Archives

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Tip of the moment... Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia is a list of insights about Wikipedia specifically targeted at people who have limited or no prior experience with the project (such as journalists, new editors, and new readers). These explanations should not surprise experienced editors but will hopefully help the rest of the world to shape an informed opinion of our work. Prior tip –  Tips library –  Next tip Read more: Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia   Become a Wikipedia tipster To add this auto-randomizing template to your user page, use {{ totd-random}}

...

Hello there.

You deleted the above entry in June and I wanted to ask if you could re-instate it please? I'm quite happy to provide (in fact it is what I was about to do when I discovered it had disappeared) further information and substantiation. It is also linked from elsewhere in WP...

Thanks

Copydawg ( talk) 14:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I've restored it and moved it to your userspace here so you can work on it. I don't think it would stay in mainspace in its present form. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 15:38, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

OK Thanks. Would you mind taking a look and advising again once I've done some changes?

Copydawg ( talk) 16:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

No problem. Give me a message when you've done. Rodhull andemu 17:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC) reply

HI there. Added some citation and references. Sure lots more will crop up, but for now, could you reinstate properly, or explain to me how to re-name correctly... and reinstate? Thanks. Oh yeah, and also feedback. Most of the links were what turned up in a quick google search, so I could probably find better... and I have a pile of actual physical press copies, but need to go through it for dates etc... Cheers

Copydawg ( talk) 13:55, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello again.

Just a little nudge re the above when you have a moment. Cheers

Copydawg ( talk) 08:34, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

This like you were trying to hide this topic, as it doesn't appear in your archive. Malleus Fatuorum 21:10, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Still there in the history for anyone who cares, and prefectly legitimate. Rodhull andemu 21:16, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

( edit conflict) What's the problem with that, Malleus? ╟─ Treasury Tag► Africa, Asia and the UN─╢ 21:17, 29 October 2010 (UTC) reply

On 30 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harold Greenwood (solicitor), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Why did you change my edits to Henry's page?They were correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AHaze88 ( talk • contribs) 12:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

You didn't cite a source for the salaries, and information about our article being vandalised is irrelevant to Henry's life and career. Rodhull andemu 12:49, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I am a foreigner and a simple reader of Wikipedia. Thank you very much for your job. Frankly say, Editing article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geim, is in a wrong way, by colluding of some editors and admins there. Their IDs are: Therexbanner, Gladsmile, Narking, Christopher Connor, RobertMfromLI, NickCT, Beetstra, 7. These Users are trying by reverting correct edits of the article, and doing a sort of anagram and "misusing" information in sources, show Mr. Andre Geim (winner of 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics) is not a Jewish and he has another ethnic. They seem like pure (but a bit hidden)vandalism. All correct RS sources, like:

- http://www.scientific-computing.com/features/feature.php?feature_id=1,

- http://www.russia-ic.com/education_science/science/breakthrough/1176/,

- http://www.forward.com/articles/131944/

- http://www.gazeta.ru/science/2010/10/07_a_3426604.shtml

- http://www.kfki.hu/chemonet/osztaly/kemia/ih.pdf

- http://onnes.ph.man.ac.uk/~geim/pt.html

- http://www.forward.com/articles/131944/

- http://www.russia-ic.com/education_science/science/breakthrough/1176/

- …

clearly show that Mr. Andre Geim is a Jewish (he repeatedly mentioned about his Jewishness, [subject of self-identification]) in ethnical point of view and his family was originated from Germany(he also several times mentioned that his family are German [origin]). Nowadays German is a general word, which could means: Citizenship, Nationality, Origin, residentship, and so on. When Geim is taking about German being of his family, clearly and logically he talks about their origin before emigration to Russia. There is the same situation about Richard Feynman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman. By the way in a reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Andre_Geim_interview_to_Yedioth_Ahronoth,_Oct_15_2010,_p._25.jpg, (that several times misused by above Users) Geim also said a story concerning Jewishness (clearly in religious point of view) of his grandmother, that of course it doesn’t mean that only his grandmother was a Jewish. Now in article as I checked the history of the article, above Users by reverting the correct edits there, try to present and show by their wrong way Mr. Geim an “ethnic” German person. The point is that in any RS sources, Geim hasn’t say that he has such ethnic, and he never used word “ethnic” there. Andre Geim won the Nobel Prize in the beginning of October; unfortunately, right after his winning until now, above Users kept the text of the article in a wrong position. In any case, if you have time, please check this Users carefully. By the way USER:Gladsmile, repeatedly reverted and undid the edits there, without any explanation(even wrong one). Personaly, seems like an extrimist Vandalism. Best Alexander468 ( talk) 16:38, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Sorry, I'm going to have to decline getting involved here. 1: It is largely a content dispute, up to its editors to sort out; 2: Admins are already on the case; 3: There is no recent disruption such that action is needed immediately; 4: The dispute is already in mediation. If you think protection needs to be applied, please discuss with the previous Admin or report at WP:RFPP. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 16:49, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Is it possible to be notified by email or on a particular page of the edits by a particular user? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.41.207 ( talk) 23:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Not that I know of. Registered users can maintain a Watchlist for pages but not for editors' contributions. If you register an account, you can then set up RSS or Atom email notifications for those articles. I take your implied point that it would be useful to have for all editors, but so far, only registered editors can get that information. Rodhull andemu 23:07, 30 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Sean has passed away, unfortunately. I've had numerous sources confirm it already. Not that I think he'd want a mention on The Other Wiki, but your curt dismissal was a little hurtful at this time. Jes' sayin' ... - Alison ^❤ 00:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

