipedia. Which copyright option should I choose?
Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnspowell ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 9 February 2007
Ah, ok. Thanks for clarifying that. - Bluedog423 Talk 18:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't want my maps to be orphaned. - Patricknoddy 14:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I assert to be the same user as commons:User:AuburnPilot auburnpilot talk 05:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
u are a fucken retard and so is leo mavidis —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.194.50.80 ( talk) 09:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
block me you retard —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.194.50.80 ( talk) 09:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
We have not agreed much at all...but I admire your convicitions and the dissappearance of any past tension 'tension'...If you find more ridiculous sockpuppets on the Fox News Talk Page. PLEASE let me know on my talk page or by e-mailing me so we can get rid of these thugs (thats what they are) as quickly as possible... lets atleast come together on this topic...also if you encounter any such problems elsewhere on any article,,, please also let me know...I am SICK of it and would like to help get rid of all sockpuppets no matter what their affiliation. Look forward to your response, and working on this one topic which we share in common. Thank you for looking out! OfForByThePeople 00:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. Oguz1 ( talk · contribs) reported Khoikhoi, Artaxiad and ROOB323 just because we disagree with his belief that the Armenian Genocide never occurred in the city of Ordu. He seriously doesn't understand what AIV is for. Nishkid 64 18:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
OK but, they won't discuss, dispute, or argue that it's not POV, and still revert - what's that called? Ordu-- Oguz1 19:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't consider the post that I made on the George Bush page to be vandalism. It is just me expressing my feelings about this boorish character. Sorry if I offended you or any Wikipedia users, but I am going to continue expressing my feelings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nathan ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
What's an auburn fan doing defending the bama page?????? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.114.121.212 ( talk • contribs) 04:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome. - Lake Ontario 06:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Keep on finding those vandals and making those reports to AIV. You're doing a great job helping to keep Wikipedia free of defacement. We need lots of people like you! Cheers, Heimstern Läufer 08:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I am writing regarding your characterization of my edit to the fulgarite article as vandalism, or in your "words," a test--and the concomitant personal comment, "Harvard, tisk tisk." I would have you know that as a tenured geologist, I have done extensive research into the properties of fulgarite, and, as a matter of fact, my comparison of the mineral to the male sexual organ is visually, topologically and culturally accurate. Once formed from lightning, fulgarite exhibits a uneven, partially tapered structure, from shaft to tip, that is extraordinarly evocative of the phallus. As a result, many societies throughout human history have considered fulgarite to be a symbol of virility. The mineral makes several prominent appearances in Anasazi pornographic lore. The carrot, to which fulgarite was previously likened in the eponymous article, does not display an exponential rate of change in its radius as a function of height, as does both fulgarite and the penis. Frankly, I wonder if you have ever set eyes on fulgarite material in your life. In the future you shouldn't be too hasty to foist your uninformed ego on the flow of information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.247.46.130 ( talk) 10:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
AuburnPilot,
Since you apparently believe the characterization I have made is not neutral, please consider posing the following question to some neutral acquaintances you may have.
Polling results for three individuals rate performance in two categories, “Excellent/Pretty Good” and “Only Fair/Poor”. The “Excellent/Pretty Good” percentage results for the three individuals are as follows: A-46; B-32; and C-29; and the “Only Fair/Poor Ratings” are A-48, B-66; and C-58. Which of the following are fair to say regarding A’s results? 1. A has the highest job rating of the group. 2. A has the least disfavorable job rating of the group. 3. A has less than a 50% favorability job rating 4. A has a disfavorable job rating
If you think this question is unfair, please let me know how you would make it fairer. Thank you for your communication. Ohioan1 14:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I saw I was approved, so I tried it out. I hated it. - Patricknoddy 12:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
AuburnPilot,
Thank you for the greeting; I hope to learn my way around Wikipedia without too many missteps. CharliePATpk 18:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Here you go:
Let me know when you've answered the questions and are ready to post! Good luck! Kafziel Talk 20:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello AuburnPilot, I think you have more than the amount of experiance, dedication, and trust to become an administrator. The last I checked, your user box indicated that you were not a sysop, but would hope to be one. You have also been a great help for the community against vandalism. Would you accept a nomination? I have not done any of the steps.-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 02:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Allright, I'm thrilled to see you decided to accept yourself on the RfA, and wish you the best of luck! I'm sure you'll do great!-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot, I noticed you and a few other editors say sometimes in your edit summary, "JS:Reverted vandalism by X to last version by Y" as opposed to "Reverted edits by X(talk) to last version by Y". What does the JS mean?-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 01:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I'd certainly second the nomination. I notice you changed your adminship interest status recently. I've been pondering it a bit myself. You'll be a shoo-in; what do you think of my chances? / Blaxthos 05:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
(cross posted to Wikipedier's talk page) Thanks very much for the offer. I was actually contacted by another use via email a few days ago asking if I would accept a nomination. My concern is that my participation in deletion discussions is quite limited. It is an area of Wikipedia that is of no interest to me, and I only participate when I stumble across a nominated article/category/misc. I've seen too many good users massacred at RfA for this reason, and must decline a nomination at this time. I will most likely submit to an editor review in the coming weeks, and would appreciate any feedback you can provide. Again, thanks very much for the offer. auburnpilot talk 16:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits on the William March page, they do not go unnoticed! - Diarmada 21:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the nomination, I would truly love seeing William March's story discussed and discovered....he is one of the great tragedies of the last century, no wonder they are considered the "lost generation"....it is also quite sad that his story is not even well known in the state that he so loved...there are many reasons to this, but of them all, none are more potent than the realization that education in our fair state is less than stellar on literary subjects and literature in general, but the times they are a changing... - Diarmada 12:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
On a side note, I created this userbox, thought you might like to see it...
![]() |
This user believes that William March is the unrecognized genius of our time |
- Diarmada 12:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I have a situation brewing and want to check myself before going further by way of a second opinion, just to see if I'm off base. I'm not sure if it's something you want to dive into in the middle of your (long overdue) RfA, so I can consult elsewhere if now isn't convenient. You're kindof my go-to guy for second opinions (if you can't trust a Tiger, who can you trust?)... hope it's not inconvenient. ;-) / Blaxthos 05:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd let you know I decided to err on the lenient side and not block that user indef, since not all edits seemed to be clearly vandalism. I do kind of hope just a two-day block might shape him/her up, though I suppose it's not too likely. Heimstern Läufer 07:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I hope you and yours are okay. Kafziel Talk 02:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I know it was all near your part of the state, hope all is well and power is restored soon - Diarmada 12:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Fortunately my family and I were far enough away to not receive any damage and the only tree to fall in my neighborhood was the one between me and the telephone pole. Killed the phone, tv, internet, and power but I'm back up and running. auburnpilot talk 06:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey man, thanks for your opinion regarding the image dispute. That's why I asked for a second opinion from someone I trust. I'm considereing offering my resources to interested wikipedia editors, and want to know if you think it's a good idea. Check out my idea at User:Blaxthos/Research requests and let me know if you think it's a good idea that will be used, or if it's a potential nightmare of trollish requests and time-sucking futility. thanks, and congrats on the near-unanimous RfA! / Blaxthos 20:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I know it's a bit early, but I think it's safe to say you'll be an admin within a couple of hours. Thanks for being willing to give this a shot; I know you'll do a great job with your new tools. If you ever need anything, you know where to find me. Kafziel Talk 18:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations!-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC) Warning to vandals, Wikipedia has a new vandal-fighting admin.-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 04:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. I'll do my best to use the tools wisely. auburnpilot talk 02:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the revert on my user page :-) - Myanw 08:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
He looks like a scrotum face tho, let me edit that page on him. The people have the right to know! He also sucks ass (literally and figuratively) and thats a fact. Haha anyway how was your weekend?!?!?!? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LKWJE ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC).
You reverted my addition of my Speach Mishaps and listed it as going against the Wikipedia is not an Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
Here is the definiton of the Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. ( WP:NOT)
My addition of the Speach Mishaps does not go against this guideline. Soulofdragon 20:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soulofdragon ( talk • contribs) 20:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I share an account with a friend, he enjoys making comedic vandalism on pages while I only apply comedic touches that are factual if available. Either method I enjoy but my methods are greater because people can relate to the comedic knowledge and learn something funny about their topic. Humor is important. Soulofdragon 21:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soulofdragon ( talk • contribs) 20:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I was on Wikibreak when you were promoted, so I missed that it had happened and all. Then I saw one of the AIV bots' edit summary say you'd blocked someone just a bit ago. Anyway, good work on becoming an admin, and give those vandals what for! Heimstern Läufer 06:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Clearly I have upset you. That was not my intent. I would not be involved but I was invited to help mediate the situation. I am not arguing against your position, but I will argue that a consensus was met. And so what if it was. Notice that I didn't change the article, and I also thought some of the recent changes were not helpful. I was pointed to an archive where consensus was met, but I saw a lot of bickering, and several of the latter points of the thread were about how the article was wrong, so I just don't get it. Then you accuse me of strong arming the discussion. Consensus isn't met because people give up on the fight. If you have a point to make, go ahead and make it. I am willing to listen, but the only argument for keeping the controversay in the intro was "we all agreed", but that isn't a reason at all. And frankly, it's disappointing that so many of us would rather get their way or quit rather than discuss the issue at hand. Bytebear 19:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The (fatal) flaw of Wikipedia is that the instant you "give up" then you've invalidated the entire validity of the project. Of course, that only occurs writ large when the number of editors married to stubbornness/ignorance/bad faith outnumbers the righteous who "fight the good fight." Keep in mind, this is not a "two sided fight where each side refuses to see the middle ground" -- this is the defense of a valid good faith effort sucessfully concluded by eighteen editors against a few who refuse to read the history involved and who sling the same invalid arguments. I completely understand the level of frustration, but if you give up, and I give up, then what happens to Wikipedia? Come back. / Blaxthos 20:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I will carry on with task-force duty, however I strongly welcome your return should you decide to come back. I find myself unwilling to give up on something we've all worked so hard to accomplish. Wikipedia relies on the conflict model to operate -- the tug of war is what keeps all sides in check, so to speak, however the system breaks down when good men become tired of drawing lines in the sand. Hope we can stay in touch; though our political philosophies probably differ, I can honestly say I was always glad to know you were keeping and eye out and also trying to keep things right. War Eagle! / Blaxthos 22:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Do you think this guy is a nutjob or a troll? / Blaxthos 00:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm almost convinced that our current "advocate" over at FNC is the same person as cbuhl79, just slightly reorganized. hohum. / Blaxthos 18:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
In response to my vandalism report...
