Hey H, would you mind adding 'Ashit' to the low confidence list? Cheers, Riana ⁂ 13:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I won't so there's no need to worry. The only thing that will cause me being desysoped will be an ArbCom decision requiring it. I'll be taking it easy over the next few days as far as my normal stuff goes, but don't think that that means I'm leaving. :-) Zsinj Talk 14:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Any chance you could change the color of that H? It makes it look like a redlink. Thanks. The Evil Spartan 17:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I didn't say it was disruptive, it's just confusing. It was just a request, feel free to turn it down, though I do think it was a good one. The Evil Spartan 17:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Could you add this to the blacklist for the namewatcher bot as User:Numberman5, sock of Numberman4 etc., has caused trouble and it is probably easier if we know when these are created. GDonato ( talk) 22:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The problem has been solved [1], the image has been saved. Rejoice! (H) 00:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I am satisfied, if you want to continue challenging it, then go for it. (H) 00:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
His description lacked the copyright holder. (H) 00:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Not sure what those things have to do with anything, frankly I find the direction you are taking this discussion a bit confusing. The new rational does provide a copyright holder. (H) 00:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hey H! I wanted to know if you were thinking about running a duplicate of the namewatcher bot, for the same reason you run the multiple AIV bots. Unlike last time, I now have a computer that can run round the clock without disruptions. -- R Parlate Contribs @ (Red Sux!) 02:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hello there, I'm sorry to bother you directly but I've noticed you've been active on the page protection effort. The reason I writing is that this page protection request has been moved by the housekeeping bot without an administrator explicitly specifying if the requests are to be allowed or denied. I've moved the request back up to the pending list once already but the bot has eventually moved it down again. :) Background on the problem: Recently the consensus behind WP:MOSNUM changed and apparently an editor didn't like the change, so as can be seen by the edit history of the articles listed in the request the disruptive anonymous proxy edits have been continuing from yesterday to today despite the best efforts of editors to revert those changes. We (the editors) could do with some help and have asked for the pages to be semi-protected for a while. The IPs being used are Tor exit nodes, but there any many many of them and edits are being made quicker than can be tracked. Fnagaton 13:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
What are your views on the AfD at Glossary of terms in The Urantia Book? All the best. Wazronk 07:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply
on the config pages, you have typed it will be read each 10 minute. But why not just read it from the irc feed instead, and read the page only when it has been changed? → Aza Toth 17:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Just wanted to say awesome job on the bot... I always end up making a submission and the bot beats me to it - can you ask it to leave some for me ;-). Regards, TimV.B.{ critic & life & speak} 00:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply
HighInBC, I am a bit disgruntled about User:Creator of Data/Information; A random user, creating a log of personal information about myself, including an (incorrect) address, real name, and many other odd things. I was wondering if any kind of action can be taken against this user, as he has made no contributions except for his userpage and user subpages. -- Hojimachong talk 01:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
All due respect, but if consensus hasn't been reached in 2 months (between this policy and WP:BADSITES), it's probably not going to get there in 30 hours. Hard work has been done by many editors whose only desire is to have a stable policy; unfortunately, any attempt to change this policy from one with a great big "disputed" tag halfway down has met with another bout of edit warring. Is this normal in policy discussions? Risker 03:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi there. That thread at ANI is getting rather long (mostly due to me...), so I thought I'd drop you a note to point out my response to an earlier comment of yours. Thanks. Carcharoth 16:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Spotted something else as well. You said "If you want to preserve the content of an article the time to do it is during the AfD" - I did have plans to do that, and I asked for the MfD closure to be delayed until after the weekend so I could copy around 500 pages. Then the MfD closed as no consensus and I got on with other things, thinking I no longer needed to carry out this copying. Then I find I've missed a DRV and the pages are gone. Do you see my problem? Carcharoth 16:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi H, thanks for your replies. Yes I know that there are legit purposes of multiple accounts. In this case Mantanmoreland and Tomstoner have edited together on contentious pages (esp. Naked Short Selling) and address each other as separate editors [3]. They've also actively edit-warred together on the same side: see the following sequence for example: Mantanmoreland, Mantanmoreland, Mantanmoreland; then with Mantanmoreland at three reverts in comes Tomstoner, then Tomstoner again.
