Considering that user was unblocked by Jimbo himself just a few days ago, don't you think you should get permission from him before reblocking? What "legal intimidation" are you referring to, anyway? I haven't seen any from him. Everyking 08:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Could you please just unblock 202.76.162.34 now? Not only did you have to scare me even more by doing it on a 13th, but the block will end after the year 12's at my school leave! I want the block to end before they leave!
Could you please just do it!? Jc iindyysgvxc 07:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. Peace.-- Striver - talk 13:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Look at my page. Coastergeekperson04 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Your comment "the wikilawyers who think that "The world is flat" should be tagged {{citation needed}}" just made me laugh out loud. Thanks for giving me a good start to the day. Nandesuka 12:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
I was wondering about the deleted article on airborne dust.
As you suggested to be required I sent the following to permissions-en_AT_wikimedia_DOT_org: _____________________________ Sirs,
This matter has been discussed with Sam Blanning ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Samuel_Blanning )
I hereby confirm that the copyright to the article on reference is owned by Solution UK Ltd. of which I am a director. (Solution UK Ltd. also own http://www.worldofclean.co.uk where the article is also published).
I also confirm that we wish to release the content under the GFDL in order that it may appear on your pages.
I trust that this now resolves the matter.
Regards,
John E Bolton MBICSc Solution UK Ltd.
_________________________________
I have hear nothing since.
Thank You —The preceding unsigned comment was added by John E Bolton ( talk • contribs) 21:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC).
"No-one cares". Spot on. Guy ( Help!) 23:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Why am I not surprised? Glad you give a shit. -- badlydrawnjeff talk 20:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Samuel, Jeff has a role to play here in connection with deletion policy (in addition to having written one of last week's featured articles). There is no need to question his overall commitment to Wikipedia.
Jeff, in your zealous pursuit of your inclusionist mission (much of which I share), you have once again a la Brian Peppers made an excruciatingly poor choice of which article to turn into a cause celebre. Please reconsider. Newyorkbrad 22:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Re your closing of today's DRV for Darvon Cocktail, please consider changing your wording. Even if closing the DRV appeal attempt did have majority support, it did not have consensus support, because nobody convinced me, or User:Badlydrawnjeff. -- MalcolmGin 23:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Sam can you restore Ali Zafar's Page for me to an old full version, someone has edited the page again and deleted large chunks of text and the photo. Why are people so lame???
Many Thanks
Foz
oh thanks i shall leave you to finish restoring the rest of the page!!
Thanks very much for your help :)
will you be able to restore the photo, I have a new updated one if you can set it up for me, I don't know how to do it myself
I saw your comment on RfAr. Obviously a hijacked account is a possibility, despite the checkuser comment, and if Robdurbar shows up a few weeks from now and post a shocked "yikes, that wasn't me," the situation can be reevaluated (indeed, the case I posted will provide a location for the reevaluation to take place in). However, on ANI it was pointed out that besides admins who tried to stop what he was doing, some of the accounts Robdurar blocked belonged to editors he'd had disputes with in the past, suggesting to some people who had interacted with him before (I have not) it really was probably him. :(
We may never know, but the best theory I've seen for what happened is that Robdurbar decided to retire last month because he was finding editing too addictive or time-consuming (see his goodbye comments from early March), felt himself being drawn back, and wanted to make sure he wouldn't be tempted to resume editing or adminning, at least not under this account. He has succeeded, although I hope this method of Wikibreak enforcement does not become common in the future. Newyorkbrad 10:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Sam (if I may call you so).
We have probably not directly encountered each before, but I think recall your face from the other side of the trenches during the userbox wars. In any case, I find you comments worriesome, to tell the truth. It is true - userboxes in userspace are used in a template like fashion. But then to apply a wide "divisive and inflammatory" or perhaps a CSD:T2 to it does dangerously rock the boat. The compromise we found - non NPOV userboxes go out of templatespace into userspace helped calm down the userbox wars. Let's not rock the boat again - I do not want to see another userbox war - too much time is wasted and too much wikidrama and grief occurs (now, before you say "that is exactly the reason to get rid of all userboxes" - remember that those on the "other side" do not feel that way and many will fight tooth and nail to protect their trancludable rectangles of colour, even if only on principle). Let's live with compromise, ok?