The loss of talented individuals is always regrettable, but still require reliable sources; he may well have been notable qua Enc.Dram., or otherwise, but to me, and perhaps a wider audience, his notability principally derives from his musical career, since that's what I perceive from the sources. His less important interests don't seem to cut it here as regards contributing to his notability. Rodhull andemu 01:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

...for the revdeletes on the date articles (e.g. June 19). I had requested oversight, but you got to them first. Cheers, -- Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 17:29, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

No prob, I think we can live without that sort of stuff here. Rodhull andemu 17:31, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

188.222.41.105 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - genre warring after final warning. Radiopathy •talk• 23:45, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Left a final final warning. Rodhull andemu 23:49, 3 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Am surprised you quote Eddie Izzard, who is a personal friend of mine. What's your protection of corrupt MP Bill Wiggin all about? I am simply linking to sites/newspapers which have covered his false expenses claims. The Telegraph DID call him a shyster: why do you wish that to be concealed from Wiki readers????

Jim Miller —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.177.53 ( talk) 01:27, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

And why can one link to an online newspaper article but not to Guido Fawkes' blog? Guido's extremely well-known site is just as subject to libel and slander laws as, say, the Telegraph Online. Yet you permit links to the Telegraph online! This is all over the place, Rod... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.177.53 ( talk) 01:36, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

If you can show that I quoted Eddie Izzard, I would be astounded. As I've stated in my edit summary, I bear no cross for or against Wiggin; I am just a humble servant, upholding our editorial policies here. But one opinion from a Telegraph journalist about a Labour MP is neither here nor there, is unsurprising, and in my opinion irrelevant here, in an encyclopedic atmosphere where neutrality is not only encouraged, but is a fundamental policy of this encyclopedia. The internet has numerous outlets for political polemic; but Wikipedia is not one of them. Understand? Rodhull andemu 01:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You quote Eddie Izzard on your user page prominently. Outback the koala ( talk) 04:45, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Indeed. However, I never read my userpage since it's not a reliable source. Rodhull andemu 10:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Lol, quite right! Outback the koala ( talk) 02:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• It would appear that if the "Jim Miller" above is the same as this one: "Leominster Independent - Hallo!". www.yourconvenience.org.uk. Retrieved 2010-11-05., there is a clear conflict of interest in him editing that article. I wasn't aware of this at the time. Rodhull andemu 14:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• Kington St Michael (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• PrologueBot ( talk · contribs)

Psst! This edit may have been incompetent, but it was right on the money. It was a copyright violation. The right accounts to focus on are Eton House ( talk · contribs) and MilitaryIntelligence ( talk · contribs). Uncle G ( talk) 17:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• I was going to abandon Frank Tarloff for this evening and fix it later, but I'll take a look at edits from the other accounts. Rodhull andemu 17:32, 4 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I see that you've decided to expand it. Perhaps Abrams 1996, pp. 149–152 will be of some use to you. Apparently there's some uncertainty over the history. There's more in Stacy 2001, pp. 200–203 in the footnotes. Darby & Finn 1967, pp. 8 has yet another assignment of places to Domesday entries.

• Abrams, Lesley (1996). "Kyngton". Anglo-Saxon Glastonbury: church and endowment. Studies in Anglo-Saxon history. Vol. 8. Boydell & Brewer. ISBN  9780851153698. {{ cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv ( help); Unknown parameter |isbn10= ignored ( help)
• Stacy, N. E. (2001). Surveys of the estates of Glastonbury Abbey c.1135–1201. Records of social and economic history. Vol. 33. Oxford University Press. ISBN  9780197262535. {{ cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv ( help); Unknown parameter |isbn10= ignored ( help)
• Darby, Henry Clifford; Finn, Rex Welldon (1967). The Domesday geography of South-west England. The Domesday geography of England. Vol. 5. Cambridge University Press. ISBN  9780521047715. {{ cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv ( help); Unknown parameter |isbn10= ignored ( help)