I first broached the subject with Mantanmoreland because of this edit (brought to my attention by another editor), wherein Mantanmoreland dramatically rewrote a talk-page comment by Tomstoner – not tweaking his phrasing, mind you, but radically rewriting one long paragraph and adding in an entirely new one. When I asked Mantanmoreland about it (politely, I thought), he first accused me of "trolling" and erased my question, [4] and then self-reverted and gave me an answer that seemed to me, to be frank, very glib and unsatisfactory. [5]
This doesn't add up to a picture of legitimate use of multiple accounts, unless I'm mistaken.-- G-Dett 15:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
User:High in British Columbia. Even after a name change, vandals never forget. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
'Ello again. I'm just wondering if you might have had an email off me in the last day or so? I sent you one and haven't had a reply, although I wasn't sure if that was deliberate on your part... but JzG just told me he didn't get one I sent via Email User, so maybe it's a bit temperamental. -- YFB ¿ 22:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
OK, thanks. It's clearly having an off couple of days. -- YFB ¿ 22:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Received with thanks. Any idea where's best to report a broken email function? I was beginning to think everyone was just ignoring me... :-) -- YFB ¿ 22:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Please discontinue removing the Fellowship link and replaceing it with the urantia internation group link. The Fellowship is an established world-wide organization with hundreds of members worldwide and has been in continuous existence since the 1990's lawsuits with Urantia Foundation. It succeeds the Urantia Brotherhood and organizes International confernces worldwide and publishes the Urantia book among other valuable endeavors. To replace this link with the vandals at Urantia international composed of a handful of beligerrant members whose only purpose here is vandalism as stated in their comments on the talk pages is ludicrous. Next we will have every reader or study group in the world wanting a link to their site or local activities. This is a small group of Florida readers which has a backyard bar-b-q once a year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Majeston ( talk • contribs) 18:42, May 29, 2007
Thanks, both of you, no problem. Majeston 01:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I agree with brewabeer that the solar system should be our solar systym according to
Wiktionary asolar systym is "Any collection of heavenly bodies including a star or binary
star, and any lighter stars, brown dwarfs, planets, and other objects in orbit(I copied
and pasted the definition)-- Cbennett0811 20:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC) reply
It would be so much easier to respect you as an editor if you actually tried to add something to discussions other than uncalled-for finger wagging. You know, like something that actually injected some new perspectives on the topic.
Peter Isotalo 12:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Your diplomatic skills is not what you think they are and you show little hesitation in calling whatever you feel I'm not agreeing with to be "consensus". At Talk:Medieval cuisine you defended a handful of editors with unspecified demands for more citations despite clear opposition from more editors than just me, but in this case you're defending the rights of two other editors to reinstate content they haven't even researched for themselves.
The worst problem is, however, is that you never seem to encourage anyone to motivate anything, just that everybody's opinions be incorporated in articles, no matter the counter-arguments.
Peter Isotalo 14:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
You're awfully good at popping up in unrelated discussions about medieval cuisine and history considering you haven't contributed one iota to the topic and you claim to defend "consensus" in all discussions. I mean, I still haven't seen anything that actually indicates that you know anything about the topic. Not even the basics. Basically, you engage in almost nothing but meta-discussions about perceived breeches of etiquette. There's nothing useful or constructive about that and I'm going to keep discouraging you from doing it.
Peter Isotalo 16:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I've heard of Usurping, but I didnt know they took requests that extreme seriously. Also, I'm sorry to bother you, but I don't know where else to ask: how do I get a fancy, non-plain-text signature like yours? I don't see anything in the help files that explains how. Do you just have to type the code manually every time or is there a shortcut? Haplolology 14:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hello Ryan,
While stalking a certain RFCN reject wandering about aimlessly, as I sometimes do, I notice there's an RFAR over some DRV nonsense in which your name has been taken in vain at least three times, including
this! It doesn't look like you were made aware of it, which didn't seem right. My apologies if you already knew.