Charon
X/
talk
01:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Considering that user was unblocked by Jimbo himself just a few days ago, don't you think you should get permission from him before reblocking? What "legal intimidation" are you referring to, anyway? I haven't seen any from him. Everyking 08:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Could you please just unblock 202.76.162.34 now? Not only did you have to scare me even more by doing it on a 13th, but the block will end after the year 12's at my school leave! I want the block to end before they leave!
Could you please just do it!? Jc iindyysgvxc 07:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. Peace.-- Striver - talk 13:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Look at my page. Coastergeekperson04 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Your comment "the wikilawyers who think that "The world is flat" should be tagged {{citation needed}}" just made me laugh out loud. Thanks for giving me a good start to the day. Nandesuka 12:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
I was wondering about the deleted article on airborne dust.
As you suggested to be required I sent the following to permissions-en_AT_wikimedia_DOT_org: _____________________________ Sirs,
This matter has been discussed with Sam Blanning ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Samuel_Blanning )
I hereby confirm that the copyright to the article on reference is owned by Solution UK Ltd. of which I am a director. (Solution UK Ltd. also own http://www.worldofclean.co.uk where the article is also published).
I also confirm that we wish to release the content under the GFDL in order that it may appear on your pages.
I trust that this now resolves the matter.
Regards,
John E Bolton MBICSc Solution UK Ltd.
_________________________________
I have hear nothing since.
Thank You —The preceding unsigned comment was added by John E Bolton ( talk • contribs) 21:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC).
"No-one cares". Spot on. Guy ( Help!) 23:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Why am I not surprised? Glad you give a shit. -- badlydrawnjeff talk 20:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Samuel, Jeff has a role to play here in connection with deletion policy (in addition to having written one of last week's featured articles). There is no need to question his overall commitment to Wikipedia.
Jeff, in your zealous pursuit of your inclusionist mission (much of which I share), you have once again a la Brian Peppers made an excruciatingly poor choice of which article to turn into a cause celebre. Please reconsider. Newyorkbrad 22:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Re your closing of today's DRV for Darvon Cocktail, please consider changing your wording. Even if closing the DRV appeal attempt did have majority support, it did not have consensus support, because nobody convinced me, or User:Badlydrawnjeff. -- MalcolmGin 23:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Sam can you restore Ali Zafar's Page for me to an old full version, someone has edited the page again and deleted large chunks of text and the photo. Why are people so lame???
Many Thanks
Foz
oh thanks i shall leave you to finish restoring the rest of the page!!
Thanks very much for your help :)
will you be able to restore the photo, I have a new updated one if you can set it up for me, I don't know how to do it myself
I saw your comment on RfAr. Obviously a hijacked account is a possibility, despite the checkuser comment, and if Robdurbar shows up a few weeks from now and post a shocked "yikes, that wasn't me," the situation can be reevaluated (indeed, the case I posted will provide a location for the reevaluation to take place in). However, on ANI it was pointed out that besides admins who tried to stop what he was doing, some of the accounts Robdurar blocked belonged to editors he'd had disputes with in the past, suggesting to some people who had interacted with him before (I have not) it really was probably him. :(
We may never know, but the best theory I've seen for what happened is that Robdurbar decided to retire last month because he was finding editing too addictive or time-consuming (see his goodbye comments from early March), felt himself being drawn back, and wanted to make sure he wouldn't be tempted to resume editing or adminning, at least not under this account. He has succeeded, although I hope this method of Wikibreak enforcement does not become common in the future. Newyorkbrad 10:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Sam (if I may call you so).
We have probably not directly encountered each before, but I think recall your face from the other side of the trenches during the userbox wars. In any case, I find you comments worriesome, to tell the truth. It is true - userboxes in userspace are used in a template like fashion. But then to apply a wide "divisive and inflammatory" or perhaps a CSD:T2 to it does dangerously rock the boat. The compromise we found - non NPOV userboxes go out of templatespace into userspace helped calm down the userbox wars. Let's not rock the boat again - I do not want to see another userbox war - too much time is wasted and too much wikidrama and grief occurs (now, before you say "that is exactly the reason to get rid of all userboxes" - remember that those on the "other side" do not feel that way and many will fight tooth and nail to protect their trancludable rectangles of colour, even if only on principle). Let's live with compromise, ok?
Charon
X/
talk
01:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)