Back on Meta again - cheers -- Herby talk thyme 16:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Royphnol? Last time I checked, it was Windex! -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 01:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
And he talks in Giovenese (making up words now). I think that definitely warrants a block. 24 hours without account creation for a month, maybe? -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 15:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I decided not to thankspam 44 people, since most of them have participated in a bunch of RfA's recently and the thank-you's have been cluttering the wiki. However, since you aren't necessarily a regular at RfA, and you were particularly kind in your comments: thanks. I appreciate the confidence you've expressed, and I'm getting to grips with figuring out what I'm doing. Even after less than two days, my perspective from the admin side is already a bit different than it was from the editor's side. Acroterion (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Could you have a look at this latest wikiproject that the above user has created:
As you have dealt with some of the previous projects that this user has started perhaps you would be in a better position to deal with it that me. -- Гedʃ tǁ cɭ 19:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Willing to forget this disgraceful incident? I am...-- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 02:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
If LEO responds to this comment, I'll know it's Giove. Genius! -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 15:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
User Gp75motorsports is a vandal because removes my version in Istrian exodus without comment in discussion and accuses me of sockpuppet. Regards, LEO 28 nov 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 15:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with She Who Photographs ( talk · contribs). I appreciate it. =) -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 20:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Isotope, I really wasn't accusing you of taking anyone's side (sorry if it sounded like thet). I am aware that you strive to be neutral, i.e. that you don't really care much about this dispute (this is not an accusation either, I can understand that). Its just that User:Giovanni Giove seems to think you are his "defender" for some reason, I was just irritated by that attitude, that's all.
As for
User:Gp75motorsports, he's not chained to the issue and is presumably capable of making his own decisions. I must once agian say I apall the "stay-away-from-that" attitude adopted by some Admins, please allow that this matter needs resolving and that efforts must be made in that direction by someone. --
DIREKTOR (
TALK)
21:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Would you like to be nominated for adminship? -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 00:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to participate in my recent RFA nomination. I have withdrawn the nom early at 17/13/3. I am presently going to undergo admin coaching in preparation for a second candidacy somewhere down the line. I hope to see your potential support in the future. Regards, — Scott5114 ↗ 07:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
G'day Iso,
I left a comment on FQ's talk page, expecting you to see it as well. I've composed what I hope is a useful (and funny) intro guide for noobs. If it gets positive feedback, I will look into seeking broader input and perhaps moving it to the Village Pump. It's here if you'd like to comment. WLU ( talk) 13:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Who is this "LEO" fellow who keeps popping up on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement? Is he banned? Has he ever used any accounts? Picaroon (t) 16:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I am a periodic collaborator then I don't log in. I think so: I advice all administrators regarding persistent personal attack by Gp75motorsports and DIREKTOR against me and user:Giovanni Giove pertinent inexistence sockpuppets. This action is a flamer action by DIREKTOR. Regards. LEO, 30 November 2007
Yeah I already blacklisted them. But they just avoid the spam filter by leaving out the "http://". I find myself constantly removing spam from a blocked sockpuppet and now I'm being trolled. I made a report at Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/IP_check#Europebound2007. Spellcast ( talk) 17:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Like your new userpage, good work guys! -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 19:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Erm, I can't quite see the difference, I'm afraid. Thanks for your kindness anyway... AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 20:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Gp. Is "Ignore what he says" in line with any Wiki standards? I hope not ... :-)
I couldn't see any difference on my screen between the two, but I'll say again, thank you both for your interest and help.
