![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
- FASTILY (TALK) 22:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Jesus Taught Me. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesus Taught Me (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
For using common sense and declining the speedy on Bernd Teo Matthias. I will re-write it, and in the mean time, have a cookie:
Acather96 has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Acather96 ( talk) 06:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
There is no consensus in a mob. I appreciate your endeavour in doing what you perceive is best for Wikipedia but representing me as a problem is not the truth. The problem is heavy handed administrators who forget their charge and not the editors who qualitatively improve articles. Very rarely are my edits contentious and as they 99% of the time involve citations I have demonstrably qualitatively improved the project. Out of 20,000 edits there have not been many if any significant conflicts with editors that have not been resolved. I may continue editing Wikipedia on the odd occasion to fix a spelling error or provide a linkage but apart from that my input will cease. You and the others in question have made it clear that my edits are not valued. Even more importantly, I have completed what I intended to do. Being associated with a cult by the Wikipedia community has fueled my resolve to discontinue editing. I wish you the best. B9 hummingbird hovering ( talk • contribs) 11:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC) P.S. As I just had a difference of opinion in regards to grammar as I write in Traditional or Formal English Grammar and speak in received pronunciation (which should really be the Received Pronunciation) which is very different to the English speech variety of the majority of English Wikimedians and as Wikipedia servers are in America, I will discontinue all editing.
Just to let you know the user you blocked for making up tons of fake info on Transformers pages User talk:24.207.226.65 is back and already vandalized 2 pages. I reverted them. Mathewignash ( talk) 18:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the contact Beeblebrox. The reason I marked it as a test page, after it was first marked under A7 Bio, was the fact that they'd included the "Example.jpg" image, and it appeared to me from first glance, since I didn't have a damn clue what it said, to be someone doing the old "can I really edit this?" thing. Since I now know otherwise, thanks for letting me know, just making sure you understood why I tagged it the way I did - it wasn't simply because I didn't understand it. To me, it genuinely looked like someone testing stuff. BarkingFish Talk to me | My contributions 17:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I actually did read that the block reason stated sockpuppetry, but the probability is hardly ever 100%, which is why I had commented. mechamind 9 0 19:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
How do I report a problem with an article to get more outside neutral attention on it?
You know that article you deleted, the one which someone had obviously posted as an attempt to spam Wikipedia, " The Diet Delusion", the author's article is even worse but it had references so I tried to clean it up instead of marking it for deletion - however when I did that, I got repeatedly reverted and calling my edits vandalism and "warning" me by another user who seems to have been making changes to keep it to a promotional version over a while [1] [2] [3] ... as well as an IP editor who uses the exact same edit summary when changing it back to their version... Talk:Gary Taubes#Deletion_of_Relevant_Material
Here is the cleaned up version in an attempt to make it actually factual rather than full of weasel word promotion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gary_Taubes&oldid=362684635
Here is the version he/they are trying to push: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gary_Taubes&oldid=362698924 - which seems to be more about helping to sell books rather than neutral factual coverage, deliberately bigging up physical science awards as though they are relevant to nutritional biology just before going on about books, it's incredibly misleading and just a total advertisement, I can't believe people try to protect people who do this crap. -- 94.193.135.203 ( talk) 11:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Please stop deleting the Other characters liked Jack O'Lantern (who appears in Prison Cutscene, the fire headed guy) & the playable characters who appears as bosses in the other version liked: Common Bosses: Deadpool (PS3/360 in Washigton, he's not a boss in PS2/PSP/Wii) Green Goblin (Boss to any versions) Penance (PS3/360 in Rykers Island) Thor (PS2/PSP/Wii in Storm Mission) Venom (helping Green Goblin) Anti-Registration Bosses: Agent Madrox (it is Multiple Man, but it describe as Agent Madrox, Multiple Man's Clone in PS2/PSP/Wii version) Iron Man Mr. Fantastic Ms. Marvel (PS2/PSP/Wii in HYDRA Base) Songbird (PS3/360 in NYC City) Pro-Registration Bosses: Captain America Daredevil (PS2/PSP/Wii in HYDRA Base) Iron Fist (PS3/360 back up Captain America) Luke Cage
+ there's a Iron Fist Texture that hidden on MUA2 Disc.
Note: Blaw of the Marvel Mods merely made sure:
a) the tattoo was aligned, in 3ds max it wasn't really aligned that well.. b) the green skin used MUA2 Wii's Iron Fist color. No there's no MUA2 Iron Fist model, but the sneaky bastards at N-Space left a file (hud head? dunno) which contained an Iron Fist texture. For the red version, I just applied the most bright red color I could get c) the mask and sash"belt" look as if they are what they are, instead of just a skin (shadowy effects for the win). d) the top of the body at the collar is correctly aligned so there won't be any green or red where Daniel's skin is supposed to be. Purpose was to make the collar look better.
It's been a long time since I made this one, and I happened to take a look at it and adjust it for release. The collar has been smoothened, because it became blocky when I imported it (I recently found new settings for a smoother import, but like I said this one has been made a while back).
I hope you and Iammingy are satisfied with the result!
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6476/naamloos1o.jpg http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6476/naamloos1o.jpg
If you don't play both PS3/360 + PS2/PSP/Wii or watch the cutscene/gameplay & see what's differents & what's same. You gonna feel sorry for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottKazama ( talk • contribs) 12:06, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
To be honest, I don't know -- I can only assume one of two things: 1) This was meant for me, and it was posted to your talk page by accident, or 2) ScottKazama feels this needs to be escalated to an admin. English is not his first language, though he can speak it, so this may be the case. As I'm involved with the page in question ( Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2) I should probably let you see what he needs. If he meant to put it on my page I can handle it from there. Thanks much. -- Teancum ( talk) 17:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion of dispute resolution.
Meanwhile Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uyghur guest houses suspected of ties to islamist militancy has been closed -- as "no consensus". I'd like your opinion on whether it would be useful and defensible for Uyghur guest house, Jalalabad and Uighur guest house, Pakistan to redirect there. If you agree that it would be useful and defensible I'd appreciate your opinion on what my next step should be.
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 18:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Check out a dump of the last 50 edits from 95.79.0.0/19 here.