Uncle G ( talk) 01:07, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• That would be fine, if I had access to those sources. But even the reference library in Trowbridge isn't geared up to them. I know, because I've tried before. I have no access to a university library, so I'm somewhat stuffed, but I will continue with a defensible article right now. Rodhull andemu 01:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply
  • I've asked around and Ealdgyth has volunteered some help. Drop xem a line in a couple of days. I have less access to sources that even you, from the above, by the way. ☺ Uncle G ( talk) 18:46, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks, I know a guy who lives there who is something of a local historian, so I've emailed him to see what he has. But any input is welcome. I might try the local library again, see if they've got any updates, and I know they have Pevsner for the architecture. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 19:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello??? Not used to this yet.... right. kington-st-michael.com seems bona fide to me... why cannot it be included. Do we need a humour section? Or a culture one. Mr Prologu here, editing under a BT IP earlier. At work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prologu ( talk • contribs) 23:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Parody sites aren't specifically mentioned in WP:EL but I think a particularly strong case needs to be made for their inclusion, given that we are an encyclopedia. And I'd also be interested to learn how you came to know my first name. For my own privacy, and if it matters, please use the "email this user" link to the left of this page. Thanks. Rodhull andemu 23:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hmmmm, no "email this user" link on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.192.247 ( talk) 08:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Parody is not specifically excluded by policy. Parody is part of comedy and thus part of the whole human experience. With the site in question it is quite clear that it is parody and thus no-one would be confused about the contents that it contains, indeed the site has a disclaimer. However, much of the power of comedy is that it sometimes hints at truth. Clearly the site is written with local knowledge, and perhaps it illustrates some of the truths of small village life in the early 21st Century in rural Wiltshire: viz: mindless ethno-centrism, belief in false and grand histories, and an underlying whiff of fascism and the brutality of rural life! Oh the sound of shotguns at the weekend and the slaughter of wildlife! Nonetheless it certainly demonstrates some of the conventions of comedy and indeed would appear to be in the tradition established by Aristophanes and the great comics of antiquity, see, for example, The Acharnians, and in particular the transition in the site to generalised situations. Being encyclopaedic requires a rounded view, adding a link to a parody site allows browsers to get a rounded view, and at truths other than those determined by editors. While it may tickle the ribs, it may also assist with greater understanding, not only of how village life is seen, but also in how comedy is understood. Encyclopaedic does not necessarily mean dry and humourless, indeed entries on other individuals do include comedy. The actor Joe Mantegna who plays both serious roles and Fat Tony in the Simpsons describes in some detail his sense of humour, including jokes. Entries on the comedian Eddie Izzard contain links to external sites who's intention is also comedy. Same Spike Milligan. Should these be removed, and the performers art described in excruciatingly (but correctly cited) dry detail? Surely not, and if not for Izzard, Milligan, et al, then also not for the small petite ville nestled in the Cotswold countryside. Rigid interpretation of Wikipedia policies stifles rather than nurtures, and it is important that this truly important encyclopedia does allow the exploration of issues in a fuller sense, and captures a greater example of the human experience. I therefore conclude that this site, which is definitely local, about the village concerned in the Wikipedia entry, and is also a parody, is important to add in the External Links section concerned. Prologu ( talk) 10:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC) Prologu reply

Thanks! IP had wittily redirect their talk page there ... Frickeg ( talk) 01:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Bizarre; I couldn't believe an experienced editor would do that, so perhaps it's time for looking at a block... Rodhull andemu 01:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks again for blocking them - the attempts to add that particular bit of drivel to Kristina Keneally's talk page have been going on for months under different IPs. I'd assumed that Twinkle would ignore the redirect, but as it turns out ... Frickeg ( talk) 02:26, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I just closed a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#TAKE THAT PROGRESS (Result: both warned) regarding users Reqluce and Yids2010. Hopefully they will heed your warnings, but you have my blessing if you would like to block either or both. Regards, - 2/0 ( cont.) 03:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I have my own Today program that I branched from Phaedriel as well, about them same time Rlevse did. I was a close friend of Phaedriel too. I will volunteer to take up his Today program and merge it into mine. I would appreciate it, however, if you will allow the vanished users to rest. bibliomaniac 1 5 02:13, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I have no problem with that; but I stand by my comments on your talk page. Actions have consequences, and unexplained deletions are, well, unexplained and bizarre to those impacted by them. A straight move of those pages to your own userspace would have avoided any confusion, and I have no desire that Rlevse should not be allowed to rest in peace, as it were. That's all. Rodhull andemu 02:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• As regards today, which is now yesterday, I haven't slept properly for a week or more due to the dickheads downstairs, so I am particularly tired and stressed. As regards today, they have got their state benefits, and as usual, blown it on drinks and drugs, while their friends kick in the front door, putting my domestic security in jeopardy. So if I go over the top in the next couple of hours while I am still able to work here, please block me, but only for 12 hours, since anything more might be seen as punitive rather than preventative. I've texted my landlord, but he's probably off skiiing somewhere, and the police couldn't give a toss. Meanwhile... work calls. Rodhull andemu 03:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I hope your situation IRL gets better. 213.106.180.214 ( talk) 12:44, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Could you please semi-protect this; there has been major vandalism here all day. Thanks. Radiopathy •talk• 13:05, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Another admin got it. Radiopathy •talk• 13:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I was just wondering if you could please block this user >> 82.44.23.251, As he/she keeps changing Diane Sugden and Val Pollard's pages without sources, so I was just wondering could you block the IP address or protect these article pages as I cannot what with being a new user and also not an admin Cheers Regards – TheBubler2010 ( talk) 18:51, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You are both edit-warring and have already passed the three revert limit on at least one article. You should warn the editor with {{ uw-unsourced1}} etc. on his/her Talk page, because they can't be blocked until they've had enough warnings. Rodhull andemu 18:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Okay, Thanks for that – TheBubler2010 ( talk) 19:02, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Is Back as a sock of User_talk:174.19.23.79 causing trouble. Momo san ^Talk 01:10, 7 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Blocked, declined, and CIDR range identified as 174.16.0.0/12. Not so large as to cause problems, Rodhull andemu 01:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi Rod, there appears to be problems with editors wanting to delete articles of singles released by Queen, which happen to all be notable, just that the articles themselves are badly written. Can yoyu step into this and have a look? Thanks. Best, -- Discographer ( talk) 20:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC) reply