Regards, -- Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 15:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
So if you are still using the HighinBC moniker here or elsewhere, you should consider rendering it as BhighC or inBC in your sigs. Rebus! Rebus! Rebus! Debivort 19:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
First sentence re-done due to poor style, surfeit of references, and incorrectness. Victora is not Mediterranean. Check out the wikipedia page for that climate zone/type. wikipedia should be internally consistent. Also, the references for Koeppen are highly technical. If you click on the linked term in my edit you are well on your way. Why clog up a simple one-liner intro with needless caveats and technicalise? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.98.33.33 ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi, I'm not really sure why the bot tells us at AIV that an IP is in the shared address category, but I presume it's a bug that makes it tell us that SOOOOOOOOOO many times for the same IP? [6] Not sure if I should send this to you or Krellis, so I'm sending to both. Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 21:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
[7]. MaxSem 21:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I made that account when logged in as this account. It is possible in the logs to see that it was legit. Secretlondon 22:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Thanks for the message. I informed Jorge that anyone can edit anything, per WP:OWN. Thanks, Neranei 23:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Oh, hi H, I was wondering what happened to you. Proabivouac 00:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I am HighInBC on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/HighInBC. Thanks. -- (H) 20:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC) reply
H: Thank you for your eagle eye. Your help is appreciated. IZAK 06:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Would it be possible to have a bot that turned off and on the backlog tag at CAT:CSD? I would think that it could be a relatively simple thing, but then again, items in categories are different than items actually *on* a page. If the scope is too small, it could probably do the same thing on some of the other admin pages. Just a thought. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I've protected Charlotte Wyatt (expiry time of six hours) to allow for discussion on the talk page. Mackensen (talk) 15:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC) reply
That's fine. I am relatively new with the mop and bucket, and always happy to learn.-- Anthony.bradbury 23:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC) reply
No, that's a good one. I think we need even more T/F questions. Perhaps, though, it should be, "It's not a revert when I'm just making the edit tell the truth." That's what they most often say. "It wasn't really a revert. It was a correction!" Geogre 01:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I posted on Help talk:Merging and moving pages#Merge discussion request about the need for discussion (which one user has rather nastily called " butting in"). — Athaenara ✉ 10:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi, someone commented on the image I uploaded from BC Archives Image:Parliament Buildings at Victoria.gif that they don't believe that is the Parliament buildings. Buildings are not really my line of study, so do you have any thoughts on this person's comment? CindyBo 21:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Hey H, would you mind adding 'Ashit' to the low confidence list? Cheers, Riana ⁂ 13:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I won't so there's no need to worry. The only thing that will cause me being desysoped will be an ArbCom decision requiring it. I'll be taking it easy over the next few days as far as my normal stuff goes, but don't think that that means I'm leaving. :-) Zsinj Talk 14:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Any chance you could change the color of that H? It makes it look like a redlink. Thanks. The Evil Spartan 17:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I didn't say it was disruptive, it's just confusing. It was just a request, feel free to turn it down, though I do think it was a good one. The Evil Spartan 17:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Could you add this to the blacklist for the namewatcher bot as User:Numberman5, sock of Numberman4 etc., has caused trouble and it is probably easier if we know when these are created. GDonato ( talk) 22:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The problem has been solved [1], the image has been saved. Rejoice! (H) 00:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I am satisfied, if you want to continue challenging it, then go for it. (H) 00:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
His description lacked the copyright holder. (H) 00:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Not sure what those things have to do with anything, frankly I find the direction you are taking this discussion a bit confusing. The new rational does provide a copyright holder. (H) 00:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hey H! I wanted to know if you were thinking about running a duplicate of the namewatcher bot, for the same reason you run the multiple AIV bots. Unlike last time, I now have a computer that can run round the clock without disruptions. -- R Parlate Contribs @ (Red Sux!) 02:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hello there, I'm sorry to bother you directly but I've noticed you've been active on the page protection effort. The reason I writing is that this page protection request has been moved by the housekeeping bot without an administrator explicitly specifying if the requests are to be allowed or denied. I've moved the request back up to the pending list once already but the bot has eventually moved it down again. :) Background on the problem: Recently the consensus behind WP:MOSNUM changed and apparently an editor didn't like the change, so as can be seen by the edit history of the articles listed in the request the disruptive anonymous proxy edits have been continuing from yesterday to today despite the best efforts of editors to revert those changes. We (the editors) could do with some help and have asked for the pages to be semi-protected for a while. The IPs being used are Tor exit nodes, but there any many many of them and edits are being made quicker than can be tracked. Fnagaton 13:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply
What are your views on the AfD at Glossary of terms in The Urantia Book? All the best. Wazronk 07:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply
on the config pages, you have typed it will be read each 10 minute. But why not just read it from the irc feed instead, and read the page only when it has been changed? → Aza Toth 17:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Just wanted to say awesome job on the bot... I always end up making a submission and the bot beats me to it - can you ask it to leave some for me ;-). Regards, TimV.B.{ critic & life & speak} 00:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply
HighInBC, I am a bit disgruntled about User:Creator of Data/Information; A random user, creating a log of personal information about myself, including an (incorrect) address, real name, and many other odd things. I was wondering if any kind of action can be taken against this user, as he has made no contributions except for his userpage and user subpages. -- Hojimachong talk 01:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
All due respect, but if consensus hasn't been reached in 2 months (between this policy and WP:BADSITES), it's probably not going to get there in 30 hours. Hard work has been done by many editors whose only desire is to have a stable policy; unfortunately, any attempt to change this policy from one with a great big "disputed" tag halfway down has met with another bout of edit warring. Is this normal in policy discussions? Risker 03:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi there. That thread at ANI is getting rather long (mostly due to me...), so I thought I'd drop you a note to point out my response to an earlier comment of yours. Thanks. Carcharoth 16:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Spotted something else as well. You said "If you want to preserve the content of an article the time to do it is during the AfD" - I did have plans to do that, and I asked for the MfD closure to be delayed until after the weekend so I could copy around 500 pages. Then the MfD closed as no consensus and I got on with other things, thinking I no longer needed to carry out this copying. Then I find I've missed a DRV and the pages are gone. Do you see my problem? Carcharoth 16:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi H, thanks for your replies. Yes I know that there are legit purposes of multiple accounts. In this case Mantanmoreland and Tomstoner have edited together on contentious pages (esp. Naked Short Selling) and address each other as separate editors [3]. They've also actively edit-warred together on the same side: see the following sequence for example: Mantanmoreland, Mantanmoreland, Mantanmoreland; then with Mantanmoreland at three reverts in comes Tomstoner, then Tomstoner again.
I first broached the subject with Mantanmoreland because of this edit (brought to my attention by another editor), wherein Mantanmoreland dramatically rewrote a talk-page comment by Tomstoner – not tweaking his phrasing, mind you, but radically rewriting one long paragraph and adding in an entirely new one. When I asked Mantanmoreland about it (politely, I thought), he first accused me of "trolling" and erased my question, [4] and then self-reverted and gave me an answer that seemed to me, to be frank, very glib and unsatisfactory. [5]
This doesn't add up to a picture of legitimate use of multiple accounts, unless I'm mistaken.-- G-Dett 15:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
User:High in British Columbia. Even after a name change, vandals never forget. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
'Ello again. I'm just wondering if you might have had an email off me in the last day or so? I sent you one and haven't had a reply, although I wasn't sure if that was deliberate on your part... but JzG just told me he didn't get one I sent via Email User, so maybe it's a bit temperamental. -- YFB ¿ 22:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
OK, thanks. It's clearly having an off couple of days. -- YFB ¿ 22:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Received with thanks. Any idea where's best to report a broken email function? I was beginning to think everyone was just ignoring me... :-) -- YFB ¿ 22:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Please discontinue removing the Fellowship link and replaceing it with the urantia internation group link. The Fellowship is an established world-wide organization with hundreds of members worldwide and has been in continuous existence since the 1990's lawsuits with Urantia Foundation. It succeeds the Urantia Brotherhood and organizes International confernces worldwide and publishes the Urantia book among other valuable endeavors. To replace this link with the vandals at Urantia international composed of a handful of beligerrant members whose only purpose here is vandalism as stated in their comments on the talk pages is ludicrous. Next we will have every reader or study group in the world wanting a link to their site or local activities. This is a small group of Florida readers which has a backyard bar-b-q once a year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Majeston ( talk • contribs) 18:42, May 29, 2007
Thanks, both of you, no problem. Majeston 01:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I agree with brewabeer that the solar system should be our solar systym according to
Wiktionary asolar systym is "Any collection of heavenly bodies including a star or binary
star, and any lighter stars, brown dwarfs, planets, and other objects in orbit(I copied
and pasted the definition)-- Cbennett0811 20:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC) reply
It would be so much easier to respect you as an editor if you actually tried to add something to discussions other than uncalled-for finger wagging. You know, like something that actually injected some new perspectives on the topic.
Peter Isotalo 12:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Your diplomatic skills is not what you think they are and you show little hesitation in calling whatever you feel I'm not agreeing with to be "consensus". At Talk:Medieval cuisine you defended a handful of editors with unspecified demands for more citations despite clear opposition from more editors than just me, but in this case you're defending the rights of two other editors to reinstate content they haven't even researched for themselves.
The worst problem is, however, is that you never seem to encourage anyone to motivate anything, just that everybody's opinions be incorporated in articles, no matter the counter-arguments.
Peter Isotalo 14:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
You're awfully good at popping up in unrelated discussions about medieval cuisine and history considering you haven't contributed one iota to the topic and you claim to defend "consensus" in all discussions. I mean, I still haven't seen anything that actually indicates that you know anything about the topic. Not even the basics. Basically, you engage in almost nothing but meta-discussions about perceived breeches of etiquette. There's nothing useful or constructive about that and I'm going to keep discouraging you from doing it.
Peter Isotalo 16:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I've heard of Usurping, but I didnt know they took requests that extreme seriously. Also, I'm sorry to bother you, but I don't know where else to ask: how do I get a fancy, non-plain-text signature like yours? I don't see anything in the help files that explains how. Do you just have to type the code manually every time or is there a shortcut? Haplolology 14:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hello Ryan,
While stalking a certain RFCN reject wandering about aimlessly, as I sometimes do, I notice there's an RFAR over some DRV nonsense in which your name has been taken in vain at least three times, including
this! It doesn't look like you were made aware of it, which didn't seem right. My apologies if you already knew.
Regards, -- Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 15:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
So if you are still using the HighinBC moniker here or elsewhere, you should consider rendering it as BhighC or inBC in your sigs. Rebus! Rebus! Rebus! Debivort 19:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
First sentence re-done due to poor style, surfeit of references, and incorrectness. Victora is not Mediterranean. Check out the wikipedia page for that climate zone/type. wikipedia should be internally consistent. Also, the references for Koeppen are highly technical. If you click on the linked term in my edit you are well on your way. Why clog up a simple one-liner intro with needless caveats and technicalise? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.98.33.33 ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi, I'm not really sure why the bot tells us at AIV that an IP is in the shared address category, but I presume it's a bug that makes it tell us that SOOOOOOOOOO many times for the same IP? [6] Not sure if I should send this to you or Krellis, so I'm sending to both. Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 21:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
[7]. MaxSem 21:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I made that account when logged in as this account. It is possible in the logs to see that it was legit. Secretlondon 22:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Thanks for the message. I informed Jorge that anyone can edit anything, per WP:OWN. Thanks, Neranei 23:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Oh, hi H, I was wondering what happened to you. Proabivouac 00:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I am HighInBC on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/HighInBC. Thanks. -- (H) 20:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC) reply
H: Thank you for your eagle eye. Your help is appreciated. IZAK 06:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Would it be possible to have a bot that turned off and on the backlog tag at CAT:CSD? I would think that it could be a relatively simple thing, but then again, items in categories are different than items actually *on* a page. If the scope is too small, it could probably do the same thing on some of the other admin pages. Just a thought. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I've protected Charlotte Wyatt (expiry time of six hours) to allow for discussion on the talk page. Mackensen (talk) 15:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC) reply
That's fine. I am relatively new with the mop and bucket, and always happy to learn.-- Anthony.bradbury 23:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC) reply
No, that's a good one. I think we need even more T/F questions. Perhaps, though, it should be, "It's not a revert when I'm just making the edit tell the truth." That's what they most often say. "It wasn't really a revert. It was a correction!" Geogre 01:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I posted on Help talk:Merging and moving pages#Merge discussion request about the need for discussion (which one user has rather nastily called " butting in"). — Athaenara ✉ 10:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Hi, someone commented on the image I uploaded from BC Archives Image:Parliament Buildings at Victoria.gif that they don't believe that is the Parliament buildings. Buildings are not really my line of study, so do you have any thoughts on this person's comment? CindyBo 21:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC) reply