There are no good-faith edits from that range since 6 March. How about a three-month block of the range (anon only)? I'll enact that block if no one sees a problem with it. EdJohnston ( talk) 19:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Cheers, Jack Merridew 19:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
User:East of Borschov must have seen the Village Pump policy discussion. He helped me at least indirectly, because one Wikipedia article he told me about had a template that said exactly what I needed to know--at least as far as German Wikipedia is concerned.
I finally said what I needed to say on Talk:Voestalpine, but I want you to trust me. It's worthwhile and important to the project, but I just have some trouble saying it in a way you can understand. It all makes perfect sense to me, so I don't know what the problem is. Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
The discussion here was directed over the the ANI board but the link isn't direct. I've been away so would you please link me there and maybe reflect that in the closed discussion so anyone can follow the train of debate? Thankyou. Alatari ( talk) 08:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
That link has nothing to do with the NPOV across articles discussion. Where is that link? Thanks! Alatari ( talk) 20:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC) Really that was what confused me. What does ANI board have to do with a discussion of a theoretical change to NPOV and WP:BIAS? I think there was some confusion and that section closed by mistake. How do I get the locked border and message removed from that discussion? Alatari ( talk) 20:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou Mr two headed alien. Alatari ( talk) 17:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi do you know where I could find the deletion discussion for The Diet Delusion. I thought I would point this editor to it [ [5]]. Many thanks. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 19:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
I thought you locking Twyfords/Jake out of his own talk page was a little harsh, but whatevs. I wondered if you'd noticed that you and Bwilkins are going in entirely different directions with MC Jake. Şłџğģő 00:27, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
I note your request on my talk page; apologies for any problems I have caused you. I actually was not aware that i had, with any meaningful frequency, put unblocks on hold for discussion. But I am, of course, fully aware of the {{ unblock on hold}} template, and will take care to use it in future. Thank you for pointing out my omission. That was not sarcastic, I meant it. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 18:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello Beeblebox. Since you were involved in the mess with User:Keegscee, I'm listing you as such in an ArbCom request. Your input is desired. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 20:54, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
My apologies for the incorrect speedy deletion nomination. This was a mistake on my part and I assure you it will not happen again. fair ♫ talk to me 19:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Then that would mean the block of 63.226.45.178 should probably include "anon-only, autoblock enabled (if it was already inferred that an autoblock would be applied to the IP address)". You have not yet posted a statement confirming sockpuppetry. mechamind 9 0 20:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
The page is addressed to users who should be given a just one second chance, and I'm having trouble imaging a situation where a user who has been blocked for "blatantly defamatory attacks" would ever meet that definition. I'm not going to revert because I doubt having this listed or not on that backwater page will have much affect, either way, but these are the worst kind of users who deserve a one way forced exit, and it is a terrible idea to test a user's proclivity to continue when the chance you are taking—that further defamation will occur—is the most likely way to put Wikipedia in harm's way.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 03:51, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Dude ... am I on drugs? When we moved to the new skin, I seem to have lost my "warn" tab. I've looked everywhere ... it was damned handy, especially with the block notices now in it. ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Just noticed your comment over on 45g's talk page. I disagree with you about whether or not the removal of block notices is allowed. WP:BLANKING doesn't list them as an exception, and pretty much every discussion I've read and/or participated in on the topic has ended with the consensus being that removal of the notice itself is fine. -- Onorem ♠ Dil 13:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, this is Smartse. I asked to be blocked til July 1st but I'm not quite sure why because my exams are done now. Any chance that you could unblock me? Cheers 86.7.19.159 ( talk) 10:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
You asked why you lost. I have some ideas. However, I don't know how to e-mail you. I'm a bit of an idiot. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 17:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I was alerted to this from Wikipedia:Administrator review/King of Hearts. The reason I blocked him so quickly was not just because of spam/advertising, but also for sockpuppetry; it is very likely that Madeinusacertified is the same user. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
The reason why I first got really upset was being discussed in the same item as "cults". Which was unfounded and unsubstantiated and there has been no apology. B9 hummingbird hovering ( talk • contribs) 13:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Aye, that was pretty much what I thought. I figured since I'd been hasty enough to !vote, then revert myself, I should take some time to consider. It does look to me to be very poor - saying nothing, then commenting once it's obvious the next step is the community saying "screw the RfC, let's just block". TFOWR idle vapourings of a mind diseased 17:44, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Please have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReVamp; somehow this article has no comments except for first-time commenters, and established editors like you are nowhere to be found. I don't think there's a chance in the world this band is notable right now; maybe I'm wrong, but I would at least like some "valid" votes at this AFD. Thanks. Note, you are the third (and final) editor who I've notified about this. I just wanted some other eyes, because the possible SOCK votes are discouraging. — Timneu22 · talk 19:28, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi you were kind enough to help me with the addition of the creative commons license that I need to add to my web pages in order to port that information over to Wikipedia, it was July 17th and 18th 09. I have added a note to the articles that simply states
My original pages had been updated so I then updated wikipedia ran out of room and openned another creative commons site to port link to my first. Regrettably another user has got the impression that I have mirrored wikipedia rather than allowed my site to go to creative commons on wikipedia. I don't know if you will recall my site was published in 1996 anf later formed the a number of wikipedia articles about Rivington. Would it be a good idea do think if you were to recall the conversations from logs.