AlasdairGreen27 (
talk)
23:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm creating a template but I need some help on the "If". -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 20:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Feel free to close [2]. Rarelibra obviously wants to drag on these bad feelings forever... It is a bit bizarre actually. His entire idea of the topic ban is just surreal. Anyway, I'm going to try and help end this dispute by simply ignoring him, and won't be commenting anymore on that page. regards, and good luck. :-) Icsunonove ( talk) 22:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Little bit of a dilemma. Someone left this message on my userpage. I want to tell whoever this is that it wasn't a personal attack, but there's no signature nor anyhing in the history log. -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 00:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
We have had an issue come up the last two days on the Karyn Kupcinet page with suddenly new editors making ungrounded changes of the article's content, after a rather long and laborious effort to bring the article up to some sort of WP acceptability. I am asking you, since it seems as if the newest (and anonymous) editor may have mentioned you in a personal attack on the article's talk page. Would you mind checking these two pages and weigh in on what is going on and being said? Thank you. Wildhartlivie 23:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Things are much clearer now that I see what was really going on. Thanks the same. Wildhartlivie 18:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Special Barnstar | |
Your patience, good humour, excellent suggestions and advice all combine to make the perfect storm of a helpful admin! I don't think I've ever had a conversation with you where I didn't learn something new and useful. You should be the boss of wikipedia. WLU ( talk) 21:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC) |
Um...im not sure i understand your reasoning for [ [3]]. Why was it necessary? the juggreserection ( talk) 21:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Ran across this user and they (it is more than one person) are using the talk page as a social network. I warned them with {{
uw-socialnetwork}} but I thought I should bring this to the attention of an admin if things get any worse. Hope all is well.
Gonzo fan2007
talk ♦
contribs
06:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Still waiting for another case I can help in! You got anything, let me know. -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 21:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello there. This article Elizabeth Quarshie was written by a new user to wikipedia and I have just welcomed them. I am trying to ask them to quote their sources, and give them some direction in this regard. She is a civil servant of the provincial government of Saskatchewan which should be notable. The article has been re-written from essay to encyclopedia format - how much time is given to contact the new user and show them the ropes? SriMesh | talk 00:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
In Talk:illuminati under "3 Factual Dispute" the very first article is posted by a person writing a research paper for their doctoral dissertation. That person stated some interesting items. Unfortunately their identity is unposted. They addressed somebody by name so I suspect they are know internally. I would be interested in contacting this individual about their research if possible. I may have some information to provide if they are amenable.
I have bothered to register as a user on Wikipedia and I hope I can be Emailed by my posting. -- Jhhayesii ( talk) 16:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Whiteandnerdy111 ( talk) 19:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up and thanks for the good faith. I've been uncomfortable with the word "vote" (I know it isn't a vote) but wasn't sure of an alternative. Also several different users have refactored that page several times. The original division into opinion page and talk page was done by another user(who I assumed had more experience than I) and prior to that yet another user reorganized things into an opinion and comment section (which was something I'd never seen - and seems to have created problems with inconsistencies between the opinion summary and edit summary). Thanks for looking into this. I'm sorry its such a mess to go through. Egfrank ( talk) 17:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
No I didn't think you were picking on me - but for future reference I would like to know what is the right way to handle an AfD that spirals out of control. It was pretty obvious from the first that the initial participants weren't quite sure of the difference between a talk page and an AfD and were starting to create subsections instead of commenting to each other quotes (you can see my perhaps incorrect attempts to keep comments and responses together early in the edit history). Egfrank ( talk) 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for closing the AfD - there may come a time when someone wants to renominate it, but I seriously wondered how votes could mean anything when the article was changing a mile a minute. It wasn't an entire loss - we got some really great feedback and the level of sourcing has improved dramatically. I think all the editors involved have a better understanding of the limits of WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and the need for cites. In any case, thanks Egfrank ( talk) 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Setting new lows in thank-you spam:
Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will
new mop act?
Ooops, .com
blocked
New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well
Main Page
New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault
A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out
DRV
A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye
Qatar is
blocked
Shucks those
range blocks are tricky!
Will get it straight soon.
Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ...
A. B.
Isotope, I'm glad to see you're still stable -- I reckon I'm still decaying.
In any event, decaying or not, I look forward to my new role as an admin and I appreciate your support in my RfA.