To save me from going through all of them, do you have examples? If they're being PRODded, just contest the PROD by removing the tag. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 20:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I urge you to reconsider this case, and especially my edits in question. Details here. Thank you. 128.151.26.110 ( talk) 20:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC) reply

 Done See there. Rodhull andemu 21:02, 7 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Sometimes I come home drunk and hit up the computer to release the overflow valve. After, I feel like editing this site. Mainly because it's full of wack shizzle--no offence. Is that fly? Or are you a bunch of sqaures? 94.12.63.177 ( talk) 20:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC) reply

If you wrote something in English, I'd be able to respond. But as it is, I'm not. Rodhull andemu 00:05, 10 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello, Rodhullandemu. You have new messages at Wayne Olajuwon's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please have a little look at the latest discussion by the above and anon. I am wary of this user too, having caught him changing articles to "big up" his favourites. Thanks. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 20:20, 11 November 2010 (UTC) reply

This looks like a discussion over release date for a single, and we should have a guideline somewhere. Or am I missing something? Rodhull andemu 20:44, 11 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for looking, I certainly didn't want to get involved, and I am happy with your opinion. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC) reply

A discussion about longevity WP:COI has been initiated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People#End COI. As a recent contributor to this page, your comments are solicited. JJB 20:27, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Could you put a protection on Othello? There's been a great slew of mal-edits of late. Cheers Span ( talk) 11:29, 12 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I only see a handful of vandal edits in the last few week, so I'm not sure protection is justified right now. However, I have this watchlisted and will act if it gets worse. Rodhull andemu 15:18, 12 November 2010 (UTC) reply

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. Thank you. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 06:00, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply

From the thread at ANI, Rod, all seem to support you stay away from Malleus, that you don't confront him on his talkpage or anywhere else for that matter. When you come back, consider taking a self imposed few weeks away from the tools, take the pressure off, edit as a simple editor and get a breath of fresh perspective, its not on calling anyone a wanker they may well be trying their best even if they are annoying. Best wishes. Take your time, your well being is paramount, regards. Off2riorob ( talk) 22:50, 13 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Rod, it's not going to do your nerves or anything else any good to continue posting at Malleus's talkpage. The community has suggested you stop, he's asked you to stop, he' probably only going to be rude to you, and you risk looking like an idiot or worse. Please stop, don't post there again. There's no point, really. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 01:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Rod, I don't believe you would dis the discussion and my comment here by going straight to Malleus@s talkpage, that is disappointing indeed. Off2riorob ( talk) 01:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

1. - I am very disappointed in your recent actions, not really the administrative ones but all of them in general and your incivility and your apparent desire to escalate conflict on the wikipedia when I expect administrators to reduce disruption and at this point in time I do not support your continued status as Administrator and I request you return to the community and seek their continued support for your status, thanks. Off2riorob ( talk) 01:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• I give up. Loud is not the same as correct. I have great respect for Malleus and those like him who create great content; but that's not a free ride to anywhere. Sorry, but I quit, if only because of the imbalance that prevails. Cheers all, but I do not appreciate being bullied. 01:54, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Not the first time you've tried to quit under pressure, only to come back and continue the behaviour. Come on, it's not that difficult to stay away from Malleus is it? Strange Passerby ( talk • contribs) 01:58, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• (ec's)Phil, you are not being bullied - but you have to drop the stick. What follows is the post I ec'ed with yours above;

  *I will block you for a day if you post again, uninvited, on Malleus' page or on a talkpage where you had not previously commented in response to a post by Malleus (obvious exceptions such as WP:RfAR or WP:RfC apply, of course). Now, I hope you know that I am prepared to do this as much for your benefit as the project - and then that leaves you two options, wheelwar (and I might not flatter myself in believing I have as much gravitas as you do) or eat crow. Neither is worth just dropping the matter. Wherever you are going, it does not need to be dragging this shit along with it. Just step the fuck away, alright?