Thank you for unblocking me. You have at least partially restored my faith in the administrators here. Hopefully more will start using some sort of basic standards for evidence, as on the receiving end, that was a very unpleasant sequence of events. WavePart ( talk) 08:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Many readers, with years of experience in reading Encyclopædia Britannica, might be frustrated when coming to Wikipedia and seeing the differences. I have recommended to also consider Scholarpedia, for users who expected the traditional expert essays that Britannica has contained for decades. Of course, some of those EB essays contained rather shocking opinions, but it was better to allow experts the freedom of over-analyzing the facts, rather than not allow experts to offer perspective in complex fields, such as Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, which maintained a standard format for over 2,600 years. Numerous scholars have had trouble with Wikipedia, so perhaps some changes can be made to avoid future disputes, such as happened with B9. I am sorry that you had so much trouble in confronting his style, which may have resulted from him knowing too much about the Britannica treatises and less about WP:MOS. As long as your "suffering" leads to better practices in the future, consider it not just an isolated incident that seemed to waste your limited time now. Again, perhaps the first response should be to mention "Scholarpedia" if a similar confrontation arises. I have predicted WP to total over 9 million articles before reaching a " steady state" where deletions offset new articles, perhaps in year 2045 (see: WP:Modelling Wikipedia extended growth), so there is a lot of time to adapt and expand our policies here. I and other people are recommending huge changes in Wikipedia structure, so beware "This isn't (yet) your grandchildren's WP". Certainly, we will also see "auto-translators" between article languages, so the future is still wide open. - Wikid77 ( talk) 17:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for slowing things down on this page. I would appreciate advice on how to proceed. Should the NPOV issues be primarily discussed on the article talk page or one of the noticeboards? Thanks! Jminthorne ( talk) 00:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I was a bit offended by your comments about me. Gobbleswoggler ( talk) 19:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
What do you mean by a topic ban? Gobbleswoggler ( talk) 16:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
FYI if you are including a URL in a field of a template, you need to include 1= unless there's any more specific name. Best, ╟─ Treasury Tag► UK EYES ONLY─╢ 17:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I suppose the block reason could have been clearer; but the user did violate BLP re: Chuck Lorre in the edits that resulted in their level 1 and 2 warnings here and here. The level 3 and 4 warnings were related to general POV disruptiveness. The block reason should have been a different one. I'm all for giving second chances where a user has some evidence of positive contributions outside of those that resulted in a block; but this unblock seems to be more due to a technicality rather than evidence of the user changing their behavior. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 21:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
— Tanvir 08:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Category:Administrators willing to consider requests for self blocking, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. PleaseStand (talk) 02:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm New wiki, so my apologies in advance if I'm contacting you the wrong...a page I recently created under Jamilah B. Creekmur was deleted because of "ambiguous" promotion and copyright infringement. I just edited the entire bio on Jamilah by compiling information from reliable sources, and took out what I feel was biased information. However, I'm open to you suggestion on what I may have left in and need to take out. I'm learning the process, and would appreciate your feedback, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suganique ( talk • contribs) 23:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Do not delete Jack O'Lantern. He makes cameo in Ryker's Island. ScottKazama ( talk) 16:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv68t3eag2s
As well concept art on the games ScottKazama ( talk) 16:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
TFOWR 21:41, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Well I didn't know someone could really unblock anybody, you see! I thought they were just threats! Mayurvg ( talk) 17:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
An Arbitration request in which you are involved has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Workshop.
Additionally, please note that for this case specific procedural guidelines have been stipulated; if you have any questions please ask. The full outline is listed on the Evidence and Workshop pages, but please adhere to the basics:
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 00:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
How can i get in touch with you abut unprotecting a page title that you protected for "repeatedly recreated". I am wanting to create a legitimate wiki entry for someone of the same name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookmark this ( talk • contribs) 01:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I did make a draft. It's here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bookmark_this Then another editor almost deleted it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookmark this ( talk • contribs) 01:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it looks like the page I am trying to create was tried by someone 4 years ago. I found a deletion log. I think the person I did the article about is definitely notable now. There is another person with the same name that is the subject of quite a bit of ire on the interntet and I assumed that was what the "repeatedly recreated" was about. Can you let me know if/when you will be able to unlock it? Cheers Bookmark this ( talk) 12:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your effort to rewrite the Gundala (film) that I AfD-ed. Bennylin ( talk) 02:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 ( talk) 14:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This is to Beeblebrox and HJMitchell. A while back we spent lots of time on a new user and his peculiar timestamp username. It probably added up to several user-hours spent. That user has since not made any edits. This is not a unique case. Many follow this same pattern ending in a waste of time for all. I am watching one unfold now and it is really annoying me. Do you have any recommendations on a clever way to handle these kinds of new users? Please drop me a line on my talk page if you have any thoughts. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 01:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Beeblebrox and sorry for bothering you; I see you've declined
User:Theirrulez's request for unblock on the basis that it's an ARBCOM sanction and so an admin cannot lift it. Well, to make a long story short, my curiosity is: do arbitrary sanctions imposed by an admin in accordance with an ARBCOM ruling have to go through the arbcom-l mailing list? From your answer there, I gather they do, but I wanted to make sure, so a "yes" will suffice. ;) It's just that I find it a bit puzzling that any admin can impose such a sanction and, yet, only Arbcom can lift it
Thanks for your attention.
Salvio (
Let's talk 'bout it!)
10:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am requesting that you please unlock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Baillie so that we may enter new content to reflect the fact that he is now running for political office. Thank you very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Votebaillie ( talk • contribs) 13:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm requesting you undelete New Testament Christian Churches of America, Inc., as there are now sources for the article. Becritical ( talk) 18:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Please remember to sign the close so everyone can tell in retrospect who closed, and log the ban at Wikipedia:List of banned users.
Thanks!
Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 21:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You were extremely helpful in the Zubaty affair, and I thought your expertise would be helpful in the current discussion at Toyota Camry Hybrid regarding whether to merge the article with the larger Camry article. I have stepped back for a few days of cool-down period, but I would like to see what cooler, neutral heads might have to say regarding the current debate. Note that I am not asking you as a subject-matter expert, but rather as a Wikipedia rules expert. Many thanks. Ebikeguy ( talk) 16:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Beeblebrox , how are you?
I am also involved in this discussion and I was quite annoyed that Mariordo had unfairly skewed the results by contacting five users that would support his point-of-view by personally contacting all of them and unfairly canvassing votes via their user talk pages: [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Canvassing votes is against policy, please see: Wikipedia:Consensus#Improper consensus-building.
I look forward to your reply. Kind Regards. OSX ( talk • contributions) 00:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
People are allowed to create user names containing the word pimp? What about whore? Everard Proudfoot ( talk) 21:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I had just archived earlier discussion, including the sections you deleted, when I edit-conflicted with you. If you feel strongly about pulling them out of the archive, I won't object. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 16:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
I was going to say "As much as we might appreciate Sopranos-style dealing with problem editors, we cannot condone such activity. Since we cannot find the proof in the Hudson River, we will have to pass for now" ;-) ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
How is the consensus to delete? CTJF83 pride 01:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear administrator, Kindly take a look at my email. -- DawnOfTheBlood ( talk) 06:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
-- ja _ 62 14:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Re. 4o4aestudiografico ( talk · contribs) UAA end of here
(Hard to discuss UAA matters, as the postings to the page are so quickly archived)
OK, thanks, I guess it seemed obvious / common sense to me, not to others; I understand; I'll try to be more circumspect in reporting in the future. I'm actually pleased that you are so careful to AGF in UAA; I wish same happened in other areas - see Wikipedia_talk:Request_an_account/Guide#AGF! Chzz ► 17:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
This user has requested an unblock and it seems reasonable to me. I would like to unblock them so they can request a username change, but wanted to ask you first as the blocking admin. TN X Man 18:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
There is an ongoing issue with the Holmes a Court articles, it's OTRS stuff but you can email me if you want some more information. Guy ( Help!) 09:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
In case you weren't aware, this user went under a previous name; Ibaranoff24 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · rfcu · SPI · cuwiki). This user.. although I can't remember what specific month, was indef blocked for personal attacks, edit warring, and most of all, abuse of alternate accounts. He had about 2 other alternate accounts, and 20+ IP socks. He denied and lied until he was blue in the face, and when the indef was imposed, he finally admitted to the block evasion.