--
A. B.
(talk)
23:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Since you're the only editor, shouldn't this be userfied and categorised into Category:user essays? I dorftrottel I talk I 08:36, December 12, 2007
No consensus? Really? Seemed pretty in favour of deletion to me, in terms of both numbers and arguments. Neıl ☎ 09:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Back on Meta again - cheers -- Herby talk thyme 16:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Royphnol? Last time I checked, it was Windex! -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 01:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
And he talks in Giovenese (making up words now). I think that definitely warrants a block. 24 hours without account creation for a month, maybe? -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 15:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I decided not to thankspam 44 people, since most of them have participated in a bunch of RfA's recently and the thank-you's have been cluttering the wiki. However, since you aren't necessarily a regular at RfA, and you were particularly kind in your comments: thanks. I appreciate the confidence you've expressed, and I'm getting to grips with figuring out what I'm doing. Even after less than two days, my perspective from the admin side is already a bit different than it was from the editor's side. Acroterion (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Could you have a look at this latest wikiproject that the above user has created:
As you have dealt with some of the previous projects that this user has started perhaps you would be in a better position to deal with it that me. -- Гedʃ tǁ cɭ 19:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Willing to forget this disgraceful incident? I am...-- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 02:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
If LEO responds to this comment, I'll know it's Giove. Genius! -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 15:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
User Gp75motorsports is a vandal because removes my version in Istrian exodus without comment in discussion and accuses me of sockpuppet. Regards, LEO 28 nov 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 15:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with She Who Photographs ( talk · contribs). I appreciate it. =) -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 20:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Isotope, I really wasn't accusing you of taking anyone's side (sorry if it sounded like thet). I am aware that you strive to be neutral, i.e. that you don't really care much about this dispute (this is not an accusation either, I can understand that). Its just that User:Giovanni Giove seems to think you are his "defender" for some reason, I was just irritated by that attitude, that's all.
As for
User:Gp75motorsports, he's not chained to the issue and is presumably capable of making his own decisions. I must once agian say I apall the "stay-away-from-that" attitude adopted by some Admins, please allow that this matter needs resolving and that efforts must be made in that direction by someone. --
DIREKTOR (
TALK)
21:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Would you like to be nominated for adminship? -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 00:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to participate in my recent RFA nomination. I have withdrawn the nom early at 17/13/3. I am presently going to undergo admin coaching in preparation for a second candidacy somewhere down the line. I hope to see your potential support in the future. Regards, — Scott5114 ↗ 07:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
G'day Iso,
I left a comment on FQ's talk page, expecting you to see it as well. I've composed what I hope is a useful (and funny) intro guide for noobs. If it gets positive feedback, I will look into seeking broader input and perhaps moving it to the Village Pump. It's here if you'd like to comment. WLU ( talk) 13:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Who is this "LEO" fellow who keeps popping up on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement? Is he banned? Has he ever used any accounts? Picaroon (t) 16:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I am a periodic collaborator then I don't log in. I think so: I advice all administrators regarding persistent personal attack by Gp75motorsports and DIREKTOR against me and user:Giovanni Giove pertinent inexistence sockpuppets. This action is a flamer action by DIREKTOR. Regards. LEO, 30 November 2007
Yeah I already blacklisted them. But they just avoid the spam filter by leaving out the "http://". I find myself constantly removing spam from a blocked sockpuppet and now I'm being trolled. I made a report at Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/IP_check#Europebound2007. Spellcast ( talk) 17:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Like your new userpage, good work guys! -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 19:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Erm, I can't quite see the difference, I'm afraid. Thanks for your kindness anyway... AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 20:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Gp. Is "Ignore what he says" in line with any Wiki standards? I hope not ... :-)
I couldn't see any difference on my screen between the two, but I'll say again, thank you both for your interest and help.
AlasdairGreen27 (
talk)
23:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm creating a template but I need some help on the "If". -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 20:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Feel free to close [2]. Rarelibra obviously wants to drag on these bad feelings forever... It is a bit bizarre actually. His entire idea of the topic ban is just surreal. Anyway, I'm going to try and help end this dispute by simply ignoring him, and won't be commenting anymore on that page. regards, and good luck. :-) Icsunonove ( talk) 22:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Little bit of a dilemma. Someone left this message on my userpage. I want to tell whoever this is that it wasn't a personal attack, but there's no signature nor anyhing in the history log. -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 00:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
We have had an issue come up the last two days on the Karyn Kupcinet page with suddenly new editors making ungrounded changes of the article's content, after a rather long and laborious effort to bring the article up to some sort of WP acceptability. I am asking you, since it seems as if the newest (and anonymous) editor may have mentioned you in a personal attack on the article's talk page. Would you mind checking these two pages and weigh in on what is going on and being said? Thank you. Wildhartlivie 23:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Things are much clearer now that I see what was really going on. Thanks the same. Wildhartlivie 18:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Special Barnstar | |
Your patience, good humour, excellent suggestions and advice all combine to make the perfect storm of a helpful admin! I don't think I've ever had a conversation with you where I didn't learn something new and useful. You should be the boss of wikipedia. WLU ( talk) 21:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC) |
Um...im not sure i understand your reasoning for [ [3]]. Why was it necessary? the juggreserection ( talk) 21:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Ran across this user and they (it is more than one person) are using the talk page as a social network. I warned them with {{
uw-socialnetwork}} but I thought I should bring this to the attention of an admin if things get any worse. Hope all is well.
Gonzo fan2007
talk ♦
contribs
06:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Still waiting for another case I can help in! You got anything, let me know. -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 21:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello there. This article Elizabeth Quarshie was written by a new user to wikipedia and I have just welcomed them. I am trying to ask them to quote their sources, and give them some direction in this regard. She is a civil servant of the provincial government of Saskatchewan which should be notable. The article has been re-written from essay to encyclopedia format - how much time is given to contact the new user and show them the ropes? SriMesh | talk 00:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
In Talk:illuminati under "3 Factual Dispute" the very first article is posted by a person writing a research paper for their doctoral dissertation. That person stated some interesting items. Unfortunately their identity is unposted. They addressed somebody by name so I suspect they are know internally. I would be interested in contacting this individual about their research if possible. I may have some information to provide if they are amenable.
I have bothered to register as a user on Wikipedia and I hope I can be Emailed by my posting. -- Jhhayesii ( talk) 16:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Whiteandnerdy111 ( talk) 19:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up and thanks for the good faith. I've been uncomfortable with the word "vote" (I know it isn't a vote) but wasn't sure of an alternative. Also several different users have refactored that page several times. The original division into opinion page and talk page was done by another user(who I assumed had more experience than I) and prior to that yet another user reorganized things into an opinion and comment section (which was something I'd never seen - and seems to have created problems with inconsistencies between the opinion summary and edit summary). Thanks for looking into this. I'm sorry its such a mess to go through. Egfrank ( talk) 17:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
No I didn't think you were picking on me - but for future reference I would like to know what is the right way to handle an AfD that spirals out of control. It was pretty obvious from the first that the initial participants weren't quite sure of the difference between a talk page and an AfD and were starting to create subsections instead of commenting to each other quotes (you can see my perhaps incorrect attempts to keep comments and responses together early in the edit history). Egfrank ( talk) 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for closing the AfD - there may come a time when someone wants to renominate it, but I seriously wondered how votes could mean anything when the article was changing a mile a minute. It wasn't an entire loss - we got some really great feedback and the level of sourcing has improved dramatically. I think all the editors involved have a better understanding of the limits of WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and the need for cites. In any case, thanks Egfrank ( talk) 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Setting new lows in thank-you spam:
Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will
new mop act?
Ooops, .com
blocked
New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well
Main Page
New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault
A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out
DRV
A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye
Qatar is
blocked
Shucks those
range blocks are tricky!
Will get it straight soon.
Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ...
A. B.
Isotope, I'm glad to see you're still stable -- I reckon I'm still decaying.
In any event, decaying or not, I look forward to my new role as an admin and I appreciate your support in my RfA.
--
A. B.
(talk)
23:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Since you're the only editor, shouldn't this be userfied and categorised into Category:user essays? I dorftrottel I talk I 08:36, December 12, 2007
No consensus? Really? Seemed pretty in favour of deletion to me, in terms of both numbers and arguments. Neıl ☎ 09:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)