  Your perception of what is proper is seriously out of kilter with that of the community - the current problem is not MF but you. You have no hope in hell in passing an Admin Review or AfD, and if you believe that the project needs you and your tools then the way to keep them is to stay clear of these issues. Truly, it isn't worth it and your flags. Sorry, but it has to be said. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 02:03, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

AfD? Is no-one paying attention to this drivel...? (/tumbleweed) I meant RfA, of course! LessHeard vanU ( talk) 03:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

( edit conflict) It isn't. I have nothing else in my life now above contributing here. Passing vandals, I can warn and eventually block. Malleus is somewhat different in that he creates great content, but seems to be immune from sanctions since he appears to have a cabal behind him that will defend him on the one front, whilst ignoring the others. He's not the only such editor here to whom that applies. Me, I consider myself to be a competent, but perhaps not brilliant content provider. I came here initially to write articles. I learned the rules the hard way, perhaps; but I cut my teeth here on the Wikification project. I was lucky enough to be appointed admin after six months, mostly on my commitment to vandal-fighting, a mission I continue to the present day, and is the principal issue that outside commentators use as criticism of Wikipedia. Sorry if that is wrong, but I do believe that Wikipedia should be seen to be, if not correct, at least doing something about it; journalists miss that point. As regards your general point, sorry, this is all I have, and I take it personally. All I have to give is knowledge, and I prefer to be able to do that now, since I don't see how I can do it once I'm dead. Rodhull andemu 02:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Malleus is not blocked and banned, like another couple of editors, because the community - of which you and I are only a part, flags notwithstanding - has not come to the conclusion that what he does outside of content provisions raise to the level of being sanctionable; that is the fucking consensus - and you and me are serious arseholes who happen to believe in that "greater will" bollocks. You are not going to change the consensus over Malleus soon, and anyway if you did you could not actually press the buttons - cos that would be a COI and you don't do that "violate the admin remit" shit. Phil, warn and block the vandals - the kids, wankers, bullshit merchants, arseholes, visionaries and hate mongers - and do the other stuff, just don't get yourself into the messy fights about Malleus and others. There is not going to be a winner in that one, so best stay away (okay, I have picked a side in respect of another editor - but I only pretend I am perfect!) The community decides, and us sysops follow those decisions - that is what we do, and a bit of IAR where necessary. Now, stop farting about and give that high horse of yours a bit of hay and get back to adminning. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 02:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• I remain so, so, tired, and depresssed. In the absence of anything else to to do in my life (I am tired, cold and hungry) Wikipedia is all I have. Perhaps not much, but still of value. Also replied to your email, tks. Rodhull andemu 02:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• Yeah, I've replied. If you want this personal stuff to disappear then I guess I will have to abuse my Oversight priv's and do it - just say the word. Anyway, the point is - do the stuff that gives you satisfaction and avoid the shit, what is the point of a cyber life if it sucks as hard as the real one? LessHeard vanU ( talk) 02:54, 14 November 2010 (UTC) ps. I am considering blocking anyone who suggests bringing up a Admin review - I doubt I can get away with it, but since I am likely to oversight all this bollocks I thought I might just mention it! ;~) LessHeard vanU ( talk) 02:54, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

When I ran my RfA, I made it plain that I saw recall as a broken process, since from the candidate's POV, it was possible to set up criteria that could never be satisfied. Accordingly, I opted out. Recall is, and remains, a voluntary process. Unless and until it it imposed by the community as a necessary addition to RfA, it's of little value. Rodhull andemu 03:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on File:Optimized image 8a0da726.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi,

Ok thanks for explaining - I see where your coming from. Thanks. J —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jemsta ( talk • contribs) 23:34, 15 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi Rod. Regarding this edit to Mark Steel, I wonder if the quote can stand per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV? I agree that Callinicos isn't exactly neutral on this matter, but perhaps the quote is worth including if it's clearly attributed to him? Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I have no strong view on this, but readers may not know who Callinicos is, and his perspective on matters SWP. If you want to restore it, I won't object. Rodhull andemu 18:09, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

OK, thanks for your reply. I think I will probably restore it, but give it more context. I will also look for other reviews of the book. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:45, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I noticed you nominated the Template:SV Dynamo (A-I) and Template:SV Dynamo (J-W) for deletion. The same was done two and a half years ago with the first incarnation of the template, Template:Kinds of sport and sport associations of the SV Dynamo (see: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 7). The user you are dealing with, under his current name, User:Saruha, is really another one of many reincarnations of Kay Körner, aka User:Fox53, and so on. He is not a nice person to deal with, as myself and a number of other editors have found out in the past, thats why I nowadays stay well clear of him, as long as he doesn't go to far. Hope this bit of background info in the case might be helpful to you, have a good one, Calistemon ( talk) 12:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I kind of thought that there was a history here, given the persistent failure to comply with image policies. He just does not seem to get it. No matter, this editor is now blockable for sock-puppetry above and beyond anything else. I'm keeping an eye on his articles. Rodhull andemu 18:12, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi "Rod"! A well meaning editor has put personal information about other people on Talk:Independent Order of Odd Fellows#Scandanavian Kings. I have removed it, but the information is, of course, still in the history. Please advise how I request some of the history be purged. The edits which created the offending information are: [1] [2] [3]
Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC) reply

REVDEL'd a couple of edits that revealed personal info, per WP:BLP privacy concerns, and replied on Talk page. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 23:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Ta. Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC) reply

hi there, if you have time i was wondering if you could help contribute to the merging of ellie goulding's version of your song with the original elton john version? looking through other songs that have been covered by artists they all appear on the original article of the song so shouldnt that be the same with this version?

thanks and hope you can help :) Virus101 ( talk) 22:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I think I would propose this in the Talk page to see what other editors think. Most covers of established songs tend to be in one place, (e.g. " Video Killed the Radio Star"), but I wouldn't merge without seeking opinion first. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 22:21, 17 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I understand but... ITS MY COMMENT! I commented but I cant seen to log on again so I'm doing it this way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.194.231.189 ( talk) 16:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I see what you mean but unless you log in, we have no way of knowing it's you. Have you tried the "email me a new password" option on the login page? Rodhull andemu 16:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC) reply

@Rod Hull can you explain to someone who is new to this what is wrong with what I've done? I'm really not trying to be smart. I'm new at Wiki as my account would prove. I wasn't aware society thought it was acceptable to question 3 minor children's right to live?