He was finally unblocked when he admitted to the socking, and promised to stick to one account, and not edit war or personally attack.
Now he's changed his username to Sugar Bear, and he's back to doing the same things that originally got him the indef in the first place. Edit warring, and socking.
Taking the advice of Gwen Gale, the admin who originally indef blocked, and subsequently unblocked, indef isn't long enough. I therefore petition you to increase the block length to at least 3 months, given he's violated his original terms of unblocking.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 00:50, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
you locked one of my pages. can you write the things I wrote on the talk page onto the main page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nefesf9 ( talk • contribs) 17:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Beeblebrox. You userfied Donna Tubbs to User:Ctjf83/Donna Tubbs a few days ago, and I have now deleted User:Ctjf83/Donna Tubbs per Ctjf83's request. My question is, does the history of User:Ctjf83/Donna Tubbs need to be moved back to Donna Tubbs? Regards, Theleftorium (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Concerns regarding BrownHairedGirl. Thank you. Jeni ( talk) 00:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
My bad here; I confused two Lithuanian politicians with the same surname but different first names. Not really excusable; my apologies. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 18:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Ban of Sugar Bear/Ibaranoff24. Thank you.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 00:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Please could you restore the following deletion:
19:38, 20 June 2010 Beeblebrox (talk | contribs) deleted "Turnkey Consulting" (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
This is a genuine company and the posting was informational. I have just signed in to edit and update this with some links to relevant content and will also highlight more on the subjects of SAP Security and GRC, which will hopefully address your concerns.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.85.170 ( talk) 11:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Checker Fred came back as "unrelated" in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Simulation12/Archive#Report_date_January_28_2010.2C_00:17_.28UTC.29 . Why did you block him anyway? He has an unblock request pending, and if this was just a slip, you should probably deal with it.— Kww( talk) 12:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar | |
This is to say thanks for using your admin powers to block me and ignoring my request to be unblocked, you helped me make sure I got one of these and not one of these. It was very much appreciated. Smartse ( talk) 20:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC) |
Sorry about that, I tried inserting the page in the template and looked at the protocol how to do it but it appeared to make no difference. That article was a recreation of this page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_West 77.103.80.23 ( talk) 21:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the warm welcome and the quick tips. Raisescale ( talk) 07:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of 1984 ghallooghaaraa. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. You closed this AFD as No Consensus, then a day later another administrator just deleted it. Dream Focus 08:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
-- White Shadows There goes another day 17:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() | Warning! This user functions at a sub-optimal level before their morning coffee. |
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
It's a big one! You should put it on your mantle.-- White Shadows There goes another day 18:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I am trying to get a admin to review claims that I personally attacked someone at ani right now. I'm trying to have a admin review these attacks then comment as to the validity as I'm sure once one does they will see I have been reasonable and calm throughout. Please block me if I have violated a personal attack policy. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 16:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
User:Hm2k/Hell In A Bucket Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 16:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Being the suspicious person I am, I wanted you to notice that this user is inexplicably restoring the user pages of blocked sockpuppets, including CheckerFred whom you recently blocked. This user's latest contributions seem odd. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 01:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
You closed my discussion of systemic bias and racism in Wikipedia's official naming policies... why? You realize that this is simply proving my contention that Wikipedia's bias is both institutional and effectively unchangable, right? Not only can the bias not be changed, it can't even be discussed. SmashTheState ( talk) 15:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
...to wipe out my unblock review here? -- jpgordon ::==( o ) 16:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Please check the[request for reviewer page. Ratinator· Talk 18:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
FYI: Ratinator finally confessed
[15]. So the account was not compromised and it was him all along. Seems pretty clear that this is a really young kid. Anyway, I am not sure if this warrants changing the block settings from indef to a specific expiration time, but I wanted to let you know anyway.
Nsk92 (
talk)
20:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Please see User talk:Alcoa#Your attention needed at WP:CHU and advise. – xeno talk 19:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Beeblebrox. Ratinator's block will expire in about an hour or so, and I am hoping that he learned something from this episode and will continue to do good work on WikiProject Articles for Creation. However, I noted that the new user CuteMice had requested the rollback tool twice today (not including an additional attempt that he/she apparently self-reverted). Then I noted that CuteMice has also self-identified as a member of WikiProject Articles for Creation, and that the user's signature is essentially the same as Ratinator's sig. Given the similarity in behavior and appearance between these users, it occurs to me that Ratinator may be trying to evade his block (which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, given that there's so little time left on it), so I thought I should probably bring it to your attention since you were the admin who originally issued the block. Sorry if this ends up being a waste of your time. Regards, • Cinch Bug • 19:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Duchamps comb has repeatedly removed sourced material from Rand Paul without discussion, and then began disrupting Paul's talk page by introducing misleading quotes. Duchamps posted this on the talk page:
In reality, the sentence said:
Additionally, the source is a document that Rand Paul penned himself! When asked to cease the removal of sourced information in the article without discussion, Duchamps declined. As you've dealt with Duchamps previously, regarding similar actions, I believe this situation would benefit from your help. The Original Wikipedian ( talk) 19:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't consider it edit warring if you felt the {{
Retired}}
tags were inappropriate and removed them. I'd arrived at CuteMice by way of a "please delete my talkpage" speedy request (which I declined, obviously) and have no interest in the user or the tags either way.