You said it wasn't vandalism. While there is nothing specific in wikipedia guidlines on Wikipedia:Vandalism. Isn;t there a rule about reverting discussion pages?!? I mean... what would you do if somebody habitually blew away entire discussion pages for instance?-- Dr who1975 15:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
OMG you're gonna block my other account! What will I do now when I want to vandalise a webpage?!?!? lol sweet as Auburnpilot do whatever you want to both my accounts. So hav you been getting a bit of action recently from the ladies? I assume you're a guy... Wouldn't be surprised if you're a chick tho, you do sound like a little bitch, no offence intended :)
hav a nice day! LKWJE 22:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for protecting this page from being created again. The user wasn't adhering to any of the afd deletion warnings I placed on his page. The user and I was in a wheel war, because he kept deleting the afd tags off of the page. Well, it's late, but just a note to say thanks. Real96 08:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
It's been agreed that match taglines are not notable, so I was doing nothing wrong in removing it. Why did you give me a warning? TJ Spyke 06:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reassurance about the 3RR, i did notice that, but it said that only obvious cases would be called exceptions. I was just wondering if they were obvious enough...I'm being stupid now: it was blatant. Anyway, the script would still be useful just as a counter for non-exception reverts. Stwalkerster 21:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
You placed the following on my user page: "Please do not remove content from an editor's userpage without that person's permission, as you did to User:Duke53. Such actions are considered vandalism. Is it considered vandalism only when certain people do it, or is it vandalism whenever anybody does it? Duke53 | Talk 06:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot. Thank you for participating in my RfA. Rest assured that I have heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Thanks for your support, and please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner ( talk, email) 01:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I see you've met 70.23.199.239 ( talk · contribs). I only recently came across this editor and was surprised to see that most of his edits were adding, then fighting over, links to his own blogs and other articles. I posted a note on his talk page asking him to stop making that type of edit. I also posted at the COI noticeboard. I'm going to be aware from my computer for most of the next few weeks. Could you please keep an eye on this account? He's already skirting WP:NPA and if he gets much worse community action may be appropriate. Hopefully he'll simmer down and contribute constructively. Cheers, - Will Beback · † · 04:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your nomination and the input, it is greatly appreciated...the fact that the bio on William March received good article status means quite a bit, to me, but also to getting the word out on somehow who is unjustly obscure...Thanks again for your help and work, I look forward to the day it becomes a featured article...Dia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diarmada ( talk • contribs) 04:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
Thank you very much for unblocking me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MrigeshKalvani ( talk • contribs) 09:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
I appreciate your support in my recent RfA. Although I've started on CSD, as anticipated, I'll be keeping an eye on AIV too. Looks like there's plenty of things to be addressed. Shimeru 15:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm requesting your help in intervening in this article because the person User:HighTouch is getting extremely emotional because he's trying to keep a conspiracy theory [2] which has no citations except based on the person's opinion. I've already discussed this to the person which he seems arrogant that his opinion is facts. I've already explained why this could be wrong which he seems to just blow past them. I'll leave it up to you should you choose to intervene. Thank you very much. ViriiK 07:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I recently got blocked by you for 31 hours due to adding forum links. I did not even know this was against the rules, and i did not even get the warnings until I was already banned. This seems extremely unfair to me. 67.163.193.239 08:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Listen, creep-STOP STALKING ME AND STOP LEAVING INSULTING MESSAGES ON MY TALK PAGE. For your information, we are not even talking about the Rule of Rose links here. We are talking about something completely different-something that you obviously know nothing about. I don't care if you believe me or not, but I did not know forums were against the rules, since the links had been up for over a year. And I only got two warnings, both of which only arrived AFTER I got banned. As for the Rule of Rose area, again, unrelated. I do not read discussion pages, and not even sure what they are. The link there was perfectly legit, but some trolls who kept attacking my site and forum did not like it, so they kept deleting and editting it so it would not work. 67.163.193.239 17:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm just going to stop listening to you. I have no time to listen to the bogus and rude accusations of a troll. You don't know anything-you're just making assumptions. The RoR thing had nothing to do with getting blocked, so obviously you don't know as much as you think you do.
Hi, AP. It happens that two of us Auburnites were cleaning up after User:Haydeniscrunk. Not trying to second-guess, but I was surprised to find an indefinite block on the page. All of the vandalism happened in one day, if I read the user contribs correctly. Is there a history here I don't know about? -- Rob C (Alarob) 22:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Special:Undelete/Watumull Institute Of Electronic Engineering & Computer Technology (W.I.E.E.C.T.)— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 04:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry for going against wikipedia policies on the George W. Bush article. I meant it as a joke, and I didn't realize that my intentions were going to offend people this much. I have truly learned a valuable lesson. Thank you AuburnPilot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thiemster ( talk • contribs) 02:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking action on Benjiwolf. Can we now Anonblock Benjiwolfs range of IP addresses. Because the block is pretty useless without it? Ttguy
Hey, could you delete my page, Darth_maddolis/Dark Forces Clan. Thanks. Darth Maddolis 07:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
sorry bro, its a shared connection, i didnt know, i thought the last thing was months ago—Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.215.125.76 ( talk • contribs) 05:01, 28 March 2007
Burstcum - same MO as very-recently blocked socks. -- ElKevbo 06:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I just get a little annoyed with malformed/invaild requests sometimes John Reaves (talk) 07:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you have your talk page linked in your sig: talk but when I try to copy that and change it to my name talk it doesn't work...do you know why? Cogswobble talk 19:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
User:Xindiweapon has been putting offensive imagery on the user page of User:Cleo123. I have been reverting it and also I have been responding to User:Xindiweapon on his/her Talk and User pages. Bus stop 07:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
you have email as well. :-) Thanks for the effort, and thanks especially for the note on my talkpage. Generally speaking, my mailboxen receive so much spam that I usually overlook legit emails unless i'm specifically waiting for them. I have your emails to come up orange on blue in my index list (war eagle!) but it's always best practice to drop me a note on the talk page telling me to look out. Thanks again! / Blaxthos 17:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Yup....not sure why it was almost two hours after it had expired, but oh well. Wikilife goes on. Thanks again... SVRTVDude ( Yell - Toil) 09:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the guy who was vandalizing William Wilberforce, but I wonder what the usefulness is of a 12-hour block. I got blocked (BY MISTAKE) for 24 hours for someone else's actions that were not nearly as serious as this user's. Why not block him for a month? InkQuill 21:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I understand if it's from a school. InkQuill 22:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry Auburnpilot, if I did something wrong, I apologize..
But as my post has been suprest, I can’t go back and read it again.. but I don’t remember having posted another user's personal information.. anywhere..
Anyway.. I came to the “anchor article” to stop somebody who is very closely related to a manufacturer,(*) to use Wikipedia to make his owm promotion about his products..
My action is on a good way to succeed, so I have nothing more to do on such a complicated Wiki, and now you can indefinitely block my account..
(*) is that a “user's personal information” ?
Hylas 21:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the user who was posting female genitalia on my user page! I've been pretty busy and I was completely oblivious to the vandalism! Thank you so much for taking care of the situation. I appreciate your help! Best Regards, Cleo123 07:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I thought that removing warnings was against policy because it makes users believe you are trying to hide them. Since it doesn't exist, i apologize for waisting your time. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 23:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for those tallies, I usually remember but I am tired ;). I hope adminship is treating you well. Cheers. ~ Arjun 04:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Just informaing you that User:Rb5464 has recreated article Robert Stewart Ottawa, which I noted you have specifically warned him against. The Kinslayer 15:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot, I noticed your comment on this SSP case (congrats on your successful RfA, BTW). Personally, I doubt that anyone would fault you for handing out blocks in this case, although some judicious page protection might be enough here. However, maybe another way of dealing with the problem is a post to WP:ANI? I would do it myself, but I'm not an admin, and about half the time when I post to ANI about sock-related matters the post gets no response.
By the way, is there any chance that you could review some of the other SSP cases? There are some fairly old ones where I think there's definite sockpuppetry (e.g. WP:SSP page on "Terryfilene22", WP:SSP page on "Rsbj66", WP:SSP page on "Adversegecko"), and some where sockpuppetry seems possible ( WP:SSP page on "Opp2"). --Akhilleus ( talk) 02:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot, in case you haven't noticed, our canine friend has discovered the SSP case, and has posted some nice pictures to the page: WP:SSP page on "Benjiwolf". --Akhilleus ( talk) 01:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey man, some more activity by our boy Benji, including confirmed puppetry with new accounts -- check the checkuser request under the second account. I tossed up a few ssp/confirmed templates but removed the indef block language due to a lack of block. The puppetmaster got a 2 week block a few weeks ago, nothing so far against the puppet account. Isn't that an automatic indefblock? / Blaxthos 20:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Might want to go ahead and hit User talk:CrystalizedAngels too -- he's spamming the wikivandal service there too. / Blaxthos 05:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm initiating an arbitration case against benjiwolf because of the for-profit vandal service he's offering, along with his sockpuppetry and admitted purpose of getting most of switzerland blocked. Please head over to the current requests and drop in your $.02 (the sooner the better). Also, his talk page will need unprotection, and we'll need to let him have the ability to edit the arbcom case. / Blaxthos 05:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
new to wiki please help..
--
ElijahCollins
04:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
hey editors why does no specific information exhist about PEPCON. a factory which blew up in henderson NV in 1988. the factory was one of two in the united states at the time which made Ammonium perchlorate. Ammonium Perchlorate was an oxidizer used in Rocket Fuel for NASA. and why does my English teacher say that I can't use Wiki as a Reference for info WTF. Got to be a big set back. oh well. I need to know the Exact coordinates of where the place was so that I can photo it with google earth. if you can get that for me or refer me I'd appreciate it.. thanx.
P.S. I'm not pissed about how you deleted my article THE COLLINS CHRONICLES even though I know it was legit and had valid references. I guess there's still nothing a regular person can do when two mods who are wrong Gang up on him. NOT here to talk about it though.. I need info! Thanx..
Poetadmit ( talk · contribs · logs) I've already reverted his 2 edits to existing pages. Reporting this incognito cause I don't want to end up on his retaliation list. Thanks, 76.174.125.149 08:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey auburnpilot talk I hang my head in shame, but I lost my quick link to reporting “Vandals” to administrator page and can not refind it on the site. Can you supply. Thanks for the help. Shoessss 17:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks,
-- Moumine70 17:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
A 3RR report was just filed against User:Armyranger. I see you protected the article and I didn't know if you were in the middle of any mediation there; I'm all set to block him but I don't want to step on your toes. Let me know. Kafziel Talk 20:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello AuburnPilot! You are receiving this message because we've noticed your excellent edits on some of the Alabama-related pages. We need your assistance at the WIkiProject Alabama. This is a new WikiProject and there is much work to do. Please head over to the project page, add your name, and help us enhance and increase the coverage of Alabama related stories. |
—Preceding unsigned comment added by J. Bryant Evans ( talk • contribs) 03:34, 7 April 2007
Damn that was fast! Thanks for the snaps of the coliseum. I really appreciate it! Go Tigers! Вasil | talk 23:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Archive_2, thanks for your support in my successful
RfA. As the picture shows, the goddesses have already bestowed my new weapons, |
Thanks for teh reply! Appreciate the heads up. I haven't been able to locate it in my inbox or spamtrap. Same from address, to address, and delivery method? / Blaxthos 02:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
does this count as a legal threat by this blocked user? User:67.163.193.239: [3]
That aggression was not appreciated. Whilst I understand the possibility of my creation of the redirect being misinterpreted, if you review Talk:No. 1 terrorist, you will notice that I explain this redirect exists simply because the terrorist description is used by detractors of Bush. I would request that you do not act so prematurely in the future as my contribution was in fact made for a reason. Thankyou -- Doctor11 20:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Please response to the unblock request at User talk:88.111.204.41. The user is claiming that he was blocked for blanking his own talkpage and did not realize this was prohibited. I assume there is more to the story than that. Newyorkbrad 23:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I am somewhat new to this community, but a great advocate of simple facts and correct representation.
If you get the chance, can you tell me how I would go about, in a Wiki-way, of correcting something similar to what is being discussed about "The Bet" in the William M. Gray article. I will not repeat the arguments here, I have stated them in the discussion page, but the bit I have attempted to edit simply violates very clear Biographies of Living Persons policy and Reliable Source policy.
Yet, two editors leap-frog one another to prevent corrections, and simply ignore WP:RS altogether. Both editors are very active POV editors (both show up heavily in the editing of articles about Climate Change Skeptics and Climate Change articles, enforcing their personal POVs)
I see no sense in reverting the item again, as they will (I think it is Conneley's turn next) revert it back again. I was foolish enough to think that pointing out the clear policy violation and making a correction would actually have some effect. But it does not work without some enforcement.
The leap-frog POV enforcement system of these two editors seems designed to bypass the three-revert rule. They do not seem to take Wiki policy seriously - at least not if it doesn't work in favor of their enforcing their own viewpoints. If Wiki is going to become a respected, usable reference work, it must develop a system to prevent the hijacking of pages like this.
I am disappointed that there are not "gatekeepers" of some sort - administrators who enforce Wiki policy, especially on Biography pages. KipHansen 21:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Reliable Sources
"Material found in self-published books, zines, websites or blogs SHOULD NEVER BE USED [ my caps ], unless written or published by the subject (see below). These sources should also not be included as external links in BLPs, subject to the same exception."