Audience awareness —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audience awareness ( talk • contribs) 01:18, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

In the context of the "This Morning" article, one event, however gross, should not be given undue prominence. The quantity of text you added indicated that this could be a separate article, perhaps, but it's much to early to tell whether this will be so, however strongly you feel. That depends on what reliable, independent sources make of it in due time. Your last comment is particularly telling; we are here to report, not to make judgements, moral or otherwise. I'd give this event some time to cool down to see whether it becomes a cause celebre but is is up to neither you nor Wikipedia to try to turn it into one. Hence the reference to WP:SOAPBOX. I'd sleep on it, think about it for a day or two, and in the cold light of day, decide whether this content, in any form at all, properly belongs in This Morning, Kelvin MacKenzie, or elsewhere. Thanks. Rodhull andemu 01:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Some context: I'd take a look at Russell Brand Show prank telephone calls row to see how much this sort of content needs to be supported by sources to justify a separate article. Meanwhile, I'd advise taking a step back. Rodhull andemu 01:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you for at least being clear. If you mean the snakes reference you really don't know wat's been said do you? I would send you article but don't wanna get you in trouble but everything I said was true 100% and I have more to prove it but the Wiki guidelines won't allow it. I thought this was a place where people could add informative information as long it's fact checked? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audience awareness ( talk • contribs) 01:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I didn't mean the snakes reference. I meant "I wasn't aware society thought it was acceptable to question 3 minor children's right to live?", which is pure advocacy, and seems contrary to our major principles. I have read your sources; they could be more neutrally worded. But you are unlikely to get me into trouble here. Truth is all very well, but it has to form part of a balanced treatment of the topic under discussion, and given appropriate weight within that context. Getting used to this takes new editors some time unless they are already used to writing content in that way. And please sign your posts using ~~~~ as this makes responses somewhat easier to manage. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 01:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Wasn't my codes accurate weren't my two articles on proper sites that prove Michael Jackson Innocent, I mean look what i wrote Guilty until proven innocent, it's a disgrace. Then to attack his children.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html

http://www.stereoboard.com/pdfs/Michael-Jackson-The-Making-Of-A-Myth-Part-I.

And neither are fans.

Audience awareness ( talk) 02:11, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Audience awareness Audience awareness ( talk) 02:11, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

• Websites and journalists aren't juries. A jury acquitted Jackson in the only trial he faced. That's an end of it. We are not here to amplify beyond that. Encyclopedias do not apportion blame for the follies of journalists; we aren't here to sell material to audiences lusting for controversy. Rodhull andemu 02:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

And yet if i went to his wiki page there would be a whole segment detailed of the so called facts of the 93 case based on tabloid journalism. I wasn't being snippy the site blocked most of my last comment. It's just wrong. Your asking me to be fair to a industry that shows bias. How can you put them from a fair perspective when in this case about his children 90% of it was wrong?

Audience awareness ( talk) 02:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Audience awareness Audience awareness ( talk) 02:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Sorry, you've lost me completely. There is a well-sourced article here about the trial of Jackson. The 93 case (IIRC) was based on speculation that, in the event, got nowhere. But it is up to editors to know, or get to know, what journalistic sources are reliable. If in doubt, you can ask here. But this is off the point as regards your additions to This Morning, and I'd be glad if you would return to the specific point of relevance to that article. Rodhull andemu 02:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Okay fair enough, as someone who sounds like a guy whos been around here a while how do you explain this without bias to either party. Kelvin MacKenzie (Guest): Well, she gave a good interview but of course she’s been brought up in the limelight. It was quite a nice thing for her to say, I must say, about her dead father. I have much more significant question about how and why some of those children were born and under what circumstances they were born – and whether he, in the end, would have turned out to be a great father. Certainly, there are aspects to him which I think your audience would raise their eyebrows.

It isn't exactly an unbiased statement. Sorry for got 2 sign Audience awareness ( talk) 02:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Audience awareness Audience awareness ( talk) 02:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You seriously expect a former editor of The Sun to be unbiased, considering the history of that newspaper (and I use that term loosely, if not incorrectly)? Journalists do not write encyclopedias; we do. Rodhull andemu 02:43, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

LOL fair play. But this is the frustrating thing as you said with his history, how can This Morning dignify his actions and then bring him back again hours after sending us a email saying sorry if we offended you. How did they expect us to feel when you see him there back again just a slap in the face of the people who complained. It's hard not to be biasd ya know? It's as if they are saying well what he said was acceptable when it clearly wasn't and people believe these people which is the frightening thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audience awareness ( talk • contribs) 02:53, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Audience awareness ( talk) 02:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Audience awareness Audience awareness ( talk) 02:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello. I'm sending you a message as you seem to be one of the most active people editing the Dauntsey's article - active on Wikipedia this is, if not on the article in question. The main person I'd like to ask seems not to have contributed here for months. As I have said on the talk page for the article, it is in no way clear what is meant by All Saints and All Souls in the list of former pupils. I wonder whether you can help.-- Oxonian2006 ( talk) 14:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm only active in the sense of fixing vandalism & general wikignoming, and am not familiar with this school. Initially I thought these might be school houses, but the school website doesn't confirm that. They may be former houses, but I can find nothing in Google to confirm. So, sorry, can't really help with this one. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 17:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC) reply

OK, i changed the genre of A Day in the Life beacause don't have source, i've been searching some source to put it like a reference in the genre, thanks for the welcome. P.S. In the Child in Time article, are various users changin' the genre, and don't have source all the extra genres like Progressive, Psychedelic and Folk Rock, i think that some administrator must be generalize the genres Hard Rock/Heavy Metal.-- TheBloodrocker666 ( talk) 00:20, 21 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi Rod, just to inform you: your deletion of this file was not correct. The Commons copy was missing essential source information which is urgently needed in the Commons move process. Please do not delete such files without correcting the bad move first (e.g. run Commonshelper and copy over the generated description to the commons file page). Cheers -- Saibo ( Δ) 01:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I corrected it now. Cheers -- Saibo ( Δ) 01:44, 21 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks, but out of perhaps 10,000 such edits, I'm not going to remember individual images, but thanks for fixing it. Rodhull andemu 01:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Okay - I did not know how many nowCommons deletions you do. If you know that the Commons page must contain all relevant information before deletion of the source file and linking the source file then it's fine. :) Cheers -- Saibo ( Δ) 03:57, 21 November 2010 (UTC) reply

... how can we get his ugly mug out of my face, blud? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.253.128 ( talk) 19:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Just click the "X" in the top right. You can't hide it permanently unless you register an account. Rodhull andemu 19:38, 22 November 2010 (UTC) reply

This article is marked for speedy deletion. Can you help me here?-- Canniba loki 00:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You seem to have it under control, and have correctly contested it on the Talk page; the label seems to have some notable artists, so that would save it from deletion. If I were coming to this as an admin, I wouldn't speedy it, but you might have to face an AFD (since it seems clear that PROD would be defended). More information and better sources would help. Does it have an entry on Allmusic? Rodhull andemu 00:54, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

There is no entry on Allmusic. At this point we should not have to face an AFD, because the sources are interviewing the label owner but are at the same time describing its historical significance to the underground genre that is known as extreme metal. Probably, there is a plenty of print magazines covering the label's history, but I don't have any of them.-- Canniba loki 01:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

That is surprising, perhaps, because notable bands and labels who have been mentioned in print tend also to have an internet presence of some sort, in my experience. However, when it comes to sourcing, WP:AGF suggests that we accept offline sources if they have credible references; case in point is my own collection of pre-internet music magazines, although I have few left. Rodhull andemu 01:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

This record label have, as the online sources can prove. Anyway, thanks for the help.-- Canniba loki 10:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

and I argue for the use of humour as means of understanding everyday phenomena. What remains inexplicable remains rather funny.

Jolly Huntsman 10+ years ago. Roller Skate is the main means of transort. Trick bicycle performer after the accident with the computer and the 56k modem. HTML is just a part of SGML. Hello? 81.155.192.247 ( talk) 22:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC) MilitaryIntelligence and I am also. reply

Obscure. Warwick University? Rodhull andemu 22:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Yep. hallo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prologu ( talk • contribs) 22:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thought so. Good to hear from you. But as an admin here, I don't think that link belongs, amusing though it is. I may have to pass this on, due to a conflict of interest. Regards and Christmas wishes to your family. It would be nice to be close enough to pop into the JH, but I'm stuck here carless, and you can probably guess where from the pics on my userpage. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 22:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Well I suppose its a good place to be. However, i sense a certain anal retentiveness. You can't suddenly declare a COI because you once drank there... otherwise why did you re-write the whole article? C'mon step outside of this "I am an encylopedia" smeg. BTW forogt baldie's name is he still alive? Can this step off Wikiwhatnot? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prologu ( talk • contribs) 22:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I had to rewrite the whole article because it was deleted as a wholesale copyright violation of the village's own website. Although I spend a lot of time on Wiltshire-related articles, I'd prefer to set my own agenda. And my COI is more because you and I know each other personally than having drunk in the JH. As far as I know, baldy is still alive, although we don't talk any more after the way he treated me. Long story. If you want to email me off-wiki, fine, but I would be criticised by the hierarchy if I favoured one user as against another. I'm supposed to be protective of Wikipedia, whilst remaining impartial, and it's not always easy. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 23:05, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

well I suppose i get that... while i can't still go off wiki b/c can't spell/find shit. So. mail, um, <email redacted> and then I'll tell you the real truth about KSM. Then I presume I can either delete this or put up with a lifetime of spam harvesting robots hello!.

Replied per email (redacted to defend against harvesters). Rodhull andemu 23:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Try again.!Nothing in yahoo, sure you are not banned from there? But seeing as you can do all this shit the real email address that you can redact in a minute is <redacted> FFS.

Forwarded, and found your website. Impressive. Gisajob? Rodhull andemu 23:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Always space for a C# programmer. Can you parse a 14 dimension array in PHP? Cos I fucking can't. I have to explode the array into 5 or 6 bits then move on. No mail yet from you.... suppose the mail server is a bit jammed?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Prologu ( talk • contribs)

Never used C#, but I used to be a C++ and C guru, so I doubt it would take me long to pick it up. The basics are the same. PHP, I would need to spend a week or so learning, but I have done ASP, so it's not that great a step. As for email, it isn't instantaneous, nor ever was intended to be. Rodhull andemu 23:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC) reply

We were having a conversation about something. I started it, we cleared up the issue, so I removed it. It is no longer of any relevance. Then you write to me, telling me not to delete my own addition? I can only think you're correcting so many articles at the same time you didn't realise who was who? Please try and be more personable, it doesn't make anyone want to help this site if I get treated like a robot. Alexandre8 ( talk) 00:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I do not think we cleared up the issue. You made accusations, were asked to substantiate or withdraw, and you did neither. Please see guidelines on Talk pages. Removing comments by other editors is not acceptable, and is regarded as vandalism. At best, they should be archived; but then only if properly completed. I am not treating you like a robot, because it's quite clear that you are not one; however, if you wish your editing history here to endure, perhaps I might suggest that you understand, and follow, our rules, of which I have given you adequate notice on several occasions. I'm prepared to forgive inexperience, but not wilful blindness to follow such advice. Hint:If in doubt,ask for advice Rodhull andemu 00:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

HAPPY HOLIDAYS !
Wishing you and yours a very peaceful and joyous holiday season

Mlpearc

Ambience

Hi, you have a nice picture of Quake Live on the Quake Live wiki page. Can I use it in a review I am doing about Quake Live? Thanks! 96.248.119.231 ( talk) 19:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

It is a copyrighted image, being used here under a claim of fair use. I don't think there would be any problem about you using it, as long as you credit it to the original source. We can't prevent you from using it, but neither can we give permission since it's not our image. Hope that helps. Rodhull andemu 19:48, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Also, do you play Quake Live? 96.248.119.231 ( talk) 19:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

No, not really my thing. Rodhull andemu 20:26, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Henson-g.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:33, 28 November 2010 (UTC) reply

•  Done Rodhull andemu 18:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You reverted my contribution:

Using Audacity, the free audio editor, it is possible to reverse this section (select section with mouse, then use function Effect+Reverse) and slow down the speed Effect+Change Speed... to make it more intelligible. This function changes speed based on turntable speeds (78rpm, 45rpm & 33⅓rpm). If the speed is changed from 45rpm to 33⅓rpm, then it does sound rather like "Will Paul come back as Superman?". However, if the speed is slowed down from 78rpm to 33⅓rpm, then the result is more diffuse and could, indeed, appear to sound like "We'll fuck you like Superman" although it is far from clear.

My notes were:

This contribution is original research, but is something that can easily be replicated. I am surprised nobody has noted before that the speed of playback makes a difference...

My question is, did you attempt to replicate and verify my findings?!? I appreciate that there is a need to provide references where possible. In this case I explained how to verify what I recognise as original research. Did you try this?

For your convenience, I have uploaded the resulting audio files to mediafire.com

• Beatles, The - Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band - runout groove loop.mp3
• Beatles, The - Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band - runout groove loop.aup

The first is, of course, an mp3 audio file, the second is the native Audacity file format.

Both files have the same audio content in four segments:

(1) 00:00 run-out groove loop audio as recorded

(2) 00:35 run-out groove loop audio played back in reverse

(3) 01:12 run-out groove loop audio played back in reverse, slowed from 45rpm to 33⅓rpm

(4) 01:56 run-out groove loop audio played back in reverse, slowed from 78rpm to 33⅓rpm

What do you think? In my humble opinion, in take 2 and particularly 3, it seems the most coherent interpretation is "Will Paul come back as Superman?" with not much apparent ambiguity. However, if you slow it down still further, the words seem to become more diffuse and a hard k sound seems to emerge which is probably why some think they hear "We'll fuck you like Superman" ... although this needs a little more imagination. I have also copied this content to the talk page.
Enquire ( talk) 02:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I think it's still original research, despite its replicability. Rodhull andemu 19:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

A reversed section can sound like anything if you listen to it the right way. This doesn't suggest intent. Half Shadow 19:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

i added bernard matthews to the deaths in november 2010 how come you didnt think this appropriate ~~ohnoshespassed~~

Did you not read the guideline referred to in my edit summary? Matthews was not obviously of international significance, as far as I could see. Rodhull andemu 17:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC) reply

I know it is out of context with wikipedia but the man is a vile racist and it repulses me. Wouldn't you agree?