TFOWR
23:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for stopping by at the Rand Paul talk page. I was wondering if you might expand further at to the references that The Original Wikipedian is trying to add. More specifically can you state if they are RS or not. Thank you for your valuable time.-- Ducha mps_ comb MFA 00:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
- FASTILY (TALK) 22:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Jesus Taught Me. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesus Taught Me (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
For using common sense and declining the speedy on Bernd Teo Matthias. I will re-write it, and in the mean time, have a cookie:
Acather96 has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Acather96 ( talk) 06:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
There is no consensus in a mob. I appreciate your endeavour in doing what you perceive is best for Wikipedia but representing me as a problem is not the truth. The problem is heavy handed administrators who forget their charge and not the editors who qualitatively improve articles. Very rarely are my edits contentious and as they 99% of the time involve citations I have demonstrably qualitatively improved the project. Out of 20,000 edits there have not been many if any significant conflicts with editors that have not been resolved. I may continue editing Wikipedia on the odd occasion to fix a spelling error or provide a linkage but apart from that my input will cease. You and the others in question have made it clear that my edits are not valued. Even more importantly, I have completed what I intended to do. Being associated with a cult by the Wikipedia community has fueled my resolve to discontinue editing. I wish you the best. B9 hummingbird hovering ( talk • contribs) 11:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC) P.S. As I just had a difference of opinion in regards to grammar as I write in Traditional or Formal English Grammar and speak in received pronunciation (which should really be the Received Pronunciation) which is very different to the English speech variety of the majority of English Wikimedians and as Wikipedia servers are in America, I will discontinue all editing.
Just to let you know the user you blocked for making up tons of fake info on Transformers pages User talk:24.207.226.65 is back and already vandalized 2 pages. I reverted them. Mathewignash ( talk) 18:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the contact Beeblebrox. The reason I marked it as a test page, after it was first marked under A7 Bio, was the fact that they'd included the "Example.jpg" image, and it appeared to me from first glance, since I didn't have a damn clue what it said, to be someone doing the old "can I really edit this?" thing. Since I now know otherwise, thanks for letting me know, just making sure you understood why I tagged it the way I did - it wasn't simply because I didn't understand it. To me, it genuinely looked like someone testing stuff. BarkingFish Talk to me | My contributions 17:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I actually did read that the block reason stated sockpuppetry, but the probability is hardly ever 100%, which is why I had commented. mechamind 9 0 19:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
How do I report a problem with an article to get more outside neutral attention on it?
You know that article you deleted, the one which someone had obviously posted as an attempt to spam Wikipedia, " The Diet Delusion", the author's article is even worse but it had references so I tried to clean it up instead of marking it for deletion - however when I did that, I got repeatedly reverted and calling my edits vandalism and "warning" me by another user who seems to have been making changes to keep it to a promotional version over a while [1] [2] [3] ... as well as an IP editor who uses the exact same edit summary when changing it back to their version... Talk:Gary Taubes#Deletion_of_Relevant_Material
Here is the cleaned up version in an attempt to make it actually factual rather than full of weasel word promotion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gary_Taubes&oldid=362684635
Here is the version he/they are trying to push: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gary_Taubes&oldid=362698924 - which seems to be more about helping to sell books rather than neutral factual coverage, deliberately bigging up physical science awards as though they are relevant to nutritional biology just before going on about books, it's incredibly misleading and just a total advertisement, I can't believe people try to protect people who do this crap. -- 94.193.135.203 ( talk) 11:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Please stop deleting the Other characters liked Jack O'Lantern (who appears in Prison Cutscene, the fire headed guy) & the playable characters who appears as bosses in the other version liked: Common Bosses: Deadpool (PS3/360 in Washigton, he's not a boss in PS2/PSP/Wii) Green Goblin (Boss to any versions) Penance (PS3/360 in Rykers Island) Thor (PS2/PSP/Wii in Storm Mission) Venom (helping Green Goblin) Anti-Registration Bosses: Agent Madrox (it is Multiple Man, but it describe as Agent Madrox, Multiple Man's Clone in PS2/PSP/Wii version) Iron Man Mr. Fantastic Ms. Marvel (PS2/PSP/Wii in HYDRA Base) Songbird (PS3/360 in NYC City) Pro-Registration Bosses: Captain America Daredevil (PS2/PSP/Wii in HYDRA Base) Iron Fist (PS3/360 back up Captain America) Luke Cage
+ there's a Iron Fist Texture that hidden on MUA2 Disc.
Note: Blaw of the Marvel Mods merely made sure:
a) the tattoo was aligned, in 3ds max it wasn't really aligned that well.. b) the green skin used MUA2 Wii's Iron Fist color. No there's no MUA2 Iron Fist model, but the sneaky bastards at N-Space left a file (hud head? dunno) which contained an Iron Fist texture. For the red version, I just applied the most bright red color I could get c) the mask and sash"belt" look as if they are what they are, instead of just a skin (shadowy effects for the win). d) the top of the body at the collar is correctly aligned so there won't be any green or red where Daniel's skin is supposed to be. Purpose was to make the collar look better.
It's been a long time since I made this one, and I happened to take a look at it and adjust it for release. The collar has been smoothened, because it became blocky when I imported it (I recently found new settings for a smoother import, but like I said this one has been made a while back).
I hope you and Iammingy are satisfied with the result!
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6476/naamloos1o.jpg http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6476/naamloos1o.jpg
If you don't play both PS3/360 + PS2/PSP/Wii or watch the cutscene/gameplay & see what's differents & what's same. You gonna feel sorry for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottKazama ( talk • contribs) 12:06, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
To be honest, I don't know -- I can only assume one of two things: 1) This was meant for me, and it was posted to your talk page by accident, or 2) ScottKazama feels this needs to be escalated to an admin. English is not his first language, though he can speak it, so this may be the case. As I'm involved with the page in question ( Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2) I should probably let you see what he needs. If he meant to put it on my page I can handle it from there. Thanks much. -- Teancum ( talk) 17:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion of dispute resolution.
Meanwhile Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uyghur guest houses suspected of ties to islamist militancy has been closed -- as "no consensus". I'd like your opinion on whether it would be useful and defensible for Uyghur guest house, Jalalabad and Uighur guest house, Pakistan to redirect there. If you agree that it would be useful and defensible I'd appreciate your opinion on what my next step should be.
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 18:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Check out a dump of the last 50 edits from 95.79.0.0/19 here.