Hi there - I noticed your comment on Nowonline's talk page, and I think Nowonline could successfully use the {{ db-author}} template as for the articles in question Nowonline was the only substantial contributor - which is why I recommended its use. Edits which modify formatting, add Wikilinks and tidy up references wouldn't (in my opinion) be regarded as substantial - so Nowonline would not have to be the only contributor. If my interpretation of the process is wrong, please let me know. Nowonline is pretty upset at me in particular and the Wikipedia community in general (as you can tell from the open letter he/she has posted on his/her user page), so if it turns out I've given incorrect advice, I'd want to apologise. I've felt pretty upset over the application of policy to some of my good faith contributions in the past, so I know to an extent how it feels. Thanks WLD talk| edits 10:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Re Alain POIRAUD and my submission regarding vandalism - his ranting can be dealt with and is probably not worth of a block, I agree, but his postings on my user talk page are fairly serious. Removing them does not work; he routinely returns and adds them again. Your advice on how to handle this would be appreciated. Badmonkey 06:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Sorry if this message will edit your user page but I cannot for the life of my work out how to send a message, a have clicked "leave me a message", and the page I am now looks like a wiki edit page screen. I just got your second message. By the time I had read your first I had added a few links, and only just worked out how to send you a message. Sorry, I didnt realise it was classed as Valdalism. Can you tell me who I speak to about adding links like TVSquad had, TV.com has etc etc. I understand official sites added, but I cant understand why TVSquad and TV.com are allowed and I am told not to. Is there someone in Wiki I can speak to about advertising rates? I have also told members of my site to stop adding links, some were, but without wiki usernames they didnt receive any messages telling them to stop. Thanks simsyboy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simsyboy ( talk • contribs) 09:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | I see that you've made edits in articles about
Guster. I'm trying to create a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the band. If you're interested, please express interest for WikiProject Guster on the proposal page. Thanks! - [hmwith] |
Dear AuburnPilot, Thanks your warning. I am not the position to say " I dont aware about rules" , but I think I have some excuses. There are a group of users with a political agenda for some definite articles, they are trying to fork some contents to articles. I dont like to deal with edit-rv wars, but please check these links how they attack personally in edit-summaries, and talk pages;(You can see my edit summaries also in these links)
Thanks for deleting the image that I wanted deleted! -- 98E 15:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
First of all, check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:LeToya_Luckett#revision.2C_but_under_vandalism_action
I've revised this article, with the intention to someone else, revise it, correcting, removing some unfactual and unbalanced statements, even if I wrote any. This one and the album too, LeToya (album), you can even check prior version, in both articles. Then take a look at the main article, LeToya Luckett. I was about to violate the 3RR.
I would like to know about your opinion
regards, Eduemoni 00:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Calm down. What I learned from that 7 April gross miscarriage of justice is that if another requests plain text, I'll oblige. Not every 1 minds;" Hdt83 Chat is an example: Hdt83 doesnt mind." _ Lilkunta 02:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up on User:Matthew Yeager... scary. I think, based on his first few edits, he's probably a benevolent sockpuppet of someone who's decided to start using his real name. Oh well. I came first, I've got a better claim to that name. *grin* Still pretty weird, though.
Looks like User:Dachannien deserves the praise for fixing the TOC. That is very strange, I'm not sure how in the world it got screwed up... strange.
Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 21:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I just didn't understand. - Patricknoddy TALK (reply here)| HISTORY 20:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
That user is an Impersonator account, for the last time. How are wikipedia admins this blind? Page needs to blanked or have a template that says its an impersonator. User needs to be indef blocked. Please don't turn wikipedia into a joke. 70.143.31.60 22:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Now, another admin is abusing his powers. On La Coka Nostra, theres a link that doesn't meet WikiStandards, so I removed it, and it got reverted, and so on and so forth, and now the page is locked all because of a link that doesn't even have traffic. 75.43.137.179 04:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I raised this at WP:AN/I. I haven't checked back again, but the last time I did, no-one had offered an explanation [I've just checked; still no explanation]. There's an autoblock, but the block itself doesn't show up in the log. I did, though, block him (my block notice is just above his appeal notice). That there are two autoblocks is a bit odd, though — I only blocked him once.
He certainly deserves to be blocked for disruption. He's been doing the same thing for some time — reverting articles to poor formatting and English (without explanation, or with misleading edit summaries), adding unsourced and unexplained material, and either refusing to respond to queries or responding with fake innocence ("what have I done wrong? I don't understand"), despite many explanations. This is fairly typical; note the first part, which returns the article to incorrect capitalisation and infobox formatting that goes against the WikiProject — he's been reverting to that on and off, here and on other articles, for weeks. Nothing that anyone can say to him stops him. -- Mel Etitis ( Talk) 21:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The Rice edit is fact. Rice took over after the US government administrator in Iraq was removed by Bush. This has only happened one time previously.
You have made a bad edit, please fix. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dustndown ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
Just to let you know -- I blocked this user (not an autoblock) for repeatedly uploading unfree images, tagging them with fake US Govt tags, and putting them into articles. Check the talk page history -- the user has repeatedly blanked it. The user's last comment doesn't give me much hope that he/she understands the problem. NawlinWiki 23:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello. You recently blocked Richard.Pluta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and they have asked to be unblocked. Even though the "it was my roomie" story is not a very new one, this sounds like someone who might not abuse a second chance. What do you think? Thank you, Sandstein 05:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I see you already warned our new friend. Is it appropriate for me to re-insert, or is that also treading on 3RR? / Blaxthos 21:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Didn't realize that was what I had done. Thanks for moving it.
-- Ispy1981 08:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Good edit - I had intended to revert to the wording that I posted originally which didn't have the "extremely narrow" - so thanks for picking that up. Tvoz | talk 07:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
And again - thanks for catching my latest idiotic typo. Any ideas how to proceed with the over-exuberant cutting (I am attemption AGF here)? I spent a lot of time yesterday trying to reinstate material without stepping on subsequent goood edits, and I missed some deletions that I was glad Mbc caught - I don't see that this individual is getting the message. Tvoz | talk 22:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
WP:NPA. Consider this your first warning; I have been acting in accordiance with every Wikipedia policy, but you are not getting one thing clear. NPOV is non-negotiable. The statement is biased since you and other editors will not consent to clarifying the statement as it is required under WP:NPOV and furthered in WP:WEASEL. WP:LEAD may call for a concise summary that covers the entire article, and I have no doubt that it is in your best interest to do that, but NPOV is the one policy that absolutely cannot be skipped, and it should never be positioned under any other policy on WP. To say the least, it wouldn't hurt at all to cite the source of the statement in the lead. Frankly, if you were the least bit concerned about neutrality on WP, you'd at least consider it without pointing each and every single person to the archives for a discussion that didn't even have a clear end at the time. And it certainly doesn't now. I'm not questioning your ability to understand policy, I'm questioning your editing practices, and protection of a highly controversial decision by the opinion of only a select few, that never changes. -- 66.227.194.89 04:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Auburn,
I have a large number of articles on my watchlist (mostly small Irish towns/villages) that undergo regular vandalism from random IPs. Usually it's idiot school kids saying "this village bites", or "John sucks cock" or other such nonsense. I'm considering requesting that some of them be semi-protected, and I noticed that you've turned down a number of requests on RFPP on the basis that there's an insufficiently high rate of vandalism. As a rule of thumb, approximately how much vandalism do you consider enough to warrant semi-protection?
Cheers, Cmdrjameson 14:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I added (if I remember rightly) some traditional nicknames for inhabitants of South Carolina on the article pertaining to that state. I think it was you who deleted this information. Why was this? (I am not claiming it was red-hot stuff that should have everyone agog, merely that it is a (declining) feature of American culture. I thought I would contribute it for the sake of completeness.
Flonto 00:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
One the one hand, I could argue that if nicknames for a South Carolinian are trivia, then so are nicknames for the state itself - which are included. On the other hand, I admit that the state nicknames are used officially whereas nicknames for inhabitants are hardly ever heard nowadays. I also admit that my failure to source my info was lazy and contrary to Wikipedia policy. I think that my best option is to try to move with the times and accept that the world of Buckeyes, Jayhawkers, Mudcats, Gunflints, Gamecocks, etc. is over and has to be left behind. Flonto 07:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I see you just reverted an edit I made [12], so quickly (about 25 seconds after I made it) that I wonder if you assessed the edit before reverting it (see WP:REVERT). The user page (and talk page) had a fake "you have new messages banner", frowned upon per WP:USER#Simulated_MediaWiki_interfaces which I had removed from the user page before your reversion. Note also the similar fake banner on the discussion page, and the bouncing wikipedia logo, and the user's (lack of) substantive contribs, the other discussion on the user's talk page, and the user being indef blocked for multiple accounts among other things. I see you also marked your reversion as "minor" which was somewhat inappropriate, and you didn't leave a talk message or explanatory edit summary as is customary after a reversion. I can't help wondering if you used a rollback script of some type. I don't know if policy currently requires it, but I think it would help transparency if such scripts always identified themselves in the edit summary (VP, popups, etc. all do that). Could you please try to be more careful about this stuff in the future, and possibly reconfigure your script (if you're using one) to identify itself and not mark the edits as minor. Thanks. 75.62.7.22 07:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot,
Following on from the post on User_talk:Mikecraig#Regarding_reversions.5B2.5D_made_on_30_April_2007_to_The_Angels_.28Australian_band.29, the user Tony Senatore is still causing issues.
Look at the following pages, Talk:The_Angels_(Australian_band)#Image, User_talk:Tony_Senatore#Signing_posts_and_user_talk_pages and you will see that there is some major issues which needs to sorted out. I appreciate your advise and hope that you can advise what is next course of action, thanks. -- Mikecraig 01:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Please explain how the conservative or liberal criticism label is a notable controversy. Arzel 00:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
This is new to me, so I will try again. Hi Auburn Pilot. Natalee as you are well aware is a Missing person. I do not understand the need to slander her here, especially her being a human being who cannot defend herself. Please explain why you feel differently, thanks.
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dollby"
So I go and report USER:Threeafterthree for 3RR, and instead of blocking, the responding admin protects the page based on the crazy talk page... without any regard for the context or history of editors involved (look at threeafterthree's block history -- attack, sockpuppets and block avoidance, "creepy" etc). Not sure what to do at this point... / Blaxthos 17:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear AuburnPilot,
I do a bit of editing on the Genetic engineering and releated subjects pages. These pages must be some of the most heavily vandalised pages out there. Pretty much all of the vandalsim comes from IP address editors. I believe semi-protection of the following pages would be justified.
Genetic engineering , Genetically modified food, Genetically modified organism, Genetically modified food controversies
Is there a process to make this happen or can an admin just do it?
I've requested an admin either long term or indef block the user here [13] Just an FYI. CASCADIA Howl/ Trail 21:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me. Have a beer... WjB scribe 21:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I cannot think of anyone that would deny that:
-The vast majority of Americans perceive Bush to be from Texas. -He is actually from the Northeast. -His family, the Bushes, are old money, which is a nice American way of saying "aristocracy." -Phillips Andover has a HUGE endowment and has historically been a feeder for Ivies (HYP in particular), whose graduates can then perpetuate the family wealth (see "old money" or "aristocracy.") -After going there, Bush then went to Yale.
What seems more "dripping with POV" to me is to NOT put such pertinent information about Bush's upbringing and formative years (which I imagine were much more critical in shaping his political views than his fake Texan shtick) in a prominent place. To herald Bush's supposed Texan-ness therefore seems misleading in the same way that Bush was when he ran as a "Western outsider" in 2000, which fooled most of our idiotic countrymen into actually thinking he was from Texas (see above). In other words, my version is far less "liberal" and far less misleading than the current incarnation is "conservative" in its omitting relevant information.
So aside from a lack of citations I don't see what's wrong with my edit. Cure me of my ignorance?
Cheers, Itscml 03:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it's awesome that you justify your idea of the introduction's aesthetic with the "verifiability" maxim, because obviously playing up certain facts or omitting others couldn't possibly indicate any bias (viz. breach of NPOV), right? Since you're not contesting the basic correctness of my claims, I'm assuming they can go back up once I find a reputable source to corroborate them.
Cheers, Itscml 04:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, awesome. It's going back in the "early life" section as soon as I give a fuck enough to google some sources and copy and paste my masterful prose. For the record, I consider your ideological fetishism to be possibly indicative of a socially conservative bias on wiki, as well as dangerous and retarded, while your tone in defending it is kind of sanctimonious. I can't decide whether to be upset or amused. It all amounts to the same evocation, though: blow me.
Cheers, Itscml 05:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Yawn. I read your last piece of invective with a mixture of boredom and amusement normally reserved for when I watch women's basketball. After comparing it against the Rosetta Stone of other Wikipedia administrators' talk pages, as well as the malicious and authoritarian edicts of my high school principals, I was able to translate said comment from the original Passiveaggressiveassholeëse (note use of diacritic mark). It read:
"Because I have nothing better to do with my time and I have no control of my life, which makes me miserable, I turn to Wikipedia so I can uphold arbitrary standards, which makes me feel significant among my peers."