There are no good-faith edits from that range since 6 March. How about a three-month block of the range (anon only)? I'll enact that block if no one sees a problem with it. EdJohnston ( talk) 19:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Cheers, Jack Merridew 19:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
User:East of Borschov must have seen the Village Pump policy discussion. He helped me at least indirectly, because one Wikipedia article he told me about had a template that said exactly what I needed to know--at least as far as German Wikipedia is concerned.
I finally said what I needed to say on Talk:Voestalpine, but I want you to trust me. It's worthwhile and important to the project, but I just have some trouble saying it in a way you can understand. It all makes perfect sense to me, so I don't know what the problem is. Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
The discussion here was directed over the the ANI board but the link isn't direct. I've been away so would you please link me there and maybe reflect that in the closed discussion so anyone can follow the train of debate? Thankyou. Alatari ( talk) 08:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
That link has nothing to do with the NPOV across articles discussion. Where is that link? Thanks! Alatari ( talk) 20:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC) Really that was what confused me. What does ANI board have to do with a discussion of a theoretical change to NPOV and WP:BIAS? I think there was some confusion and that section closed by mistake. How do I get the locked border and message removed from that discussion? Alatari ( talk) 20:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Thankyou Mr two headed alien. Alatari ( talk) 17:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi do you know where I could find the deletion discussion for The Diet Delusion. I thought I would point this editor to it [ [5]]. Many thanks. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 19:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
I thought you locking Twyfords/Jake out of his own talk page was a little harsh, but whatevs. I wondered if you'd noticed that you and Bwilkins are going in entirely different directions with MC Jake. Şłџğģő 00:27, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
I note your request on my talk page; apologies for any problems I have caused you. I actually was not aware that i had, with any meaningful frequency, put unblocks on hold for discussion. But I am, of course, fully aware of the {{ unblock on hold}} template, and will take care to use it in future. Thank you for pointing out my omission. That was not sarcastic, I meant it. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 18:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello Beeblebox. Since you were involved in the mess with User:Keegscee, I'm listing you as such in an ArbCom request. Your input is desired. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 20:54, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
My apologies for the incorrect speedy deletion nomination. This was a mistake on my part and I assure you it will not happen again. fair ♫ talk to me 19:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Then that would mean the block of 63.226.45.178 should probably include "anon-only, autoblock enabled (if it was already inferred that an autoblock would be applied to the IP address)". You have not yet posted a statement confirming sockpuppetry. mechamind 9 0 20:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
The page is addressed to users who should be given a just one second chance, and I'm having trouble imaging a situation where a user who has been blocked for "blatantly defamatory attacks" would ever meet that definition. I'm not going to revert because I doubt having this listed or not on that backwater page will have much affect, either way, but these are the worst kind of users who deserve a one way forced exit, and it is a terrible idea to test a user's proclivity to continue when the chance you are taking—that further defamation will occur—is the most likely way to put Wikipedia in harm's way.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 03:51, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Dude ... am I on drugs? When we moved to the new skin, I seem to have lost my "warn" tab. I've looked everywhere ... it was damned handy, especially with the block notices now in it. ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Just noticed your comment over on 45g's talk page. I disagree with you about whether or not the removal of block notices is allowed. WP:BLANKING doesn't list them as an exception, and pretty much every discussion I've read and/or participated in on the topic has ended with the consensus being that removal of the notice itself is fine. -- Onorem ♠ Dil 13:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, this is Smartse. I asked to be blocked til July 1st but I'm not quite sure why because my exams are done now. Any chance that you could unblock me? Cheers 86.7.19.159 ( talk) 10:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
You asked why you lost. I have some ideas. However, I don't know how to e-mail you. I'm a bit of an idiot. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 17:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I was alerted to this from Wikipedia:Administrator review/King of Hearts. The reason I blocked him so quickly was not just because of spam/advertising, but also for sockpuppetry; it is very likely that Madeinusacertified is the same user. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
The reason why I first got really upset was being discussed in the same item as "cults". Which was unfounded and unsubstantiated and there has been no apology. B9 hummingbird hovering ( talk • contribs) 13:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Aye, that was pretty much what I thought. I figured since I'd been hasty enough to !vote, then revert myself, I should take some time to consider. It does look to me to be very poor - saying nothing, then commenting once it's obvious the next step is the community saying "screw the RfC, let's just block". TFOWR idle vapourings of a mind diseased 17:44, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Please have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReVamp; somehow this article has no comments except for first-time commenters, and established editors like you are nowhere to be found. I don't think there's a chance in the world this band is notable right now; maybe I'm wrong, but I would at least like some "valid" votes at this AFD. Thanks. Note, you are the third (and final) editor who I've notified about this. I just wanted some other eyes, because the possible SOCK votes are discouraging. — Timneu22 · talk 19:28, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi you were kind enough to help me with the addition of the creative commons license that I need to add to my web pages in order to port that information over to Wikipedia, it was July 17th and 18th 09. I have added a note to the articles that simply states
My original pages had been updated so I then updated wikipedia ran out of room and openned another creative commons site to port link to my first. Regrettably another user has got the impression that I have mirrored wikipedia rather than allowed my site to go to creative commons on wikipedia. I don't know if you will recall my site was published in 1996 anf later formed the a number of wikipedia articles about Rivington. Would it be a good idea do think if you were to recall the conversations from logs.
Thank you for unblocking me. You have at least partially restored my faith in the administrators here. Hopefully more will start using some sort of basic standards for evidence, as on the receiving end, that was a very unpleasant sequence of events. WavePart ( talk) 08:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Many readers, with years of experience in reading Encyclopædia Britannica, might be frustrated when coming to Wikipedia and seeing the differences. I have recommended to also consider Scholarpedia, for users who expected the traditional expert essays that Britannica has contained for decades. Of course, some of those EB essays contained rather shocking opinions, but it was better to allow experts the freedom of over-analyzing the facts, rather than not allow experts to offer perspective in complex fields, such as Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, which maintained a standard format for over 2,600 years. Numerous scholars have had trouble with Wikipedia, so perhaps some changes can be made to avoid future disputes, such as happened with B9. I am sorry that you had so much trouble in confronting his style, which may have resulted from him knowing too much about the Britannica treatises and less about WP:MOS. As long as your "suffering" leads to better practices in the future, consider it not just an isolated incident that seemed to waste your limited time now. Again, perhaps the first response should be to mention "Scholarpedia" if a similar confrontation arises. I have predicted WP to total over 9 million articles before reaching a " steady state" where deletions offset new articles, perhaps in year 2045 (see: WP:Modelling Wikipedia extended growth), so there is a lot of time to adapt and expand our policies here. I and other people are recommending huge changes in Wikipedia structure, so beware "This isn't (yet) your grandchildren's WP". Certainly, we will also see "auto-translators" between article languages, so the future is still wide open. - Wikid77 ( talk) 17:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for slowing things down on this page. I would appreciate advice on how to proceed. Should the NPOV issues be primarily discussed on the article talk page or one of the noticeboards? Thanks! Jminthorne ( talk) 00:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I was a bit offended by your comments about me. Gobbleswoggler ( talk) 19:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
What do you mean by a topic ban? Gobbleswoggler ( talk) 16:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
FYI if you are including a URL in a field of a template, you need to include 1= unless there's any more specific name. Best, ╟─ Treasury Tag► UK EYES ONLY─╢ 17:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I suppose the block reason could have been clearer; but the user did violate BLP re: Chuck Lorre in the edits that resulted in their level 1 and 2 warnings here and here. The level 3 and 4 warnings were related to general POV disruptiveness. The block reason should have been a different one. I'm all for giving second chances where a user has some evidence of positive contributions outside of those that resulted in a block; but this unblock seems to be more due to a technicality rather than evidence of the user changing their behavior. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 21:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
— Tanvir 08:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Category:Administrators willing to consider requests for self blocking, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. PleaseStand (talk) 02:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm New wiki, so my apologies in advance if I'm contacting you the wrong...a page I recently created under Jamilah B. Creekmur was deleted because of "ambiguous" promotion and copyright infringement. I just edited the entire bio on Jamilah by compiling information from reliable sources, and took out what I feel was biased information. However, I'm open to you suggestion on what I may have left in and need to take out. I'm learning the process, and would appreciate your feedback, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suganique ( talk • contribs) 23:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Do not delete Jack O'Lantern. He makes cameo in Ryker's Island. ScottKazama ( talk) 16:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv68t3eag2s
As well concept art on the games ScottKazama ( talk) 16:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
TFOWR 21:41, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Well I didn't know someone could really unblock anybody, you see! I thought they were just threats! Mayurvg ( talk) 17:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
An Arbitration request in which you are involved has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Workshop.
Additionally, please note that for this case specific procedural guidelines have been stipulated; if you have any questions please ask. The full outline is listed on the Evidence and Workshop pages, but please adhere to the basics:
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 00:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
How can i get in touch with you abut unprotecting a page title that you protected for "repeatedly recreated". I am wanting to create a legitimate wiki entry for someone of the same name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookmark this ( talk • contribs) 01:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I did make a draft. It's here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bookmark_this Then another editor almost deleted it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookmark this ( talk • contribs) 01:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it looks like the page I am trying to create was tried by someone 4 years ago. I found a deletion log. I think the person I did the article about is definitely notable now. There is another person with the same name that is the subject of quite a bit of ire on the interntet and I assumed that was what the "repeatedly recreated" was about. Can you let me know if/when you will be able to unlock it? Cheers Bookmark this ( talk) 12:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your effort to rewrite the Gundala (film) that I AfD-ed. Bennylin ( talk) 02:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 ( talk) 14:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This is to Beeblebrox and HJMitchell. A while back we spent lots of time on a new user and his peculiar timestamp username. It probably added up to several user-hours spent. That user has since not made any edits. This is not a unique case. Many follow this same pattern ending in a waste of time for all. I am watching one unfold now and it is really annoying me. Do you have any recommendations on a clever way to handle these kinds of new users? Please drop me a line on my talk page if you have any thoughts. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 01:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Beeblebrox and sorry for bothering you; I see you've declined
User:Theirrulez's request for unblock on the basis that it's an ARBCOM sanction and so an admin cannot lift it. Well, to make a long story short, my curiosity is: do arbitrary sanctions imposed by an admin in accordance with an ARBCOM ruling have to go through the arbcom-l mailing list? From your answer there, I gather they do, but I wanted to make sure, so a "yes" will suffice. ;) It's just that I find it a bit puzzling that any admin can impose such a sanction and, yet, only Arbcom can lift it
Thanks for your attention.
Salvio (
Let's talk 'bout it!)
10:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am requesting that you please unlock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Baillie so that we may enter new content to reflect the fact that he is now running for political office. Thank you very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Votebaillie ( talk • contribs) 13:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm requesting you undelete New Testament Christian Churches of America, Inc., as there are now sources for the article. Becritical ( talk) 18:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Please remember to sign the close so everyone can tell in retrospect who closed, and log the ban at Wikipedia:List of banned users.
Thanks!
Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 21:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You were extremely helpful in the Zubaty affair, and I thought your expertise would be helpful in the current discussion at Toyota Camry Hybrid regarding whether to merge the article with the larger Camry article. I have stepped back for a few days of cool-down period, but I would like to see what cooler, neutral heads might have to say regarding the current debate. Note that I am not asking you as a subject-matter expert, but rather as a Wikipedia rules expert. Many thanks. Ebikeguy ( talk) 16:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Beeblebrox , how are you?
I am also involved in this discussion and I was quite annoyed that Mariordo had unfairly skewed the results by contacting five users that would support his point-of-view by personally contacting all of them and unfairly canvassing votes via their user talk pages: [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Canvassing votes is against policy, please see: Wikipedia:Consensus#Improper consensus-building.
I look forward to your reply. Kind Regards. OSX ( talk • contributions) 00:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
People are allowed to create user names containing the word pimp? What about whore? Everard Proudfoot ( talk) 21:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I had just archived earlier discussion, including the sections you deleted, when I edit-conflicted with you. If you feel strongly about pulling them out of the archive, I won't object. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 16:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
I was going to say "As much as we might appreciate Sopranos-style dealing with problem editors, we cannot condone such activity. Since we cannot find the proof in the Hudson River, we will have to pass for now" ;-) ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
How is the consensus to delete? CTJF83 pride 01:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear administrator, Kindly take a look at my email. -- DawnOfTheBlood ( talk) 06:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
-- ja _ 62 14:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Re. 4o4aestudiografico ( talk · contribs) UAA end of here
(Hard to discuss UAA matters, as the postings to the page are so quickly archived)
OK, thanks, I guess it seemed obvious / common sense to me, not to others; I understand; I'll try to be more circumspect in reporting in the future. I'm actually pleased that you are so careful to AGF in UAA; I wish same happened in other areas - see Wikipedia_talk:Request_an_account/Guide#AGF! Chzz ► 17:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
This user has requested an unblock and it seems reasonable to me. I would like to unblock them so they can request a username change, but wanted to ask you first as the blocking admin. TN X Man 18:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
There is an ongoing issue with the Holmes a Court articles, it's OTRS stuff but you can email me if you want some more information. Guy ( Help!) 09:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
In case you weren't aware, this user went under a previous name; Ibaranoff24 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · rfcu · SPI · cuwiki). This user.. although I can't remember what specific month, was indef blocked for personal attacks, edit warring, and most of all, abuse of alternate accounts. He had about 2 other alternate accounts, and 20+ IP socks. He denied and lied until he was blue in the face, and when the indef was imposed, he finally admitted to the block evasion.