Wikipedia may not be my playground, but it certainly is your alternate reality. Real life not cutting it, Mr. Quixote? Then mount the nearest decrepit computer kiosk and tilt at windmills. Don't take this the wrong way: but your self-righteousness is completely encompassing and therefore you are a complete joke; what you don't seem to understand is that being passive-aggressive is far worse than being forthright. When you're in a position of authority, if such a weighty word can be applied to a Wiki adminship, it's your duty to tolerate criticism and free speech (barring libel or a few other exceptions) instead of quashing it in a way that transcends hypocrisy in its repugnance. Especially when you are actually being sanctimonious.
In conclusion, I genuinely feel sorry for you and would like to extend an invitation for drinks, a joint, or perhaps even hallucinogens if you're ever in Manhattan anytime between the months of September and May. I guess you could ban me for this comment, but that would be kind of stupid because I'm going home to a loving family and a fresh IP address in a couple of days, and even if I wasn't, I could just make another account and resume the kind of activities that you and Hu Jintao and Mussolini would deem so seditious ad nauseam.
Best of luck, Itscml 05:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Punish me, Porfiry, your apathetic feint isn't fooling anyone. Itscml 06:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Let me make it easy for you: narcissistic asshole. Itscml 06:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I see you salted UCR mascot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) after the last SummerThunder rampage. Would you mind also salting his alternate page-creation locations at UCR mascot Highlander ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), UCR Mascot Highlander ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and UCR Mascot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? Thanks. --Dynaflow 19:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You may not add anything to my talk page without prior consent. 76.197.131.48 04:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the semi protect. It's a pain going there to see some random IP's have added obscene language or deleted half the article. Omega Archdoom Talk 02:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Looks like you have another sockpuppet of Benjiwolf, although I could be wrong. User:MnemosynesMusings was indef blocked as a sock puppet for User:Benjiwolf. Shortly after, User: PolyhymniasPeripheralPerceptions was created and began editing the same articles, including commenting on Benji's blocked IPs user pages. Between the very similar names and contributions, I wonder if this isn't another one? I'm kind of new to wikipedia so I'm not really sure what the due process is to check these things out. Thanks CredoFromStart 15:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
The edit I made to the GWB article simply clarified it. As it stands, it gives the false impression that the Supreme Court decided the election. They did not, as any honest student of government knows. They simply upheld Florida law, which was established by the Florida legislature. The Constitution gives the right to each state legislature the way they cast their electoral college votes for President. Why would you have a problem with a minor clarification like that? I would hope it's not based upon your POV against the President. Sdth 17:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks for that complete and through fair use rationale statement! -- Ttownfeen 19:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing this out promptly. David Fuchs ( talk / frog blast the vent core!) 22:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
...and thanks also for letting me swipe the code for the Christian and Birmingham user boxes. And my condolences in Steve Spurrier's whuppin' of Tubs at the Regions Classic Pro-Am on Thursday. Realkyhick 05:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Recoome, who seems to have retired from Wikipedia, has had his userpage blanked by several anon. ips since then. Since you are an administrator, can you fully protect it to prevent this ridiculous editing from continuing? More enough, the ip has been blanking more content from Recoome's talk page and impersonated him by signing his post as Recoome. See Recoome's page history for insight. Strangely, the same things happened on Power Level's userpage and in turn that page was protected by Deskana. Thank you for your time.~ I'm anonymous
We almost edit conflicted. Last I read, it wasn't a requirement to sign with four tildes unless you're putting an article up for good article status. ~ I'm anonymous
Your right next time I will include a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajuk ( talk • contribs) 16:34, 21 May 2007
I really like wikipedia. It's real nifty like. How did you get started with it?
Hey, sorry I never got a chance to thank you for deleting my archive pages - I really appreciate it. I probably won't be needing them back again - as I've set up a system on my talk page where rather than having to use a bunch of pages - I can use only one to keep track of the archive. Again though, really appreciate it. daniel folsom 11:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey Pilot, thanks for the vandal-fighting at my user page. AUTiger ʃ talk/ work 05:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
The problem with fiml About Rape is that is a very short category, there are many films with a rape scene or theme but is not the central story, like Kill Bill or Highlander, so I think in increase the level a litle. Anty way, keep Films about rape, then. But >I think is important to let the other category exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spockdg ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 22 May 2007 aka 200.9.37.219
can you block User_talk:65.94.156.187 him from vandalizing his talk page? he has been blocked and is blanking out and/or writing profanity on his page.
thanks Momusufan 21:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
looks like it's already done, thanks anyway Momusufan 21:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I applaud your due diligence in regards to your success in protecting my user page. As much as I see the vandalism as humorous and quite flattering, I want not for other editors to use valuable time in reverting the inane contributions of others. In short, I applaud your decision and I stand by said actions. We cool. Thanks! the_undertow talk 22:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the swift attention. Any idea how to get them to sit down and discuss instead of revert at eachother? Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I have some worries that it may be too soon to unprotect MMM for the moment, even though it's locked in a state I'm not altogether happy with. Gwen Gale 17:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I'm hoping you can help me recover an article I was working on which has been deleted, as I intend to move it to another Wiki. The article was entitled 'Shetlink'. Thanks in advance Prroudfoot 15:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't really understand all the ins and outs of Wikipedia in-general, let alone protection specifically, but it seems to me that TFA should at least be semi-protected. So much time and energy overnight from folks who (thankfully) are out there trying to catch vandals. This is a big day for alot of folks and I sure hope vandals don't ruin it. I'm not being critical - just trying to understand why/how things work. Kmzundel 10:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello again,
I wanted to let you know that I added a bit more content to the William March page and finished integrating the trivia section into the main text. Tell me what you think (if you have the time).
Also, I had a question for you about the importance meter. The page I created on March's Company K received an importance rating of mid, while his novels The Bad Seed and The Looking-Glass are rated importance low. Company K is still being rated as the greatest work of American World War I fiction (arguably the greatest work of World War I literature from the US). This novel continues to be taught and was currently made into a film. The masses have largely forgotten about the work, but the same could be said about the whole WWI era.
My question is who deems the works noteworthy or not, as Company K is most assuredly a work that should not be forgotten. March's The Bad Seed helped start the serial killer genre (it's film adaptation at least), sold millions of copies, was made into a long-running Broadway play and an oscar nominated, golden globe winning film (being remade this year). While The Looking-Glass is noted for being March's masterpiece, even if it was not a commercial success. I do not know where I am going with this, just thought I would put it out there...
Thanks for all your past help. - Diarmada 05:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Again, I really do appreciate the words of support and praise, as this is usually a thankless job (as you know!). I would also encourage you to try it once. It is incredibly rewarding, especially if there is enough biographical information available. I was lucky enough that March has a few things written about his life and a ton of other writer's thoughts on him as well. But it does take a long time to get it right, as I am going on a year now with regards to the March page. There are a few more Alabama authors that need a page, namely Gustav Hasford & Augusta Evans Wilson, whom had no page up until a few months ago.
Featured status (thanks for the mention of the possibility, it made my day!) was always the goal I had in mind for the bio, as it might grant William March's work some needed exposure. Honestly though, if I had written something more topical, it would have been a disservice to March's life.
Concerning the book covers, March's The looking Glass has been out of print since 1955. Company K is still copyrighted by the University of Alabama Press and his estate. I would be willing to contact the estate to get permission though, as they are quite accessible.
Thanks again (sincerely), I always look forward to your input - Diarmada 16:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Awesome, I really appreciate the help, as I know you have very little spare time. About the image use, I spent weeks and weeks trying to locate and finally get in touch with the photographer Jerry Bauer over an image of Joseph Heller. After getting written permission to use the image, it still was not enough...although it was a good experience talking with someone so accomplished, all the work was for naught. Thanks again, if ever you need any help with anything or see a hole to be plugged, let me know. - Diarmada 00:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey AUPilot; OTduff and myself could use a little assistance with protecting David Irons from a persistant IP vandal who insists on inserting defamatory POV statements into the article. If you check the history you'll see it's a Bellsouth.net (dialup?) subscriber with a constantly changing IP, so no hope of blocking by address. I'm afraid it's going to take a semi-protect and hope he gives up and goes away when he can't easily continue his attack. Thanks in advance for the help. AUTiger ʃ talk/ work 06:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I've had this on the project talk page for a while, but since you seem to know what you're doing (unlike me), I'd like to ask you. I have created a ton of new userboxes, and they are all on the new userboxes page. However, should I also put them on the main userboxes category pages (example: my Star Trek userboxes under TV Shows (media) or under Sci-fi) or not?
Thank you for your time,
--
FastLizard4 (
Talk|
Contribs)
02:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I figured he or another user would have done this. I'm not gonna bother reverting him since I don't want to get involved with him or a "Prince Zarbon" again. Is full protection a good idea right about now? Lord Sesshomaru
The current President of Auburn University is still President Ed Richardson, not Dr. Jay Gogue as shown in the Current Directors section. Jay Gogue will be taking over sometime in July. Since it is semi-protected, I cannot make any changes, and prior edits were undone.
mat1583 3:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
alledgedly, when did i vandalize the article on George Bush? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Llama554 ( talk • contribs) 22:04, 31 May 2007
Looks fine to me. Judging by the current way the AfD discussion is going and my "delete unless" comment there's not much point me changing anything anyway. Good job on the article. One Night In Hackney 303 02:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, so what is your requirement then. When add a request to the talk page and how long do I wait, if no one responds, before I can add the link? And if there's is a discussion, who decides if it gets added? Also, apparently you're an administrator? How do I tell that you are and that you have the power to do what you threatened? - Micahburnett 04:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert on my User Talk page. FlowerpotmaN ( t · c) 22:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey AuburnPilot/Archive 2. See your an admin and all, I was wondering if you could help me. About 5 months ago (January acutally) I created an article named Swiss-Canadian War. It was deleted at this afd: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swiss-canadian war. I heard that all deleted articles are stored somewhere, and I was wondering if you could copy and paste the article into my subpage at: user:pahomeboy1992/swiss-canadian war. Thank you! -- Pahomeboy1992 02:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I've added a proposed compromise phrase in the talk of George W Bush about the whole election. Read and tell me if a different phrase should be used Mrld 12:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, AuburnPilot, for the welcome! Looks like this is a very weloming group! :) Aleta 18:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps it would have been best not to use the rollback button when dealing with something that is not vandalism [18]. Anyway, I have opened a discussion at the article's talk page, so please make any comments there. Nishkid64 ( talk) 19:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Bush is evil like Adolf Hitler though, unless of course you're a republican who thinks he's God. Citikiwi 20:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out on the "Movement to impeach Bush" article. I'm new here as well but I'm trying to be a team player. Barnstormer was rewriting the entire lead of the article and making it much longer, repeating information that had already been included farther down in what was already an extremely long article. He was also removing the only criticism of the movement, returning the article to its previous pro-impeachment bias. Good work. FreedomAintFree 06:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Hail fellow well met! Long time no see. As you're well aware, you're my go-to guy when I want a level/trusted opinion on Wikimatters. If you have the time (and don't mind helping me see things objectively), please take a look at this thread and let me know what you think of the situation. Also, please note I'm not "running to AuburnPilot" or whining... You've been my trusted looking glass for much longer than you've been an admin. :-) Thanks! / Blaxthos 17:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.
Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. Yechiel Man 21:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Pilot, could you take a look at this request I made of Johntex who seems to be on a vacation and help out? Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks and WDE! AUTiger ʃ talk/ work 00:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh man, for a second I thought you were acussing me of being a vandal. That was very funny. Thanks -- Mr.crabby (Talk) 02:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
This is an archive for User talk:AuburnPilot. Comments made between 21 January 2007 and 5 June 2007 are archived here.
Hi. Did you know that may be deleted? I don't think it's fair, but can't seem to change anyone's minds. Could you please take a look? Thanks. Xiner ( talk, email) 23:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the recognition! It's most definitely my pleasure to contribute in a positive fashion to the project, and it is always rewarding to have those contributions recognized. Have a good one! Ginsengbomb 06:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for talking to me about vandilism. Now I'm REALLY going to mess up your freakin page.
Corndog117
21:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
By the way, youre the slowest ive ever met. People talked to my other guy,
Targon142 within 5 seconds. I mean, come on.
Hello. I saw your posting on the Admin board to get one of these fixed and just wanted to pop in and show you this in case you were not aware. It will usually do the job except when you need something done "right now". I think most requests are usually filled in less than a day. -- After Midnight 0001 16:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Wow! Thanks! That was fast! I responded back in the Talk:Fox_News_Channel again on the topic. ZacBowling 01:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your advice! Sasha best February 08 2007
Ah, missed it. I check in on the commonly hit pages every so often, but it usually seems like somebody else spots him first and lets me know about it. Thanks! Luna Santin 04:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm putting together a story on the challenges involved in keeping ideologically charged Wikipedia pages up, open and unlocked. I'm really interested in tracking down people that monitor and manage such pages. Examples include: George W. Bush's page, the page on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the page on The Armenian Genocide and pages on creationism and evolution. I see that you’ve worked on the Bush page a lot. I was wondering if you might be willing to talk to me about the challenges of keeping pages like this up and unlocked. If you have any thoughts on tracking down the right person to talk to for a story like this, please shoot them my way. I hope to get in contact with you. You can email me here: matt.phillips@wsj.com
Thanks much, Matt —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MattPhillips33 ( talk • contribs) 15:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Auburn Pilot,
I'm terribly confused about copyright and the Lucien Durosoir image I uploaded. I took a photo of this picture, which is over 100 years old and is owned by Lucien Durosoir's son. I have his full permission to use it on Wikipedia. Which copyright option should I choose?
Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnspowell ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 9 February 2007
Ah, ok. Thanks for clarifying that. - Bluedog423 Talk 18:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't want my maps to be orphaned. - Patricknoddy 14:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I assert to be the same user as commons:User:AuburnPilot auburnpilot talk 05:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
u are a fucken retard and so is leo mavidis —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.194.50.80 ( talk) 09:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
block me you retard —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.194.50.80 ( talk) 09:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
We have not agreed much at all...but I admire your convicitions and the dissappearance of any past tension 'tension'...If you find more ridiculous sockpuppets on the Fox News Talk Page. PLEASE let me know on my talk page or by e-mailing me so we can get rid of these thugs (thats what they are) as quickly as possible... lets atleast come together on this topic...also if you encounter any such problems elsewhere on any article,,, please also let me know...I am SICK of it and would like to help get rid of all sockpuppets no matter what their affiliation. Look forward to your response, and working on this one topic which we share in common. Thank you for looking out! OfForByThePeople 00:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. Oguz1 ( talk · contribs) reported Khoikhoi, Artaxiad and ROOB323 just because we disagree with his belief that the Armenian Genocide never occurred in the city of Ordu. He seriously doesn't understand what AIV is for. Nishkid 64 18:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
OK but, they won't discuss, dispute, or argue that it's not POV, and still revert - what's that called? Ordu-- Oguz1 19:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't consider the post that I made on the George Bush page to be vandalism. It is just me expressing my feelings about this boorish character. Sorry if I offended you or any Wikipedia users, but I am going to continue expressing my feelings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nathan ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
What's an auburn fan doing defending the bama page?????? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.114.121.212 ( talk • contribs) 04:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome. - Lake Ontario 06:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Keep on finding those vandals and making those reports to AIV. You're doing a great job helping to keep Wikipedia free of defacement. We need lots of people like you! Cheers, Heimstern Läufer 08:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I am writing regarding your characterization of my edit to the fulgarite article as vandalism, or in your "words," a test--and the concomitant personal comment, "Harvard, tisk tisk." I would have you know that as a tenured geologist, I have done extensive research into the properties of fulgarite, and, as a matter of fact, my comparison of the mineral to the male sexual organ is visually, topologically and culturally accurate. Once formed from lightning, fulgarite exhibits a uneven, partially tapered structure, from shaft to tip, that is extraordinarly evocative of the phallus. As a result, many societies throughout human history have considered fulgarite to be a symbol of virility. The mineral makes several prominent appearances in Anasazi pornographic lore. The carrot, to which fulgarite was previously likened in the eponymous article, does not display an exponential rate of change in its radius as a function of height, as does both fulgarite and the penis. Frankly, I wonder if you have ever set eyes on fulgarite material in your life. In the future you shouldn't be too hasty to foist your uninformed ego on the flow of information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.247.46.130 ( talk) 10:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
AuburnPilot,
Since you apparently believe the characterization I have made is not neutral, please consider posing the following question to some neutral acquaintances you may have.
Polling results for three individuals rate performance in two categories, “Excellent/Pretty Good” and “Only Fair/Poor”. The “Excellent/Pretty Good” percentage results for the three individuals are as follows: A-46; B-32; and C-29; and the “Only Fair/Poor Ratings” are A-48, B-66; and C-58. Which of the following are fair to say regarding A’s results? 1. A has the highest job rating of the group. 2. A has the least disfavorable job rating of the group. 3. A has less than a 50% favorability job rating 4. A has a disfavorable job rating
If you think this question is unfair, please let me know how you would make it fairer. Thank you for your communication. Ohioan1 14:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I saw I was approved, so I tried it out. I hated it. - Patricknoddy 12:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
AuburnPilot,
Thank you for the greeting; I hope to learn my way around Wikipedia without too many missteps. CharliePATpk 18:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Here you go:
Let me know when you've answered the questions and are ready to post! Good luck! Kafziel Talk 20:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello AuburnPilot, I think you have more than the amount of experiance, dedication, and trust to become an administrator. The last I checked, your user box indicated that you were not a sysop, but would hope to be one. You have also been a great help for the community against vandalism. Would you accept a nomination? I have not done any of the steps.-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 02:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Allright, I'm thrilled to see you decided to accept yourself on the RfA, and wish you the best of luck! I'm sure you'll do great!-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot, I noticed you and a few other editors say sometimes in your edit summary, "JS:Reverted vandalism by X to last version by Y" as opposed to "Reverted edits by X(talk) to last version by Y". What does the JS mean?-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 01:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I'd certainly second the nomination. I notice you changed your adminship interest status recently. I've been pondering it a bit myself. You'll be a shoo-in; what do you think of my chances? / Blaxthos 05:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
(cross posted to Wikipedier's talk page) Thanks very much for the offer. I was actually contacted by another use via email a few days ago asking if I would accept a nomination. My concern is that my participation in deletion discussions is quite limited. It is an area of Wikipedia that is of no interest to me, and I only participate when I stumble across a nominated article/category/misc. I've seen too many good users massacred at RfA for this reason, and must decline a nomination at this time. I will most likely submit to an editor review in the coming weeks, and would appreciate any feedback you can provide. Again, thanks very much for the offer. auburnpilot talk 16:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits on the William March page, they do not go unnoticed! - Diarmada 21:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the nomination, I would truly love seeing William March's story discussed and discovered....he is one of the great tragedies of the last century, no wonder they are considered the "lost generation"....it is also quite sad that his story is not even well known in the state that he so loved...there are many reasons to this, but of them all, none are more potent than the realization that education in our fair state is less than stellar on literary subjects and literature in general, but the times they are a changing... - Diarmada 12:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
On a side note, I created this userbox, thought you might like to see it...
![]() |
This user believes that William March is the unrecognized genius of our time |
- Diarmada 12:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I have a situation brewing and want to check myself before going further by way of a second opinion, just to see if I'm off base. I'm not sure if it's something you want to dive into in the middle of your (long overdue) RfA, so I can consult elsewhere if now isn't convenient. You're kindof my go-to guy for second opinions (if you can't trust a Tiger, who can you trust?)... hope it's not inconvenient. ;-) / Blaxthos 05:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd let you know I decided to err on the lenient side and not block that user indef, since not all edits seemed to be clearly vandalism. I do kind of hope just a two-day block might shape him/her up, though I suppose it's not too likely. Heimstern Läufer 07:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I hope you and yours are okay. Kafziel Talk 02:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I know it was all near your part of the state, hope all is well and power is restored soon - Diarmada 12:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Fortunately my family and I were far enough away to not receive any damage and the only tree to fall in my neighborhood was the one between me and the telephone pole. Killed the phone, tv, internet, and power but I'm back up and running. auburnpilot talk 06:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey man, thanks for your opinion regarding the image dispute. That's why I asked for a second opinion from someone I trust. I'm considereing offering my resources to interested wikipedia editors, and want to know if you think it's a good idea. Check out my idea at User:Blaxthos/Research requests and let me know if you think it's a good idea that will be used, or if it's a potential nightmare of trollish requests and time-sucking futility. thanks, and congrats on the near-unanimous RfA! / Blaxthos 20:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I know it's a bit early, but I think it's safe to say you'll be an admin within a couple of hours. Thanks for being willing to give this a shot; I know you'll do a great job with your new tools. If you ever need anything, you know where to find me. Kafziel Talk 18:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations!-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC) Warning to vandals, Wikipedia has a new vandal-fighting admin.-- Wikipedier ( talk • contribs) 04:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. I'll do my best to use the tools wisely. auburnpilot talk 02:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the revert on my user page :-) - Myanw 08:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
He looks like a scrotum face tho, let me edit that page on him. The people have the right to know! He also sucks ass (literally and figuratively) and thats a fact. Haha anyway how was your weekend?!?!?!? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LKWJE ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC).
You reverted my addition of my Speach Mishaps and listed it as going against the Wikipedia is not an Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
Here is the definiton of the Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. ( WP:NOT)
My addition of the Speach Mishaps does not go against this guideline. Soulofdragon 20:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soulofdragon ( talk • contribs) 20:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I share an account with a friend, he enjoys making comedic vandalism on pages while I only apply comedic touches that are factual if available. Either method I enjoy but my methods are greater because people can relate to the comedic knowledge and learn something funny about their topic. Humor is important. Soulofdragon 21:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soulofdragon ( talk • contribs) 20:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I was on Wikibreak when you were promoted, so I missed that it had happened and all. Then I saw one of the AIV bots' edit summary say you'd blocked someone just a bit ago. Anyway, good work on becoming an admin, and give those vandals what for! Heimstern Läufer 06:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Clearly I have upset you. That was not my intent. I would not be involved but I was invited to help mediate the situation. I am not arguing against your position, but I will argue that a consensus was met. And so what if it was. Notice that I didn't change the article, and I also thought some of the recent changes were not helpful. I was pointed to an archive where consensus was met, but I saw a lot of bickering, and several of the latter points of the thread were about how the article was wrong, so I just don't get it. Then you accuse me of strong arming the discussion. Consensus isn't met because people give up on the fight. If you have a point to make, go ahead and make it. I am willing to listen, but the only argument for keeping the controversay in the intro was "we all agreed", but that isn't a reason at all. And frankly, it's disappointing that so many of us would rather get their way or quit rather than discuss the issue at hand. Bytebear 19:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The (fatal) flaw of Wikipedia is that the instant you "give up" then you've invalidated the entire validity of the project. Of course, that only occurs writ large when the number of editors married to stubbornness/ignorance/bad faith outnumbers the righteous who "fight the good fight." Keep in mind, this is not a "two sided fight where each side refuses to see the middle ground" -- this is the defense of a valid good faith effort sucessfully concluded by eighteen editors against a few who refuse to read the history involved and who sling the same invalid arguments. I completely understand the level of frustration, but if you give up, and I give up, then what happens to Wikipedia? Come back. / Blaxthos 20:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I will carry on with task-force duty, however I strongly welcome your return should you decide to come back. I find myself unwilling to give up on something we've all worked so hard to accomplish. Wikipedia relies on the conflict model to operate -- the tug of war is what keeps all sides in check, so to speak, however the system breaks down when good men become tired of drawing lines in the sand. Hope we can stay in touch; though our political philosophies probably differ, I can honestly say I was always glad to know you were keeping and eye out and also trying to keep things right. War Eagle! / Blaxthos 22:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Do you think this guy is a nutjob or a troll? / Blaxthos 00:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm almost convinced that our current "advocate" over at FNC is the same person as cbuhl79, just slightly reorganized. hohum. / Blaxthos 18:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
In response to my vandalism report...
You said it wasn't vandalism. While there is nothing specific in wikipedia guidlines on Wikipedia:Vandalism. Isn;t there a rule about reverting discussion pages?!? I mean... what would you do if somebody habitually blew away entire discussion pages for instance?-- Dr who1975 15:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
OMG you're gonna block my other account! What will I do now when I want to vandalise a webpage?!?!? lol sweet as Auburnpilot do whatever you want to both my accounts. So hav you been getting a bit of action recently from the ladies? I assume you're a guy... Wouldn't be surprised if you're a chick tho, you do sound like a little bitch, no offence intended :)
hav a nice day! LKWJE 22:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much for protecting this page from being created again. The user wasn't adhering to any of the afd deletion warnings I placed on his page. The user and I was in a wheel war, because he kept deleting the afd tags off of the page. Well, it's late, but just a note to say thanks. Real96 08:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
It's been agreed that match taglines are not notable, so I was doing nothing wrong in removing it. Why did you give me a warning? TJ Spyke 06:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reassurance about the 3RR, i did notice that, but it said that only obvious cases would be called exceptions. I was just wondering if they were obvious enough...I'm being stupid now: it was blatant. Anyway, the script would still be useful just as a counter for non-exception reverts. Stwalkerster 21:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
You placed the following on my user page: "Please do not remove content from an editor's userpage without that person's permission, as you did to User:Duke53. Such actions are considered vandalism. Is it considered vandalism only when certain people do it, or is it vandalism whenever anybody does it? Duke53 | Talk 06:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot. Thank you for participating in my RfA. Rest assured that I have heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Thanks for your support, and please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner ( talk, email) 01:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I see you've met 70.23.199.239 ( talk · contribs). I only recently came across this editor and was surprised to see that most of his edits were adding, then fighting over, links to his own blogs and other articles. I posted a note on his talk page asking him to stop making that type of edit. I also posted at the COI noticeboard. I'm going to be aware from my computer for most of the next few weeks. Could you please keep an eye on this account? He's already skirting WP:NPA and if he gets much worse community action may be appropriate. Hopefully he'll simmer down and contribute constructively. Cheers, - Will Beback · † · 04:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your nomination and the input, it is greatly appreciated...the fact that the bio on William March received good article status means quite a bit, to me, but also to getting the word out on somehow who is unjustly obscure...Thanks again for your help and work, I look forward to the day it becomes a featured article...Dia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diarmada ( talk • contribs) 04:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
Thank you very much for unblocking me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MrigeshKalvani ( talk • contribs) 09:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
I appreciate your support in my recent RfA. Although I've started on CSD, as anticipated, I'll be keeping an eye on AIV too. Looks like there's plenty of things to be addressed. Shimeru 15:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm requesting your help in intervening in this article because the person User:HighTouch is getting extremely emotional because he's trying to keep a conspiracy theory [2] which has no citations except based on the person's opinion. I've already discussed this to the person which he seems arrogant that his opinion is facts. I've already explained why this could be wrong which he seems to just blow past them. I'll leave it up to you should you choose to intervene. Thank you very much. ViriiK 07:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I recently got blocked by you for 31 hours due to adding forum links. I did not even know this was against the rules, and i did not even get the warnings until I was already banned. This seems extremely unfair to me. 67.163.193.239 08:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Listen, creep-STOP STALKING ME AND STOP LEAVING INSULTING MESSAGES ON MY TALK PAGE. For your information, we are not even talking about the Rule of Rose links here. We are talking about something completely different-something that you obviously know nothing about. I don't care if you believe me or not, but I did not know forums were against the rules, since the links had been up for over a year. And I only got two warnings, both of which only arrived AFTER I got banned. As for the Rule of Rose area, again, unrelated. I do not read discussion pages, and not even sure what they are. The link there was perfectly legit, but some trolls who kept attacking my site and forum did not like it, so they kept deleting and editting it so it would not work. 67.163.193.239 17:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm just going to stop listening to you. I have no time to listen to the bogus and rude accusations of a troll. You don't know anything-you're just making assumptions. The RoR thing had nothing to do with getting blocked, so obviously you don't know as much as you think you do.
Hi, AP. It happens that two of us Auburnites were cleaning up after User:Haydeniscrunk. Not trying to second-guess, but I was surprised to find an indefinite block on the page. All of the vandalism happened in one day, if I read the user contribs correctly. Is there a history here I don't know about? -- Rob C (Alarob) 22:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Special:Undelete/Watumull Institute Of Electronic Engineering & Computer Technology (W.I.E.E.C.T.)— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 04:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry for going against wikipedia policies on the George W. Bush article. I meant it as a joke, and I didn't realize that my intentions were going to offend people this much. I have truly learned a valuable lesson. Thank you AuburnPilot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thiemster ( talk • contribs) 02:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking action on Benjiwolf. Can we now Anonblock Benjiwolfs range of IP addresses. Because the block is pretty useless without it? Ttguy
Hey, could you delete my page, Darth_maddolis/Dark Forces Clan. Thanks. Darth Maddolis 07:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
sorry bro, its a shared connection, i didnt know, i thought the last thing was months ago—Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.215.125.76 ( talk • contribs) 05:01, 28 March 2007
Burstcum - same MO as very-recently blocked socks. -- ElKevbo 06:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I just get a little annoyed with malformed/invaild requests sometimes John Reaves (talk) 07:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you have your talk page linked in your sig: talk but when I try to copy that and change it to my name talk it doesn't work...do you know why? Cogswobble talk 19:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
User:Xindiweapon has been putting offensive imagery on the user page of User:Cleo123. I have been reverting it and also I have been responding to User:Xindiweapon on his/her Talk and User pages. Bus stop 07:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
you have email as well. :-) Thanks for the effort, and thanks especially for the note on my talkpage. Generally speaking, my mailboxen receive so much spam that I usually overlook legit emails unless i'm specifically waiting for them. I have your emails to come up orange on blue in my index list (war eagle!) but it's always best practice to drop me a note on the talk page telling me to look out. Thanks again! / Blaxthos 17:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Yup....not sure why it was almost two hours after it had expired, but oh well. Wikilife goes on. Thanks again... SVRTVDude ( Yell - Toil) 09:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the guy who was vandalizing William Wilberforce, but I wonder what the usefulness is of a 12-hour block. I got blocked (BY MISTAKE) for 24 hours for someone else's actions that were not nearly as serious as this user's. Why not block him for a month? InkQuill 21:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I understand if it's from a school. InkQuill 22:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry Auburnpilot, if I did something wrong, I apologize..
But as my post has been suprest, I can’t go back and read it again.. but I don’t remember having posted another user's personal information.. anywhere..
Anyway.. I came to the “anchor article” to stop somebody who is very closely related to a manufacturer,(*) to use Wikipedia to make his owm promotion about his products..
My action is on a good way to succeed, so I have nothing more to do on such a complicated Wiki, and now you can indefinitely block my account..
(*) is that a “user's personal information” ?
Hylas 21:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the user who was posting female genitalia on my user page! I've been pretty busy and I was completely oblivious to the vandalism! Thank you so much for taking care of the situation. I appreciate your help! Best Regards, Cleo123 07:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I thought that removing warnings was against policy because it makes users believe you are trying to hide them. Since it doesn't exist, i apologize for waisting your time. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 23:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for those tallies, I usually remember but I am tired ;). I hope adminship is treating you well. Cheers. ~ Arjun 04:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Just informaing you that User:Rb5464 has recreated article Robert Stewart Ottawa, which I noted you have specifically warned him against. The Kinslayer 15:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot, I noticed your comment on this SSP case (congrats on your successful RfA, BTW). Personally, I doubt that anyone would fault you for handing out blocks in this case, although some judicious page protection might be enough here. However, maybe another way of dealing with the problem is a post to WP:ANI? I would do it myself, but I'm not an admin, and about half the time when I post to ANI about sock-related matters the post gets no response.
By the way, is there any chance that you could review some of the other SSP cases? There are some fairly old ones where I think there's definite sockpuppetry (e.g. WP:SSP page on "Terryfilene22", WP:SSP page on "Rsbj66", WP:SSP page on "Adversegecko"), and some where sockpuppetry seems possible ( WP:SSP page on "Opp2"). --Akhilleus ( talk) 02:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot, in case you haven't noticed, our canine friend has discovered the SSP case, and has posted some nice pictures to the page: WP:SSP page on "Benjiwolf". --Akhilleus ( talk) 01:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey man, some more activity by our boy Benji, including confirmed puppetry with new accounts -- check the checkuser request under the second account. I tossed up a few ssp/confirmed templates but removed the indef block language due to a lack of block. The puppetmaster got a 2 week block a few weeks ago, nothing so far against the puppet account. Isn't that an automatic indefblock? / Blaxthos 20:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Might want to go ahead and hit User talk:CrystalizedAngels too -- he's spamming the wikivandal service there too. / Blaxthos 05:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm initiating an arbitration case against benjiwolf because of the for-profit vandal service he's offering, along with his sockpuppetry and admitted purpose of getting most of switzerland blocked. Please head over to the current requests and drop in your $.02 (the sooner the better). Also, his talk page will need unprotection, and we'll need to let him have the ability to edit the arbcom case. / Blaxthos 05:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
new to wiki please help..
--
ElijahCollins
04:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
hey editors why does no specific information exhist about PEPCON. a factory which blew up in henderson NV in 1988. the factory was one of two in the united states at the time which made Ammonium perchlorate. Ammonium Perchlorate was an oxidizer used in Rocket Fuel for NASA. and why does my English teacher say that I can't use Wiki as a Reference for info WTF. Got to be a big set back. oh well. I need to know the Exact coordinates of where the place was so that I can photo it with google earth. if you can get that for me or refer me I'd appreciate it.. thanx.
P.S. I'm not pissed about how you deleted my article THE COLLINS CHRONICLES even though I know it was legit and had valid references. I guess there's still nothing a regular person can do when two mods who are wrong Gang up on him. NOT here to talk about it though.. I need info! Thanx..
Poetadmit ( talk · contribs · logs) I've already reverted his 2 edits to existing pages. Reporting this incognito cause I don't want to end up on his retaliation list. Thanks, 76.174.125.149 08:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey auburnpilot talk I hang my head in shame, but I lost my quick link to reporting “Vandals” to administrator page and can not refind it on the site. Can you supply. Thanks for the help. Shoessss 17:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks,
-- Moumine70 17:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
A 3RR report was just filed against User:Armyranger. I see you protected the article and I didn't know if you were in the middle of any mediation there; I'm all set to block him but I don't want to step on your toes. Let me know. Kafziel Talk 20:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello AuburnPilot! You are receiving this message because we've noticed your excellent edits on some of the Alabama-related pages. We need your assistance at the WIkiProject Alabama. This is a new WikiProject and there is much work to do. Please head over to the project page, add your name, and help us enhance and increase the coverage of Alabama related stories. |
—Preceding unsigned comment added by J. Bryant Evans ( talk • contribs) 03:34, 7 April 2007
Damn that was fast! Thanks for the snaps of the coliseum. I really appreciate it! Go Tigers! Вasil | talk 23:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Archive_2, thanks for your support in my successful
RfA. As the picture shows, the goddesses have already bestowed my new weapons, |
Thanks for teh reply! Appreciate the heads up. I haven't been able to locate it in my inbox or spamtrap. Same from address, to address, and delivery method? / Blaxthos 02:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
does this count as a legal threat by this blocked user? User:67.163.193.239: [3]
That aggression was not appreciated. Whilst I understand the possibility of my creation of the redirect being misinterpreted, if you review Talk:No. 1 terrorist, you will notice that I explain this redirect exists simply because the terrorist description is used by detractors of Bush. I would request that you do not act so prematurely in the future as my contribution was in fact made for a reason. Thankyou -- Doctor11 20:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Please response to the unblock request at User talk:88.111.204.41. The user is claiming that he was blocked for blanking his own talkpage and did not realize this was prohibited. I assume there is more to the story than that. Newyorkbrad 23:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I am somewhat new to this community, but a great advocate of simple facts and correct representation.
If you get the chance, can you tell me how I would go about, in a Wiki-way, of correcting something similar to what is being discussed about "The Bet" in the William M. Gray article. I will not repeat the arguments here, I have stated them in the discussion page, but the bit I have attempted to edit simply violates very clear Biographies of Living Persons policy and Reliable Source policy.
Yet, two editors leap-frog one another to prevent corrections, and simply ignore WP:RS altogether. Both editors are very active POV editors (both show up heavily in the editing of articles about Climate Change Skeptics and Climate Change articles, enforcing their personal POVs)
I see no sense in reverting the item again, as they will (I think it is Conneley's turn next) revert it back again. I was foolish enough to think that pointing out the clear policy violation and making a correction would actually have some effect. But it does not work without some enforcement.
The leap-frog POV enforcement system of these two editors seems designed to bypass the three-revert rule. They do not seem to take Wiki policy seriously - at least not if it doesn't work in favor of their enforcing their own viewpoints. If Wiki is going to become a respected, usable reference work, it must develop a system to prevent the hijacking of pages like this.
I am disappointed that there are not "gatekeepers" of some sort - administrators who enforce Wiki policy, especially on Biography pages. KipHansen 21:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Reliable Sources
"Material found in self-published books, zines, websites or blogs SHOULD NEVER BE USED [ my caps ], unless written or published by the subject (see below). These sources should also not be included as external links in BLPs, subject to the same exception."
Hi there - I noticed your comment on Nowonline's talk page, and I think Nowonline could successfully use the {{ db-author}} template as for the articles in question Nowonline was the only substantial contributor - which is why I recommended its use. Edits which modify formatting, add Wikilinks and tidy up references wouldn't (in my opinion) be regarded as substantial - so Nowonline would not have to be the only contributor. If my interpretation of the process is wrong, please let me know. Nowonline is pretty upset at me in particular and the Wikipedia community in general (as you can tell from the open letter he/she has posted on his/her user page), so if it turns out I've given incorrect advice, I'd want to apologise. I've felt pretty upset over the application of policy to some of my good faith contributions in the past, so I know to an extent how it feels. Thanks WLD talk| edits 10:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Re Alain POIRAUD and my submission regarding vandalism - his ranting can be dealt with and is probably not worth of a block, I agree, but his postings on my user talk page are fairly serious. Removing them does not work; he routinely returns and adds them again. Your advice on how to handle this would be appreciated. Badmonkey 06:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Sorry if this message will edit your user page but I cannot for the life of my work out how to send a message, a have clicked "leave me a message", and the page I am now looks like a wiki edit page screen. I just got your second message. By the time I had read your first I had added a few links, and only just worked out how to send you a message. Sorry, I didnt realise it was classed as Valdalism. Can you tell me who I speak to about adding links like TVSquad had, TV.com has etc etc. I understand official sites added, but I cant understand why TVSquad and TV.com are allowed and I am told not to. Is there someone in Wiki I can speak to about advertising rates? I have also told members of my site to stop adding links, some were, but without wiki usernames they didnt receive any messages telling them to stop. Thanks simsyboy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simsyboy ( talk • contribs) 09:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | I see that you've made edits in articles about
Guster. I'm trying to create a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the band. If you're interested, please express interest for WikiProject Guster on the proposal page. Thanks! - [hmwith] |
Dear AuburnPilot, Thanks your warning. I am not the position to say " I dont aware about rules" , but I think I have some excuses. There are a group of users with a political agenda for some definite articles, they are trying to fork some contents to articles. I dont like to deal with edit-rv wars, but please check these links how they attack personally in edit-summaries, and talk pages;(You can see my edit summaries also in these links)
Thanks for deleting the image that I wanted deleted! -- 98E 15:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
First of all, check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:LeToya_Luckett#revision.2C_but_under_vandalism_action
I've revised this article, with the intention to someone else, revise it, correcting, removing some unfactual and unbalanced statements, even if I wrote any. This one and the album too, LeToya (album), you can even check prior version, in both articles. Then take a look at the main article, LeToya Luckett. I was about to violate the 3RR.
I would like to know about your opinion
regards, Eduemoni 00:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Calm down. What I learned from that 7 April gross miscarriage of justice is that if another requests plain text, I'll oblige. Not every 1 minds;" Hdt83 Chat is an example: Hdt83 doesnt mind." _ Lilkunta 02:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up on User:Matthew Yeager... scary. I think, based on his first few edits, he's probably a benevolent sockpuppet of someone who's decided to start using his real name. Oh well. I came first, I've got a better claim to that name. *grin* Still pretty weird, though.
Looks like User:Dachannien deserves the praise for fixing the TOC. That is very strange, I'm not sure how in the world it got screwed up... strange.
Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 21:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I just didn't understand. - Patricknoddy TALK (reply here)| HISTORY 20:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
That user is an Impersonator account, for the last time. How are wikipedia admins this blind? Page needs to blanked or have a template that says its an impersonator. User needs to be indef blocked. Please don't turn wikipedia into a joke. 70.143.31.60 22:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Now, another admin is abusing his powers. On La Coka Nostra, theres a link that doesn't meet WikiStandards, so I removed it, and it got reverted, and so on and so forth, and now the page is locked all because of a link that doesn't even have traffic. 75.43.137.179 04:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I raised this at WP:AN/I. I haven't checked back again, but the last time I did, no-one had offered an explanation [I've just checked; still no explanation]. There's an autoblock, but the block itself doesn't show up in the log. I did, though, block him (my block notice is just above his appeal notice). That there are two autoblocks is a bit odd, though — I only blocked him once.
He certainly deserves to be blocked for disruption. He's been doing the same thing for some time — reverting articles to poor formatting and English (without explanation, or with misleading edit summaries), adding unsourced and unexplained material, and either refusing to respond to queries or responding with fake innocence ("what have I done wrong? I don't understand"), despite many explanations. This is fairly typical; note the first part, which returns the article to incorrect capitalisation and infobox formatting that goes against the WikiProject — he's been reverting to that on and off, here and on other articles, for weeks. Nothing that anyone can say to him stops him. -- Mel Etitis ( Talk) 21:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The Rice edit is fact. Rice took over after the US government administrator in Iraq was removed by Bush. This has only happened one time previously.
You have made a bad edit, please fix. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dustndown ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
Just to let you know -- I blocked this user (not an autoblock) for repeatedly uploading unfree images, tagging them with fake US Govt tags, and putting them into articles. Check the talk page history -- the user has repeatedly blanked it. The user's last comment doesn't give me much hope that he/she understands the problem. NawlinWiki 23:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello. You recently blocked Richard.Pluta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and they have asked to be unblocked. Even though the "it was my roomie" story is not a very new one, this sounds like someone who might not abuse a second chance. What do you think? Thank you, Sandstein 05:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I see you already warned our new friend. Is it appropriate for me to re-insert, or is that also treading on 3RR? / Blaxthos 21:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Didn't realize that was what I had done. Thanks for moving it.
-- Ispy1981 08:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Good edit - I had intended to revert to the wording that I posted originally which didn't have the "extremely narrow" - so thanks for picking that up. Tvoz | talk 07:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
And again - thanks for catching my latest idiotic typo. Any ideas how to proceed with the over-exuberant cutting (I am attemption AGF here)? I spent a lot of time yesterday trying to reinstate material without stepping on subsequent goood edits, and I missed some deletions that I was glad Mbc caught - I don't see that this individual is getting the message. Tvoz | talk 22:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
WP:NPA. Consider this your first warning; I have been acting in accordiance with every Wikipedia policy, but you are not getting one thing clear. NPOV is non-negotiable. The statement is biased since you and other editors will not consent to clarifying the statement as it is required under WP:NPOV and furthered in WP:WEASEL. WP:LEAD may call for a concise summary that covers the entire article, and I have no doubt that it is in your best interest to do that, but NPOV is the one policy that absolutely cannot be skipped, and it should never be positioned under any other policy on WP. To say the least, it wouldn't hurt at all to cite the source of the statement in the lead. Frankly, if you were the least bit concerned about neutrality on WP, you'd at least consider it without pointing each and every single person to the archives for a discussion that didn't even have a clear end at the time. And it certainly doesn't now. I'm not questioning your ability to understand policy, I'm questioning your editing practices, and protection of a highly controversial decision by the opinion of only a select few, that never changes. -- 66.227.194.89 04:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Auburn,
I have a large number of articles on my watchlist (mostly small Irish towns/villages) that undergo regular vandalism from random IPs. Usually it's idiot school kids saying "this village bites", or "John sucks cock" or other such nonsense. I'm considering requesting that some of them be semi-protected, and I noticed that you've turned down a number of requests on RFPP on the basis that there's an insufficiently high rate of vandalism. As a rule of thumb, approximately how much vandalism do you consider enough to warrant semi-protection?
Cheers, Cmdrjameson 14:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I added (if I remember rightly) some traditional nicknames for inhabitants of South Carolina on the article pertaining to that state. I think it was you who deleted this information. Why was this? (I am not claiming it was red-hot stuff that should have everyone agog, merely that it is a (declining) feature of American culture. I thought I would contribute it for the sake of completeness.
Flonto 00:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
One the one hand, I could argue that if nicknames for a South Carolinian are trivia, then so are nicknames for the state itself - which are included. On the other hand, I admit that the state nicknames are used officially whereas nicknames for inhabitants are hardly ever heard nowadays. I also admit that my failure to source my info was lazy and contrary to Wikipedia policy. I think that my best option is to try to move with the times and accept that the world of Buckeyes, Jayhawkers, Mudcats, Gunflints, Gamecocks, etc. is over and has to be left behind. Flonto 07:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I see you just reverted an edit I made [12], so quickly (about 25 seconds after I made it) that I wonder if you assessed the edit before reverting it (see WP:REVERT). The user page (and talk page) had a fake "you have new messages banner", frowned upon per WP:USER#Simulated_MediaWiki_interfaces which I had removed from the user page before your reversion. Note also the similar fake banner on the discussion page, and the bouncing wikipedia logo, and the user's (lack of) substantive contribs, the other discussion on the user's talk page, and the user being indef blocked for multiple accounts among other things. I see you also marked your reversion as "minor" which was somewhat inappropriate, and you didn't leave a talk message or explanatory edit summary as is customary after a reversion. I can't help wondering if you used a rollback script of some type. I don't know if policy currently requires it, but I think it would help transparency if such scripts always identified themselves in the edit summary (VP, popups, etc. all do that). Could you please try to be more careful about this stuff in the future, and possibly reconfigure your script (if you're using one) to identify itself and not mark the edits as minor. Thanks. 75.62.7.22 07:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi AuburnPilot,
Following on from the post on User_talk:Mikecraig#Regarding_reversions.5B2.5D_made_on_30_April_2007_to_The_Angels_.28Australian_band.29, the user Tony Senatore is still causing issues.
Look at the following pages, Talk:The_Angels_(Australian_band)#Image, User_talk:Tony_Senatore#Signing_posts_and_user_talk_pages and you will see that there is some major issues which needs to sorted out. I appreciate your advise and hope that you can advise what is next course of action, thanks. -- Mikecraig 01:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Please explain how the conservative or liberal criticism label is a notable controversy. Arzel 00:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
This is new to me, so I will try again. Hi Auburn Pilot. Natalee as you are well aware is a Missing person. I do not understand the need to slander her here, especially her being a human being who cannot defend herself. Please explain why you feel differently, thanks.
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dollby"
So I go and report USER:Threeafterthree for 3RR, and instead of blocking, the responding admin protects the page based on the crazy talk page... without any regard for the context or history of editors involved (look at threeafterthree's block history -- attack, sockpuppets and block avoidance, "creepy" etc). Not sure what to do at this point... / Blaxthos 17:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear AuburnPilot,
I do a bit of editing on the Genetic engineering and releated subjects pages. These pages must be some of the most heavily vandalised pages out there. Pretty much all of the vandalsim comes from IP address editors. I believe semi-protection of the following pages would be justified.
Genetic engineering , Genetically modified food, Genetically modified organism, Genetically modified food controversies
Is there a process to make this happen or can an admin just do it?
I've requested an admin either long term or indef block the user here [13] Just an FYI. CASCADIA Howl/ Trail 21:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me. Have a beer... WjB scribe 21:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I cannot think of anyone that would deny that:
-The vast majority of Americans perceive Bush to be from Texas. -He is actually from the Northeast. -His family, the Bushes, are old money, which is a nice American way of saying "aristocracy." -Phillips Andover has a HUGE endowment and has historically been a feeder for Ivies (HYP in particular), whose graduates can then perpetuate the family wealth (see "old money" or "aristocracy.") -After going there, Bush then went to Yale.
What seems more "dripping with POV" to me is to NOT put such pertinent information about Bush's upbringing and formative years (which I imagine were much more critical in shaping his political views than his fake Texan shtick) in a prominent place. To herald Bush's supposed Texan-ness therefore seems misleading in the same way that Bush was when he ran as a "Western outsider" in 2000, which fooled most of our idiotic countrymen into actually thinking he was from Texas (see above). In other words, my version is far less "liberal" and far less misleading than the current incarnation is "conservative" in its omitting relevant information.
So aside from a lack of citations I don't see what's wrong with my edit. Cure me of my ignorance?
Cheers, Itscml 03:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it's awesome that you justify your idea of the introduction's aesthetic with the "verifiability" maxim, because obviously playing up certain facts or omitting others couldn't possibly indicate any bias (viz. breach of NPOV), right? Since you're not contesting the basic correctness of my claims, I'm assuming they can go back up once I find a reputable source to corroborate them.
Cheers, Itscml 04:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, awesome. It's going back in the "early life" section as soon as I give a fuck enough to google some sources and copy and paste my masterful prose. For the record, I consider your ideological fetishism to be possibly indicative of a socially conservative bias on wiki, as well as dangerous and retarded, while your tone in defending it is kind of sanctimonious. I can't decide whether to be upset or amused. It all amounts to the same evocation, though: blow me.
Cheers, Itscml 05:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Yawn. I read your last piece of invective with a mixture of boredom and amusement normally reserved for when I watch women's basketball. After comparing it against the Rosetta Stone of other Wikipedia administrators' talk pages, as well as the malicious and authoritarian edicts of my high school principals, I was able to translate said comment from the original Passiveaggressiveassholeëse (note use of diacritic mark). It read:
"Because I have nothing better to do with my time and I have no control of my life, which makes me miserable, I turn to Wikipedia so I can uphold arbitrary standards, which makes me feel significant among my peers."
Wikipedia may not be my playground, but it certainly is your alternate reality. Real life not cutting it, Mr. Quixote? Then mount the nearest decrepit computer kiosk and tilt at windmills. Don't take this the wrong way: but your self-righteousness is completely encompassing and therefore you are a complete joke; what you don't seem to understand is that being passive-aggressive is far worse than being forthright. When you're in a position of authority, if such a weighty word can be applied to a Wiki adminship, it's your duty to tolerate criticism and free speech (barring libel or a few other exceptions) instead of quashing it in a way that transcends hypocrisy in its repugnance. Especially when you are actually being sanctimonious.
In conclusion, I genuinely feel sorry for you and would like to extend an invitation for drinks, a joint, or perhaps even hallucinogens if you're ever in Manhattan anytime between the months of September and May. I guess you could ban me for this comment, but that would be kind of stupid because I'm going home to a loving family and a fresh IP address in a couple of days, and even if I wasn't, I could just make another account and resume the kind of activities that you and Hu Jintao and Mussolini would deem so seditious ad nauseam.
Best of luck, Itscml 05:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Punish me, Porfiry, your apathetic feint isn't fooling anyone. Itscml 06:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Let me make it easy for you: narcissistic asshole. Itscml 06:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I see you salted UCR mascot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) after the last SummerThunder rampage. Would you mind also salting his alternate page-creation locations at UCR mascot Highlander ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), UCR Mascot Highlander ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and UCR Mascot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? Thanks. --Dynaflow 19:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You may not add anything to my talk page without prior consent. 76.197.131.48 04:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the semi protect. It's a pain going there to see some random IP's have added obscene language or deleted half the article. Omega Archdoom Talk 02:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Looks like you have another sockpuppet of Benjiwolf, although I could be wrong. User:MnemosynesMusings was indef blocked as a sock puppet for User:Benjiwolf. Shortly after, User: PolyhymniasPeripheralPerceptions was created and began editing the same articles, including commenting on Benji's blocked IPs user pages. Between the very similar names and contributions, I wonder if this isn't another one? I'm kind of new to wikipedia so I'm not really sure what the due process is to check these things out. Thanks CredoFromStart 15:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
The edit I made to the GWB article simply clarified it. As it stands, it gives the false impression that the Supreme Court decided the election. They did not, as any honest student of government knows. They simply upheld Florida law, which was established by the Florida legislature. The Constitution gives the right to each state legislature the way they cast their electoral college votes for President. Why would you have a problem with a minor clarification like that? I would hope it's not based upon your POV against the President. Sdth 17:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks for that complete and through fair use rationale statement! -- Ttownfeen 19:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing this out promptly. David Fuchs ( talk / frog blast the vent core!) 22:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
...and thanks also for letting me swipe the code for the Christian and Birmingham user boxes. And my condolences in Steve Spurrier's whuppin' of Tubs at the Regions Classic Pro-Am on Thursday. Realkyhick 05:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Recoome, who seems to have retired from Wikipedia, has had his userpage blanked by several anon. ips since then. Since you are an administrator, can you fully protect it to prevent this ridiculous editing from continuing? More enough, the ip has been blanking more content from Recoome's talk page and impersonated him by signing his post as Recoome. See Recoome's page history for insight. Strangely, the same things happened on Power Level's userpage and in turn that page was protected by Deskana. Thank you for your time.~ I'm anonymous
We almost edit conflicted. Last I read, it wasn't a requirement to sign with four tildes unless you're putting an article up for good article status. ~ I'm anonymous
Your right next time I will include a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajuk ( talk • contribs) 16:34, 21 May 2007
I really like wikipedia. It's real nifty like. How did you get started with it?
Hey, sorry I never got a chance to thank you for deleting my archive pages - I really appreciate it. I probably won't be needing them back again - as I've set up a system on my talk page where rather than having to use a bunch of pages - I can use only one to keep track of the archive. Again though, really appreciate it. daniel folsom 11:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey Pilot, thanks for the vandal-fighting at my user page. AUTiger ʃ talk/ work 05:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
The problem with fiml About Rape is that is a very short category, there are many films with a rape scene or theme but is not the central story, like Kill Bill or Highlander, so I think in increase the level a litle. Anty way, keep Films about rape, then. But >I think is important to let the other category exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spockdg ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 22 May 2007 aka 200.9.37.219
can you block User_talk:65.94.156.187 him from vandalizing his talk page? he has been blocked and is blanking out and/or writing profanity on his page.
thanks Momusufan 21:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
looks like it's already done, thanks anyway Momusufan 21:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I applaud your due diligence in regards to your success in protecting my user page. As much as I see the vandalism as humorous and quite flattering, I want not for other editors to use valuable time in reverting the inane contributions of others. In short, I applaud your decision and I stand by said actions. We cool. Thanks! the_undertow talk 22:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the swift attention. Any idea how to get them to sit down and discuss instead of revert at eachother? Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I have some worries that it may be too soon to unprotect MMM for the moment, even though it's locked in a state I'm not altogether happy with. Gwen Gale 17:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I'm hoping you can help me recover an article I was working on which has been deleted, as I intend to move it to another Wiki. The article was entitled 'Shetlink'. Thanks in advance Prroudfoot 15:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't really understand all the ins and outs of Wikipedia in-general, let alone protection specifically, but it seems to me that TFA should at least be semi-protected. So much time and energy overnight from folks who (thankfully) are out there trying to catch vandals. This is a big day for alot of folks and I sure hope vandals don't ruin it. I'm not being critical - just trying to understand why/how things work. Kmzundel 10:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello again,
I wanted to let you know that I added a bit more content to the William March page and finished integrating the trivia section into the main text. Tell me what you think (if you have the time).
Also, I had a question for you about the importance meter. The page I created on March's Company K received an importance rating of mid, while his novels The Bad Seed and The Looking-Glass are rated importance low. Company K is still being rated as the greatest work of American World War I fiction (arguably the greatest work of World War I literature from the US). This novel continues to be taught and was currently made into a film. The masses have largely forgotten about the work, but the same could be said about the whole WWI era.
My question is who deems the works noteworthy or not, as Company K is most assuredly a work that should not be forgotten. March's The Bad Seed helped start the serial killer genre (it's film adaptation at least), sold millions of copies, was made into a long-running Broadway play and an oscar nominated, golden globe winning film (being remade this year). While The Looking-Glass is noted for being March's masterpiece, even if it was not a commercial success. I do not know where I am going with this, just thought I would put it out there...
Thanks for all your past help. - Diarmada 05:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Again, I really do appreciate the words of support and praise, as this is usually a thankless job (as you know!). I would also encourage you to try it once. It is incredibly rewarding, especially if there is enough biographical information available. I was lucky enough that March has a few things written about his life and a ton of other writer's thoughts on him as well. But it does take a long time to get it right, as I am going on a year now with regards to the March page. There are a few more Alabama authors that need a page, namely Gustav Hasford & Augusta Evans Wilson, whom had no page up until a few months ago.
Featured status (thanks for the mention of the possibility, it made my day!) was always the goal I had in mind for the bio, as it might grant William March's work some needed exposure. Honestly though, if I had written something more topical, it would have been a disservice to March's life.
Concerning the book covers, March's The looking Glass has been out of print since 1955. Company K is still copyrighted by the University of Alabama Press and his estate. I would be willing to contact the estate to get permission though, as they are quite accessible.
Thanks again (sincerely), I always look forward to your input - Diarmada 16:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Awesome, I really appreciate the help, as I know you have very little spare time. About the image use, I spent weeks and weeks trying to locate and finally get in touch with the photographer Jerry Bauer over an image of Joseph Heller. After getting written permission to use the image, it still was not enough...although it was a good experience talking with someone so accomplished, all the work was for naught. Thanks again, if ever you need any help with anything or see a hole to be plugged, let me know. - Diarmada 00:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey AUPilot; OTduff and myself could use a little assistance with protecting David Irons from a persistant IP vandal who insists on inserting defamatory POV statements into the article. If you check the history you'll see it's a Bellsouth.net (dialup?) subscriber with a constantly changing IP, so no hope of blocking by address. I'm afraid it's going to take a semi-protect and hope he gives up and goes away when he can't easily continue his attack. Thanks in advance for the help. AUTiger ʃ talk/ work 06:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I've had this on the project talk page for a while, but since you seem to know what you're doing (unlike me), I'd like to ask you. I have created a ton of new userboxes, and they are all on the new userboxes page. However, should I also put them on the main userboxes category pages (example: my Star Trek userboxes under TV Shows (media) or under Sci-fi) or not?
Thank you for your time,
--
FastLizard4 (
Talk|
Contribs)
02:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I figured he or another user would have done this. I'm not gonna bother reverting him since I don't want to get involved with him or a "Prince Zarbon" again. Is full protection a good idea right about now? Lord Sesshomaru
The current President of Auburn University is still President Ed Richardson, not Dr. Jay Gogue as shown in the Current Directors section. Jay Gogue will be taking over sometime in July. Since it is semi-protected, I cannot make any changes, and prior edits were undone.
mat1583 3:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
alledgedly, when did i vandalize the article on George Bush? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Llama554 ( talk • contribs) 22:04, 31 May 2007
Looks fine to me. Judging by the current way the AfD discussion is going and my "delete unless" comment there's not much point me changing anything anyway. Good job on the article. One Night In Hackney 303 02:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, so what is your requirement then. When add a request to the talk page and how long do I wait, if no one responds, before I can add the link? And if there's is a discussion, who decides if it gets added? Also, apparently you're an administrator? How do I tell that you are and that you have the power to do what you threatened? - Micahburnett 04:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert on my User Talk page. FlowerpotmaN ( t · c) 22:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey AuburnPilot/Archive 2. See your an admin and all, I was wondering if you could help me. About 5 months ago (January acutally) I created an article named Swiss-Canadian War. It was deleted at this afd: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swiss-canadian war. I heard that all deleted articles are stored somewhere, and I was wondering if you could copy and paste the article into my subpage at: user:pahomeboy1992/swiss-canadian war. Thank you! -- Pahomeboy1992 02:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I've added a proposed compromise phrase in the talk of George W Bush about the whole election. Read and tell me if a different phrase should be used Mrld 12:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, AuburnPilot, for the welcome! Looks like this is a very weloming group! :) Aleta 18:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps it would have been best not to use the rollback button when dealing with something that is not vandalism [18]. Anyway, I have opened a discussion at the article's talk page, so please make any comments there. Nishkid64 ( talk) 19:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Bush is evil like Adolf Hitler though, unless of course you're a republican who thinks he's God. Citikiwi 20:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out on the "Movement to impeach Bush" article. I'm new here as well but I'm trying to be a team player. Barnstormer was rewriting the entire lead of the article and making it much longer, repeating information that had already been included farther down in what was already an extremely long article. He was also removing the only criticism of the movement, returning the article to its previous pro-impeachment bias. Good work. FreedomAintFree 06:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Hail fellow well met! Long time no see. As you're well aware, you're my go-to guy when I want a level/trusted opinion on Wikimatters. If you have the time (and don't mind helping me see things objectively), please take a look at this thread and let me know what you think of the situation. Also, please note I'm not "running to AuburnPilot" or whining... You've been my trusted looking glass for much longer than you've been an admin. :-) Thanks! / Blaxthos 17:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.
Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. Yechiel Man 21:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Pilot, could you take a look at this request I made of Johntex who seems to be on a vacation and help out? Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks and WDE! AUTiger ʃ talk/ work 00:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh man, for a second I thought you were acussing me of being a vandal. That was very funny. Thanks -- Mr.crabby (Talk) 02:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)