He was finally unblocked when he admitted to the socking, and promised to stick to one account, and not edit war or personally attack.
Now he's changed his username to Sugar Bear, and he's back to doing the same things that originally got him the indef in the first place. Edit warring, and socking.
Taking the advice of Gwen Gale, the admin who originally indef blocked, and subsequently unblocked, indef isn't long enough. I therefore petition you to increase the block length to at least 3 months, given he's violated his original terms of unblocking.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 00:50, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
you locked one of my pages. can you write the things I wrote on the talk page onto the main page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nefesf9 ( talk • contribs) 17:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Beeblebrox. You userfied Donna Tubbs to User:Ctjf83/Donna Tubbs a few days ago, and I have now deleted User:Ctjf83/Donna Tubbs per Ctjf83's request. My question is, does the history of User:Ctjf83/Donna Tubbs need to be moved back to Donna Tubbs? Regards, Theleftorium (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Concerns regarding BrownHairedGirl. Thank you. Jeni ( talk) 00:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
My bad here; I confused two Lithuanian politicians with the same surname but different first names. Not really excusable; my apologies. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 18:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Ban of Sugar Bear/Ibaranoff24. Thank you.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 00:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Please could you restore the following deletion:
19:38, 20 June 2010 Beeblebrox (talk | contribs) deleted "Turnkey Consulting" (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
This is a genuine company and the posting was informational. I have just signed in to edit and update this with some links to relevant content and will also highlight more on the subjects of SAP Security and GRC, which will hopefully address your concerns.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.85.170 ( talk) 11:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Checker Fred came back as "unrelated" in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Simulation12/Archive#Report_date_January_28_2010.2C_00:17_.28UTC.29 . Why did you block him anyway? He has an unblock request pending, and if this was just a slip, you should probably deal with it.— Kww( talk) 12:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar | |
This is to say thanks for using your admin powers to block me and ignoring my request to be unblocked, you helped me make sure I got one of these and not one of these. It was very much appreciated. Smartse ( talk) 20:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC) |
Sorry about that, I tried inserting the page in the template and looked at the protocol how to do it but it appeared to make no difference. That article was a recreation of this page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_West 77.103.80.23 ( talk) 21:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the warm welcome and the quick tips. Raisescale ( talk) 07:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of 1984 ghallooghaaraa. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. You closed this AFD as No Consensus, then a day later another administrator just deleted it. Dream Focus 08:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
-- White Shadows There goes another day 17:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() | Warning! This user functions at a sub-optimal level before their morning coffee. |
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
It's a big one! You should put it on your mantle.-- White Shadows There goes another day 18:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I am trying to get a admin to review claims that I personally attacked someone at ani right now. I'm trying to have a admin review these attacks then comment as to the validity as I'm sure once one does they will see I have been reasonable and calm throughout. Please block me if I have violated a personal attack policy. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 16:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
User:Hm2k/Hell In A Bucket Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 16:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Being the suspicious person I am, I wanted you to notice that this user is inexplicably restoring the user pages of blocked sockpuppets, including CheckerFred whom you recently blocked. This user's latest contributions seem odd. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 01:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
You closed my discussion of systemic bias and racism in Wikipedia's official naming policies... why? You realize that this is simply proving my contention that Wikipedia's bias is both institutional and effectively unchangable, right? Not only can the bias not be changed, it can't even be discussed. SmashTheState ( talk) 15:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
...to wipe out my unblock review here? -- jpgordon ::==( o ) 16:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Please check the[request for reviewer page. Ratinator· Talk 18:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
FYI: Ratinator finally confessed
[15]. So the account was not compromised and it was him all along. Seems pretty clear that this is a really young kid. Anyway, I am not sure if this warrants changing the block settings from indef to a specific expiration time, but I wanted to let you know anyway.
Nsk92 (
talk)
20:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Please see User talk:Alcoa#Your attention needed at WP:CHU and advise. – xeno talk 19:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Beeblebrox. Ratinator's block will expire in about an hour or so, and I am hoping that he learned something from this episode and will continue to do good work on WikiProject Articles for Creation. However, I noted that the new user CuteMice had requested the rollback tool twice today (not including an additional attempt that he/she apparently self-reverted). Then I noted that CuteMice has also self-identified as a member of WikiProject Articles for Creation, and that the user's signature is essentially the same as Ratinator's sig. Given the similarity in behavior and appearance between these users, it occurs to me that Ratinator may be trying to evade his block (which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, given that there's so little time left on it), so I thought I should probably bring it to your attention since you were the admin who originally issued the block. Sorry if this ends up being a waste of your time. Regards, • Cinch Bug • 19:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Duchamps comb has repeatedly removed sourced material from Rand Paul without discussion, and then began disrupting Paul's talk page by introducing misleading quotes. Duchamps posted this on the talk page:
In reality, the sentence said:
Additionally, the source is a document that Rand Paul penned himself! When asked to cease the removal of sourced information in the article without discussion, Duchamps declined. As you've dealt with Duchamps previously, regarding similar actions, I believe this situation would benefit from your help. The Original Wikipedian ( talk) 19:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't consider it edit warring if you felt the {{
Retired}}
tags were inappropriate and removed them. I'd arrived at CuteMice by way of a "please delete my talkpage" speedy request (which I declined, obviously) and have no interest in the user or the tags either way.
TFOWR
23:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for stopping by at the Rand Paul talk page. I was wondering if you might expand further at to the references that The Original Wikipedian is trying to add. More specifically can you state if they are RS or not. Thank you for your valuable time.-- Ducha mps_ comb MFA 00:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |