Archive 13 (mainly June and July, 2005). It's a long one: usually I archive more often, and this one has over 120 sections.

When this popped up on my watchlist, I was briefly amazed that the Mediawiki software had been upgraded to allow articles to revert themselves. Is your name any relation to the city in question (and if so, do you know anything more about the place than the little bit I was able to scrape together)?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Robth ( talk • contribs) .

I know it's not much for someone who has been bold so many times and created so many articles in music, but I'd appreciate your taking a look at the page music history, which you've contributed to the discussions for. I'm hoping that taking the steps I did differentiate the article further from musicology and history of music. I still need to add a lot more in research methods though. Thanks a ton! -- Myke Cuthbert 04:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply

We are here to build an encyclopedia!

Hi Antandrus, and thank you for your thoughtful comments in my request for adminship! With a final tally of (109/5/1), I have been entrusted with adminship. It's been several weeks since the conclusion of the process, so hopefully you've had a chance to see me in action. Please let me know what you think! Glad you found the question answers useful, acknowledgement made the effort of writing them worth it! Thanks again! + + Lar: t/ c 03:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Adverts: Like The Beatles?... Like LEGO?... In a WikiProject that classifies?... Are you an accountable admin?... Got DYK?...

Hi Antandrus! I'm just curious, how many items do you have on your watchlist? I really don't know the average watchlist and I have a feeling that I'm overstuffing mine. :P  G. H e 02:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Phew. That's a relief. I only have 772 right now (but I think it's going to rapidly expand over the course of time). By the way, after looking at User:Antandrus/watch, I wonder how do you check it? It looks awfully overwhelming (and painful) for me. :P Is it really that easy to go through the list?  G. H e 03:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the tip! Hopefully, it'll be helpful to me as well! :)  G. H e 03:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Antandrus. I just rewrote the Fauré Requiem article, and I found this [ [1]] webpage, which has a copy of a page of the manuscript. I can't tell if it's okay to use this. It's only one page from a huge work, and it was written well before the 1923 cutoff, although Fauré didn't die until 1924. Do you know if it's okay to use and if so, how it should be tagged? Thanks for your help! -- MarkBuckles 03:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you! Added it to the article. Best, MarkBuckles 03:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Antandrus! Sorry to bother you again, but I have a musical question that I'm sure I've inquired before, but then forgot. If, in a bar, a normal note is sharped or flatted, does it affect a grace note (same note (I.e. A, C, etc.)) after it in the same bar? And if a grace note is sharped or flatted, does it afftect a normal note (same note (I.e. A, C, etc.)) after it in the same bar? Thanks in advance!  G. H e 03:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Example: "A#" (normal note), does another "A" grace note in the same bar count as "A" or "A#"? And vice versa: If "A#" (grace note), does another "A" normal note in the same bar count as "A" or "A#"?  G. H e 03:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks again!  G. H e 21:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi! I'm working on some pages relating to early music. I've added pages on Ambrosian chant, Old Roman chant, Mozarabic chant, Gallican chant, and Celtic chant, and will soon tackle Beneventan chant. I've also worked on the Introit and Gradual pages, and plan to contribute similarly to the other Gregorian chant types. When I'm feeling like getting my hands dirty I'll try to improve/fix the Gregorian chant article, and then it's on to St Martial polyphony, etc. I ran across your user page while fixing some links to Notker of St Gall. I'm glad to see someone else is working on the early music pages, and I'm impressed by the breadth you've covered! -- Peirigill 04:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

		The Original Climacus
		I hereby award Antandrus these neumes for being a swell guy and editing a ridiculous number of articles on early music. -- MarkBuckles 07:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm a resident of La Conchita and also part of the La Conchita Community Organization. We have alot of history on La Conchita and would like add to the La Conchita site but don't want to step on anyones toes. What the best way to do this? Thanks, Toezovr

Thanks for the quick response. We hope to add some meaningful information to the LC page. Please respond with any questions.

Hi Antandrus! You may want to follow this link and purge some of its histories, as it contains personal information that seemed to went unnoticed at the time of vandalism. Thanks.  G. H e 01:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Never having done that before, I tried an experiment on my own User:Antandrus/temp page, and I seem to have lost 62 revisions. Dunno; it didn't work. Could be a bug, or an issue of database lag. I can look at it later. (I'm sure glad I didn't just nuke the Global warming page.) Antandrus (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

BTW, just trolling, what you have to do is delete the page, then go back and restore it by clicking the little boxes next to every single reversion except the ones you don't want. It's a huge pain, and if a page has a very long history (I've never seen a definition of how long) it's better to bug a developer to do it (they have extra magical powers). I'm guessing the Global warming page is huge, though, so it's probably best to find a dev. Mak (talk) 02:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Actually that is what I did on my temp page experiment... but the deleted revisions didn't magically reappear until I re-checked the revision history the next morning. There was some kind of database lag issue the other night. I'm just a little too lazy right now to do anything about global warming (isn't that what they all say, as the glaciers melt... ) Antandrus (talk) 02:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello Antandrus. Thank you for your full support at my request for adminship which ended at the overwhelming and flattering result of (160/1/0), and leaves me in a position of having to live up to a high standard of community expectation. You can see me in action and observe what then happened as a result. Naturally, if I make any procedural mistakes, feel free to point them out. I look forward to working with you in the future. (Fellow baroque/classical music lover and very amateur violinist) Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

<<mistaken warning removed>>

LOL, that's a first.  ;-) Antandrus (talk) 04:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

It seems like if I take the time to look at the user warn history, someone beats me to the revert. In this situation, the revert had already been done so my action reverted the revert. Funny, I was just reading the discussion on the AfD on removing warnings - So now there's a warning with my name on your talk page. Can we take that off? -- Geneb1955 ^Talk/ _CVU 04:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

No problem. I've "reverted reverts" myself, especially before the 2005 Mediawiki upgrade; it was a real problem in late 2004. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Antandrus! This will probably be the dumbest music question I ask: If a C, for example, is sharped, are all C's in that bar sharped, despite the octave? Thanks.  G. H e 20:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Wow... so I was wrong all along. Thanks for the correction. I was assuming that it worked for all octaves. :P  G. H e 23:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

[2] Oh dear. What have I done? :) Oh, on the octave question, I agree with you, but sometimes it depends on the edition. It reminds me of some late Renaissance music, where they put the key signature in both octaves. Finally, it'd be cool if you could check out Las Huelgas Manuscript. Tell me if you think it should be under another name. Cheers, Mak (talk) 02:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I was leaning more towards Codex as well, but Grove had Manuscript. It seems that Codex is more specifically for medieval manuscripts, so I'm thinking that might actually be better. Also, Las Huelgas Codex just sounds better to me, for no reason. Any thoughts on capitalization? It seems like a proper noun to me, thus all cap, but you could say that either Codex or Manuscript is just an adjective describing the proper noun. Or something. Mak (talk) 02:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply

If I may interject my 2 cents: I've always seen it referred to as the Codex Las Huelgas, not the Las Huelgas Codex. A quick Google search seems to confirm that as the most common name of the manuscript, so that would be my recommendation (with appropriate redirect pages for "Las Huelgas codex" and "Las Huelgas manuscript"). As for "codex" vs. "manuscript," the original distinction was between "codex" and "scroll," with codices (manuscript books made up of pieces of parchment) commonly used for Christian Scriptures instead of the more cumbersome scrolls. "Codex" thus gained the connotation of a book of ancient, classical, or sacred writings. -- Peirigill 17:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I have seen the history of this page, 8 edits today! (and counting) this is a clear breach of 3RR. I suggest you stop before someone takes action. If you have a good reason, please do inform me, as i am tempted to take action. MichaelBillington 03:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for explaining, I thought it was just an edit war. But it seems I was wrong. (sorry) MichaelBillington 03:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I stumbled accross the page from Newbie contributions, I'll keep checking there. MichaelBillington 03:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I think he may be attacking India, judjing by history. MichaelBillington 03:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Actually, these seem to be legit, ignore that above comment. I'll stop annoying you now and let you get back to whatever it is you do MichaelBillington 03:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm getting really pissed off today. Goddammitt. Mak (talk) 04:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Yeah. True. I will be, later this weekend. I just can't sleep. Mak (talk) 04:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 06:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I only saw you do one revert of his edits in the edit history on Anaheim Hills, but you still might be interested in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ericsaindon2. ^{Blank Verse} 09:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hopefully this will interest you a bit. -- Paleorthid 06:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello, Antandrus. Have you forgotten to remove the wikibreak notice on your user page, or are you just editing while on break, just as the rest of us do? Whichever, it's good to see you. Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 14:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh nooo! The administrative vandal is back! :) Mak (talk) 23:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh, it's you again! Welcome back from me too. :-) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks!  :-o Antandrus (talk) 05:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Very glad to see you back, Antandrus. I hope you are OK. -- RobertG ♬ talk 08:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Having finished the articles on the other Western plainchant pages, I put the Gregorian chant page through a major overhaul. I know you're on a break, but if at some point you're free, would you mind taking a look and giving some feedback? Thanks! Peirigill 07:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Sorta related - have you seen this site yet [3]? It seems to be slightly broken at the moment, but despite this seems awfully cool, and I've already found a couple things on it. Mak (talk) 20:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Yep, La Trobe's valuable when you're trying to track down a medieval text. Looks like they're in the middle of revamping it. Peirigill 18:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I've submitted Gregorian chant for Wikipedia:Peer review/Gregorian chant. If you get a chance, please comment! Thanks - Peirigill 04:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I am MichaelIsGreat. I added two articles (same one on each page but with a different title), one to the Bösendorfer page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%B6sendorfer and one to the Player pianos at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducing_piano

The information that I gave on these two pages is very recent, very useful and also very relevant to these two articles.

You accused me of writing an advertisement! I think this accusation is false and of very bad faith!! I accuse you of having an agenda in rejecting my two postings!!! My postings were simply enthusiastic about a new computer piano that is nothing less than exceptional. Now, such an exceptional, unique, one-of-a-kind product, should I belittle it to please or fit the mood of Mr. Antandrus?!! What a joke this Wikipedia is!!! Yes, I read the neutrality thing but is it neutral to belittle a product that is nothing less than exceptional and unique? Should I tell the truth and call this computer piano exceptional, a milestone or should I call it another reproducing piano when this CEUS computer piano has this recording and playback feature that is unique and that allows it to be the first and the only piano to be able to playback faithfully any piano performance in its full expressiveness?

What I wrote is very accurate and I have no interest at all, financially or else, with Bösendorfer. I am only very enthusiastic about their new computer piano that is really EXCEPTIONAL in many ways (I clearly explained WHY this computer piano is indeed exceptional!!). To understand how exceptional it is, you must have a strong background on computer pianos.

Therefore, to say that my two postings were an advertisement is completely untrue.

Again, when a product is unique, one-of-a-kind, should I call it ordinary and belittle it? For your information, Bösendorfer pianos are considered to be the Rolls Royce of pianos!!! It is not me who qualifies them this way, it is those with a thorough experience of many piano makers who qualify them this way! To qualify their products as ordinary would be an insult to the truth.

ANYWAY, REWRITE MY ARTICLE TO YOUR LIKING AND GIVE ME A COPY FOR APPROVAL. I WILL SEE THE WAY YOU WANT TO SEE IT WRITTEN.

I am a new user of Wikipedia. It will be my first and last experience at Wikipedia!! Wikipedia is a joke when someone like you can censor, in bad faith I believe, so easily people like me who wrote in good faith and only to add valuable information that is not widespread at all anywhere. You should be ashamed of yourself! WHEN PEOPLE LIKE YOU CENSOR AN ARTICLE THAT IS NOT AN ADVERTISEMENT BUT THAT IS SIMPLY AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF A UNIQUE PRODUCT, THEN YOU ACT WRONGLY.

I have no time to read the help files to figure out how to use Wikipedia. I assume I could get your version through the mytalk link that I have at the top of my page when I check the two pages where I posted. Then I will come here to give you my feedback if I agree on your version.

You really should be ashamed of your behaviour because my postings are not advertisements at all. I called an outstanding, unique product the way it should be called. I explain also why I call it a milestone in the history of reproducing pianos. The recognition of a unique product should be stated without having to bear your INAPPROPRIATE intervention.

YOU WILL HAVE TO POST ON THIS CEUS COMPUTER PIANOS ON THE TWO PAGES I POSTED. I WILL NOT ALLOW YOU OR ANYONE TO CENSOR MENTIONING THIS NEW CEUS COMPUTER PIANO ON THESE TWO PAGES. IS IT CLEAR? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelIsGreat ( talk • contribs)

You "have no time to read the help files to figure out how to use Wikipedia", but yet you have time to write rants such as this one? You probably are on the wrong website, Mr. "Michael is Great". There's plenty of places on the internet you can post whatever you want. This is not one of them. Maybe you misunderstand what Wikipedia is: it is NOT a place where you can write whatever you want: it is a place where people collaborate on writing articles, which conform to the core policies of neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research. We welcome your contributions when they conform to these policies: your post does not. Please ask for discussion on the article's talk page, which is the appropriate place to negotiate content disputes in an article. Thanks. Antandrus (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi, I just noticed you reverted vandalism on my user page a while back, thanks – Gurch 11:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I know. I know. I was just trying to sort that particular oy out. If you want another party to say something to him, I'd be happy to. Mak (talk) 15:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

You don't think it's the same person, do you? The edit summary style is pretty similar, but the whole adding a whole copyvio advert is different. The grasp of English is better, maybe. Perhaps Wikipedia just somehow encourages these types of people. Oh, and check out the main page, one of my articles is on DYK :) Mak (talk) 15:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Antandrus,

There's currently some discussion about whether and how to set up [a] US wikimedia chapter[s]. I'm trying to notify people who have been involved in local meetups; if you are interested, see the mailing-list and meta-page on the topic. Cheers, +sj + 16:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the revert on my userpage. All the best, -- TeaDrinker 19:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC) reply

You're welcome: anything to make it a more pleasant place here. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 20:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC) reply

And thanks from me for the same thing. Jkelly 23:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm gonna put a clean revert from the last edit before the IP's vandalism... I can't help think that we missed something in all that wreckage. GofG _|^|_| Contribs 21:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Awesome :D. I'm talking to someone in #vandalism-en-wp right now who is having a hell time with his PC :D. GofG _|^|_| Contribs 21:06, 18 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for helping with the AOL vandal. There's a page on them at User:Mboverload/vandalattack, but they've obviously changed IP pools. Kevin_b_er 04:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC) reply

...for the revert on the Music of Italy article. It was a curious bit of vandalism just to delete an entire section like that. I'm relatively new to Wikipedia. I suppose I'll have to get used to it. Thanks again. Cheers from Naples, Italy. Jeffmatt 05:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I trust you heard about LA meetup 3? Any plans to attend?-- Rockero 07:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Re your "...I've been intending to add a bit to the pre-1600 section if I ever get back to writing..." That would be very helpful, I'm sure. When I first started this Wiki stuff a few months ago, I wasn't too sure about collaborative writing; however, it seems to have produced a pretty good result so far among the three or four main contributors. Jeffmatt 07:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I was just curious about your opinion on references. I've noticed lately on a couple of the older articles on composers that they are being called unreferenced because they don't have inline citations, Charles Ives (I added the inlines) and Philip Glass come to mind. What do you think of that? I think it's a bit silly to say that not having inlines = not having references, but it makes me think that I need to add inline citations for a number of things where if it were up to me I wouldn't, because I think inline citations are only for disputable facts, or quotes that need to be specifically attributed. Oh, and that lovely person, MichaelIsGreat has been blocked for disruption and personal attacks, after having accused you, myself, RobertG and a newbie of bad faith and being pawns of jealous piano companies, I guess. <sigh>. I hope you're doing well. I need a research project, so if you think of one you don't feel like doing, feel free to shoot it at me. Cheers, Mak (talk) 16:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC) reply

MarkBuckles suggested I expand the article on Reciting tone, which I did, with mixed results. After discussing it with him, I think the only way to clarify the structure of psalm tones is to essentially reproduce the nine psalm tone formulae in staff notation from Hoppin. This raises two questions. First, how? If I were to reproduce the formulae in Finale, say, and save it as a .pdf file, is there a simple way to insert in it an article? Second, is it kosher to lift a whole page of material directly from source material, even with attribution, or am I violating copyright? Any suggestions would be much appreciated! Peirigill 18:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello again Antandrus. I've finally got round to adding the Rauschpfeife photos - just thought you'd like to know! All the best, Mattmm 17:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC) reply

ROFL: he still hasn't got the message, has he? Best regards, RobertG ♬ talk 19:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Good grief, that's quite a rant ... I'm sure it's just a "flesh wound" though ... ;-) Antandrus (talk) 23:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey Antandrus. What's up? Do you think I'm feeding trolls? I'm trying to limit the troll damage to my talk page, but I don't know how successful I'm being. I'm on IRC if you want to say hi. Mak (talk) 03:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, we got netsplitted :) Mak (talk) 05:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Nice one! I like it. How likely is it someone would lie about studying with Palestrina at that time, I wonder? It's not like they had background checks back in the day, and he was pretty hot stuff, post Council of Trent. Not saying I think he was lieing, it just occurred to me someone might. Mak (talk) 05:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Well, he got the big post at St. John Lateran the year after dedicating that book to Palestrina; it was probably with Palestrina's blessing, and the book may have been, um, a bit of mild flattery (oh-oh, original research... ) Antandrus (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Stop thinking! No thinking about things! Not allowed! No original thought! It's like original research multiplied by fifteen! Mak (talk) 06:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Wikipedia:Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, — Cel es tianpower ^háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

What does "chord form" mean to you? Root (chord) uses it a couple times. Do you think it means quality? Mak (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I just took a slash at it. My only concern is that Brits sometimes use different words in theory stuff. Mak (talk) 01:29, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, thanks for the speedy revert and block! I appreciate it lots. .ιΙ Inhuman14 Ιι.^{( talk | contrib)} 03:23, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

My pleasure! Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 03:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Sorry About that. I went to revert a vandal but looks like you beat me to it! Sorry Aeon 05:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes I was trying to warn that vandal....sorry again for the friendly fire. Aeon 05:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

You too....I will be more careful Aeon 05:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Snort. You didn't create that username, did you? :) Of course not: Antandrus is politically correct. You rock. Mak (talk) 03:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

LOL. Thanks. But now I'm rouge.  ;-) Antandrus (talk) 03:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

That's it. Own it. Mak (talk) 03:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

No problem, you can use the Wikipedia Hurricane scale on your userpage if you want to. °≈§→ Robo°_°maeyhem←§≈° ^Talk 05:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page. Much appreciated. *~Daniel~* 17:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

My pleasure! Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 17:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Can I create a section in Giuliani about the petition to have him ex-communicated or denied communion?

Pistolpierre 20:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I created the petition, it has not been covered in the news. However, were it allowed to be displayed on Wikipedia, it might receive enough signatures to make the news.

Pistolpierre 22:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello. I checked Recent Changes and yours was the first admin name I recognized, so I'm tossing the ball to you. It seems that 71.201.153.93 doesn't know how to take a hint. I've left {{subst:test}}, {{subst:test2}} and now {{subst:test3}} on his talk page. His M.O. is to "zap" a couple of pages, wait a few minutes until he thinks no one is looking, and then "zap" a couple of more. Would you mind dropping him a note on his talk page? Thank you. SWAdair 04:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Looks like that did the trick.  :) SWAdair 05:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Nice article. I'd love to read that book, I wonder if there's a translation? I've just done Theatre of Voices, which made me slightly annoyed because Paul Hillier grates on my nerves. Cheers, Mak (talk) 05:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Ho ho, I enjoyed that! He would somehow have been even more endearing if he had been arrogant enough to include himself in his list! Actually, thinking about it, if he was able to converse with Lucifer and Satan he mast already have been in the other place! Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 09:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

LOL, I was just stopping by to comment on that! Gave me a grin... now I am wondering about a contemporary version... :-) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

From the Talk page: "Looks like one of those things we discussed but never actually got around to doing. Unless I hear any strong objection in the next day or so, I'll move it. Anyone have an opinion on this? Antandrus (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)"

Go ahead...! Myopic Bookworm 12:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU VANDALISING several articles BY REMOVING LINKS?! i mean guru and dj premier

use your brain first if you got any, remove links then

you think the "wikipedia sucks" url is there for no reason?! first i had MY page linked which is gangstarr.ga.ohost.de but your admin friends who are obviously all geniuses decided to BAN ohost.de. get it unbanned and the "wikipedia sucks" url will disappear in the blink of an eye. 80.134.171.238 23:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Whatever. You're confusing this place with Usenet, or any number of internet flame boards. We're none of those things: we're a project to build an encyclopedia. I welcome you to look around and get a feeling for how we operate here, but let me start by telling you that insulting, cursing, and making threats are tolerated poorly by the community. Thanks. Antandrus (talk) 00:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage so quickly! °≈§→  Robomaeyhem: T/ ←§≈° 03:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

You're welcome again! Don't know why RC patrol is so fun, but it is ... Antandrus (talk) 03:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

(new article) He was hired provided he didn't "talk of his miracles of war". I love it. Mak (talk) 04:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I don't have the book :( I've had the library page it from offsite, and I'm allowed to read it in their flourescent reading room under their watchful eye. Mak (talk) 04:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

That reminds me of that great scene in Citizen Kane; I don't think he was allowed to "check out" that book either, LOL. I haven't touched the singers: there could be hundreds of articles to write. (Oh, you might mention that "professional singers" were considered to be a lower social class; a naive reader might not realize this; Gesualdo was at pains to be an "amateur" composer for the same reason, not to damage the perception of his nobility -- if I understand their social structure correctly.) Nice article! Antandrus (talk) 04:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I reverted your deletion of the murder on king Alexander I of Yugoslavia on October_9. I can't really see how this is a vanity edit, because it has quite some historical significance (although most other posts of user 213.244.214.230 are vanity and/or non-notable). Stefan Jansen 07:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

No problem, these date pages can be quite a handful. Stefan Jansen 16:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

My name is Roygene. Perhaps you remember me? My brother vandalized all of those articles a few months ago? Anyway, he managed to get ahold of a manuscript I am writing and incorporate it into Star Wars. I have already tagged two such articles, Xeaus and Amelico, for deletion, but those are the only two I found and there may be more. I don't know how to check Caliente001's history or what articles he's edited, but knowing him, he probably did do some more damage. Roygene 19:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm just curious, but in your user boxes, if you're a professional violinist, shouldn't we just take it as read that you're also an advanced violinist?  :-) 67.71.143.94 17:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Oops, never mind. I should go book an appointment with my optometrist, because I didn't see that said violist, not violinist! D'oh! 67.71.143.94 17:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC) reply

No problem... actually I don't play nearly as much as I should... :-) Antandrus (talk) 21:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello Antandrus, a new user User:Cbrodersen, has just made many propositions for change to the Authentic performance article, which indeed has many shortcomings including, I think, the name. Being far more versed in both wikipedia policies and early music than I, I wondered if you might come to his assistance a bit. He also just seems like a cool person to know. Best wishes. -- MarkBuckles 23:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for voting! Hello Antandrus/Archive13, and thanks for your support in my recent RfA. I'm pleased to announce that it passed with a final tally of (96/0/0). I was overwhelmed by all of the nice comments and votes of confidence from everyone. Thanks again, and see you around! OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC) reply

hi! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.6.17 ( talk • contribs)

Hello there! Antandrus (talk) 19:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for fixing my talk page. Sometimes being an admin really is a janitorial job. Cheers, - Will Beback 06:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for undoing the vandalism to my talk page. Dar-Ape 17:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC) reply

... for reverting vandalism to my userpage. JFW |  T@lk 18:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Yeah, Antandrus, "it really hapens! GOSH!" ::grin:: Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Dear Antandrus,

Thank you for reviewing the recent additions to the Cancer page on Wikipedia. I understand and appreciate your concern with people posting fringe theories on your site. The general, unifying theory of cancer may be new and innovative; however, it is not a fringe theory. To copy directly from the acknowledgements page of the author’s book:

"Many people have provided me with support, help, and encouragement in the course of this work. I would like to thank Dr. Emil Frei III, M.D., Physician-in-Chief, Emeritus at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; Donald S. Coffey, Ph.D. Professor of Oncology, Urology, Pharmacology, Molecular Biology, and Pathology, Johns Hopkins Oncology Center; Arthur C. Upton, M.D., former Director of the National Cancer Institute; Lawrence A. Loeb, M.D., Ph.D., Professor of Pathology and Biochemistry, University of Washington School of Medicine; George F. Vande Woude, Ph.D., Director Van Andel Research Institute; Craig Webb, Ph.D., Laboratory of Tumor Metastasis and Angiogenesis, Van Andel Research Institute; Harvey I. Pass, M.D., Chief, Division of Thoracic Surgery and Thoracic Oncology, NYU School of Medicine and NCI Cancer Center; Bernie Crespi, Ph.D., Professor of Evolutionary Biology, Simon Fraser University; Michael Liebman, Ph.D., Executive Director, Windber Research Institute; Richard I. Somiari, Ph.D., President and Chief Science Officer, ITSI-Biosciences; Jack Secrist, Ph.D., Vice President of Drug Discovery, Southern Research Institute; Byron Goldstein, Ph.D. and Carla Wofsy, Ph.D., Dept. of Theoretical Biophysics and Biology, Los Alamos National Labs; Dr. Christopher J. Logothetis, M.D., Chairman of the Deparment of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center; Dr. Robert Eyre, M.D., Dept. of Urology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center; Colonel Craig D. Shriver, M.D., Chief of General Surgery and Clinical Breast Care Program Director, Walter Reed Army Medical Center; Arthur Pardee, Ph.D., Department of Cancer Biology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Professor of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology Emeritus, Harvard Medical School; Andre Rosowsky, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Biological Chemistry and Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; Nora M. Navone, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Medicine, Dept. of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center; Timothy J. McDonnell, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor of Molecular Pathology and Medicine, Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center; Isan Chen, M.D., Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center; Garth Anderson, Ph.D., Assistant Research Professor, Roswell Park Cancer Institute; Samuel C. Mok, Ph.D., Director of the Laboratory of Gynecologic Oncology at Brigham and Womens Hospital; Christina Bandera, M.D., Dept. of Gynecologic Oncology, Women & Infants Hospital; Andrew V. Schally, Ph.D., M.D.H.C., Professor of Medicine, Tulane University; and Dr. Judah Folkman, Director, Vascular Biology Program, Andrus Professor of Pediatric Surgery and Professor of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School."

Thank you for considering this additional material in your decision to allow me to re-post. It is vital for additional scientists, researchers, and the public to have the opportunity to learn about this cutting-edge technology. Please feel free to contact me anytime by calling me at (617) 945-1665 or by e-mailing me at jglazier@law.harvard.edu.

With very best regards, Jeff Glazier —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffglazier ( talk • contribs)

Dear Antandrus,

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I respect your policies and the integrity of your website, and feel confident that in the near future PRTT will meet your standards and will be able to be included on your site.

With very best regards, Jeff Glazier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.45.253 ( talk • contribs)

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page. IrishGuy ^talk 02:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Yeah, I've noticed a few like that, but haven't had the wherewithal to do them yet. (Note the vagueness of Ground bass (ostinato) as well as Continuo (Figured bass, which isn't quite right in my POV). I'm on IRC, if you care :) For some reason I've taken it into my head to create redirects, etc. for Giovanni Battista, which is a bit larger than I had anticipated. Mak (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your vote in my RFA, which succeeded with a final tally of 66-0-4. If there's anything I can help you with now that I'm an admin, please let me know on my talk page. Again, thanks! Mango juice talk 21:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You're quite welcome, and I'm sure you'll be a good one! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 21:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply

No response necessary, just wanted to thank you for taking care or this thorn in my side. PAZ, -- Rockero 23:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks. Appreciated -- Samir धर्म 04:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply

My pleasure! Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 04:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey Antandrus. It was nice to sign on and find a nice message instead of a rant :-) I'm pretty happy with the articles I've done today, although they could probably do with a quick copy-edit and some smoothing ( Médée (Charpentier opera), Isabella Bendidio, and Leonora Sanvitale if you're feeling bored.) I looked in on Gregorian chant's FAC thingie, and it was a bit disheartening. I would help out, but when I read it I think it flows pretty well, so I feel a bit helpless. Now I'm checking inter-wiki links between Spanish and French, which is funny because I don't know any Spanish, I just know enough Latin and other Romance languages to figure it out pretty easily. It's kinda fun. Oh! And some family pull managed to get me the Newcomb through interlibrary loan already! Score! Prepare for some serious Madrigal in Ferrara action. Cheers, Mak (talk) 03:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Holy crap! Y'know what Fin de siècle is in French? Cheese!! My mind has now been blown. Mak (talk) 03:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I know that I've seen a set of guidelines, rules, and template outline when editing content for U.S. cities. Could you please direct me to the source or help section? I'm needing to prove that demographic information is based on the most recent U.S. Census. Many thanks! -- CityGirl 21:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I responded on your talk page. Welcome to Wikipedia! Antandrus (talk) 23:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello Antandrus: First, thank you very much for your kind welcome note the other day. I have skimmed your user page and am very interested to learn more about your career-changing, an area I struggle with constantly. But I am unwilling to burden either of our pages (mine is so nascent as to be virtually non-existent) with a lengthy discussion. What's the best way for me to ask you my questions? Merci! Wspencer11 14:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for helping me so much

I am deeply sorry for the sins I have commited here. I hope my reëntry here will be sincerely welcomed. ε γκυκλοπ αίδεια * 19:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, great job on cleaning up that vandalism! I bet that Willy's moves were reverted so fast that it made his head spin faster than his wheels did! ;) -- Ixfd64 23:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reverting my user page. I don't know what's sadder - these guys doing the vandalism on a Friday night, or us sitting here on a Friday night cleaning up after them. ;-) Thanks again - Baseball,Baby! ^{balls• strikes} 00:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Unless you are able to provide a non-commercial link of the score & music of Ellens dritter Gesang, is it not rather unhelpful to Wikipedia visitors that you removed the one I found and provided (after trawling the internet for ages)? I have also found [4], which is the only one I was able to trace with the text; but presumably this will be regarded as an even greater offense to the Wikipedia policy. Please don't trouble yourself with a reply, just put a link to the score and music in! Thank you. 02:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.179.130 ( talk • contribs) .

I replied on your talk page. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:54, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reverting the recent vandalism on my talk page :). Fabricationary 20:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I'll second that - I'm glad you guys are around and on the job. This is certainly one determined vandal. -- Dan 18:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi. Any idea of how successful were the range blocks today? Cheers TigerShark 23:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks, have you had any feedback on how much collateral damage was caused by them? Cheers TigerShark 23:15, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

OK thanks, good to know. I'm off to bed now but, if I see it again tomorrow, I'll be more confident to apply a range block if it becomes necessary. Cheers TigerShark 23:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Haven't quite made it to bed yet - but I did apply a range block. I just wondered which ranges you have seen the bot active in so far. I have reverted in 207.200.116 and 112 - have you seen vandalism outside of these ranges? If there is only a small number of 3rd level ranges, then maybe longer /24 blocks could be applied to them (e.g. 207.200.116.0/24). Any thoughts? Cheers TigerShark 23:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

No probs - I though more people would have commented on this by now. Just to let you know, I have just blocked 207.200.116.0/24 for 30 minutes. Cheers TigerShark 23:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Good job spotting the Arm* redirect vandal, he/she only got to make one circular redirect this time. Kevin_b_er 02:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Did I react too strongly here? [5] Mak (talk) 19:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh, and I forwarded the e-mail to you. I wrote this just as I got your e-mail :-) Mak (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply

My pleasure; the range blocks seemed to slow him a bit more, and eventually he would have been stymied. The next step should probably be to contact his ISP. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply

That's a really lovely article. Great job. I made a couple edits you should probably check. It's interesting how the circumstances of performance sound pretty much the same as in the musica secreta of Alfonso II d'Este, except he might have invited important nobility more often. I feel like there ought to be a better article to link to on the so-called effects of the ancient modes, as well as on Greek poetic metre. Perhaps I'll have to write them myself. Have a good evening. Mak (talk) 23:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I am using AOL at my cousins house. Well I log in to Wikipedia and find myself autoblocked because of a guy called user:Easter Bunny Gangsters ae n00bs ON WHEELS!. Appearantly he got off the internet just as I got on and I got his old IP. Gang sta EB ( sliding logs~ dive logs) 16:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply

No problem: should be done now. Happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply

[6] Thanks Ant. May I call you Ant? (btw, way to AGF above :-) pretty astonishing coincidence) Mak (talk) 04:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Ah, you're welcome. Let's see... ancient city, bug, ancient city, bug... sure, Ant is fine.  ;-) Antandrus (talk) 04:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I saw the vandalism on the Chechen guy's page, and you beat me to the punch on that one. Great job, and thanks for doing what you do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Istheway2 ( talk • contribs)

I've converted the references to templatized format, but Template:Cite encyclopedia requires the specific entry title (and author, if it is given) to work. Could you add it? Circeus 02:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

'Tis done: thanks for updating the reference style (this is starting to get complicated ... I suppose I ought to fix the other 400-odd articles I have with references now) Antandrus (talk) 02:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

No need to actually update the references. Templates allow for finer aditions (they generate some metadata) and standardized display, but any normal citation style is just fine. Circeus 04:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

On 12 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article musique mesurée, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- Mgm| ^(talk) 07:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Samsara ( talk • contribs) 21:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC) reply

So, I finally got the guts to post the sound files I uploaded months ago (you might have already noticed), you've already heard most of them, except and which I added because it's funny. Mindspillage wants me to put them up for Wikimania awards but I need to figure out which one. Cheers (and I'm hanging about on IRC) Mak (talk) 02:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I haven't listened yet but I will when I have a minute (probably not until Tuesday: I have houseguests, and will have very few moments at my computer between now and then). Nice work on Margherita Gonzaga d'Este, btw.  :-) Antandrus (talk) 03:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I thank one and all - Jarandal, Antandrus, Titoxd, Xaosflux, TenOfAllTrades, mboverload, PseudoSudo, Knowledge Seeker, Haukurth, Deathphoenix, Zzyzx11, Tyrenius, Zscout370, AnnH, Rick Block, Tyrenius (again), Zscout370 (again) and NoSeptember for your support.

To Jeffrey O. Gustafson who initiated this block request I ask why? We have had no interaction until now so how do you come to this requested action at WP:AN? Did you come across my account during your own research or are you acting as a proxy for another admin/user with whom I've caused to be angry with me? In reviewing your contributions I see no such "letter of the law" before now and so I feel singled out by you and I have no clue as to why - that to me is most disturbing. If you've come to this action on your own then should I be always wary of another admin challenging the legitimacy of my account?

For TenOfAllTrades who advised me not to worry and Rick who made me laugh I give special thanks, you've helped me to not take this so personally. And to Jeff, thanks for being courteous in informing me of your action and for letting me feel that your heart wasn't for blocking me.
Except for my one explanation above, I haven't edited for a few days now so as to allow y'all to comment about this based on my history of contribution rather than my reaction to it.

I wanted to say all of this before it all goes to archive heaven. I still have a lingering concern that this may arise again and don't want to go through WP life looking over my shoulder or worrying that I might piss-off some admin and cause another inquiry about the legitimacy of my account. If any of you who have been so gracious as to take the time to support me here have any suggestions to prevent such an action, please drop your thoughts on my talk or by email.

Finally, on a personal note to all, I never ever expected so much supportive response from all of you. I know that I've been moody at times and have spoken in ways that I have regretted the next day. I hoped otherwise but it seemed that those unfortunate responses might end up being my legacy as they were the foremost in my mind. And so far as this being a "role account", I think that I'll let the descriptions of AnnH and NoSeptember (both above) stand as the most intuitive descriptions of this account. My (and our) warmest regards to all of you for your understanding and outward support for the continuation of hydnjo's user account and future contributions. Again, my delighted and humble thanks :-) -- hydnjo talk 02:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC) reply

addendum: Jeff, I was confused at the outset in that I wasn't aware of the "role account" policy and then after becoming aware I was frustrated that I had made so many edits which could mislead someone to the conclusion that my account was a role account. I'm sorry that in my zeal to understand your actions that I posed the possibility that you were acting at someone else's behest. I have no evidence of that and it was improper of me to even mention that such a bizarre conspiracy was possible. I find myself guilty of "blaming the messenger" and posting an inappropriate comment about your motivation.

As for my account, I want to state that it is not a role account and I apologize for leaving the impression that it is one. "hydnjo" is the signature that I commonly use for much of my correspondence and thought it to be appropriate when I first started my WP account. The portmanteau is an acknowledgment of our shared existence and not an indication that Heidi and I share in editing at WP.

I thank you for your courtesy in informing me at the outset of the discussion at WP:AN and for your compliments about my contributions. The comments in my response were made in the shadow of my own frustration with my having left a trail of edits that could easily be construed as having come from either Heidi or myself. I sincerely apologize to you for making any suggestion as to your motivation in bringing up a legitimate policy question. You have a genuine concern for the orderly behavior of our editors and I thank you for initiating this discussion and providing me the opportunity to explain the nature of my account. -- hydnjo talk 18:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello Antandrus. I am writing to inform you that I have placed a merge tag on two articles: Lodovico Zacconi and Lucovico Zacconi of which the former was greatly expanded by you over the last two years. As I hold no PhD in music composition, I was wandering if you could take a look at both. As far as I can tell, the articles are about the same person. If so, they should indeed be merged. If, however, I have made a mistake, please drop me a line on my talk page. RedZebra 07:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC) reply

		Thanks for contributing to my successful RfA!
		To the people who have supported my request: I appreciate the show of confidence in me and I hope I live up to your expectations! To the people who opposed the request: I'm certainly not ignoring the constructive criticism and advice you've offered. I thank you as well! ♥! ~Kylu ( u| t) 23:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Much Music Cabal love. :) ~Kylu ( u| t) 23:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your vandalism revert on County Route 561 (New Jersey)! Much appreciated. -- NORTH ^talk 02:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I do not believe Ive made your aquatance before since I've not editing Wikipdia for some months. I tried to leave a message for "Happy Camper" this morning at 11:00 (Eastern Standard Time) and it said that you had blocked my AOL ISP. The name of the offending ISP was not mine which is "Merlinus" I would appreciate it if you could rectify this and unblock me as soon as possible. Peace... Marc -- merlinus 15:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)-- merlinus 15:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)-- merlinus 15:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)-- merlinus 15:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I just unblocked the only four autoblocks I saw in the log which might apply. See if that helps. Note that if you are able to edit my talk page, you are not blocked. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Ok, my irc is broken, but check out their letters. They're obviously made up, much like their stuff on here. Cheers, Mak (talk) 05:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh dear. I hate to say it, but that's really funny. (I can be childish sometimes :) See you around and about. Cheers, Mak (talk) 23:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Causing AOL collateral damage-- 152.163.100.13 13:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I released the autoblocks. Antandrus (talk) 15:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I saw that you undid Curps' indef block but reblocked for 24 hrs. This user sent in an unblock request to unblock-en-l and stated that they weren't causing a problem. In looking at their edit histories, I see some contentious stuff, but it doesn't appear clearly blockable.

If they aren't a zombie or proxy, what is the current justification to block them?

Thank you.

Georgewilliamherbert 19:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Ok, so I should be able to figure this out from their website, but if you join the AMS do you get free Grove access, or just cheaper? Mak (talk) 23:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC) reply

[7] Notable rests. Mak (talk) 03:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Ok, so someone who shall remain nameless might have given me access to grove, and I was planning on a new-article marathon today (it was working fine yesterday), but now their home page isn't loading. Are you having the same problem, or is it just me? Mak (talk) 18:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey Antandrus, thanks for reverting vandalism on my user talk page :D Cheers, Tangot a ngo 16:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You're welcome! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 16:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for keeping the page on Tay Sachs Disease free of vandals. You are incredibly fast. Why would anybody want to vandalize a page about a disease? -- Metzenberg 21:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You're welcome ... that particular vandal uses the random page feature. Honestly, people like that are baffling. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 22:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks I have listed him at AIV

HAve this for your efforts

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For going after IP Vandals Aeon Insane Ward 05:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC) reply

My pleasure: thanks for the star, though I'll never be as good as Rick was at his best. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I know the feeling lol. Oh well got to keep on fighting the vandals can't let them win! Aeon ^{Insane Ward} 05:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks again! Aeon ^{Insane Ward} 05:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC) reply

i thought anyone could edit ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hong ton po ( talk • contribs) . -- moved from the top with section head by Antandrus (talk)

Yes, anyone can edit. However, we want people to add useful, verifiably accurate information, not vandalism, such as the addition of the word "penis" to the cryptography article, as you did in your first edit. Antandrus (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey, Antandrus. Thanks for identifying Mr. Starchy and friends as NCV socks. (I didn't know about that vandal, and so couldn't identify him when we were dealing with his silliness at Lentil (slur) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), etc.)

I see at checkuser that Mackensen has blocked two IP ranges associated with this vandal; is it worth the labor involved to block the accounts as well, or will the range block be sufficient? (Some of the socks were blocked during the latest outbreak, but not all of them, and not all the blocks were indefinite; in particular, many of the accounts used to vandalise Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) have not been blocked or tagged. I guess I'm wondering if it's worth my time to tag and block them all or not. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 07:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi Josiah: thanks for the message. Yes, that's our "friend", the kid in North Carolina, who has literally been vandalising every day (with maybe a handful of exceptions, for example when all his ranges have been blocked) for more than a year. Regarding blocks of individual puppets: I usually block them, because he uses aged accounts for page-move vandalism--it's next door to impossible to get them all though, since he has made thousands. Let's hope Mackensen's range-block (with the delicious summary "hive of sum and villainy") sticks. Happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 15:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh--and regarding tagging the accounts, I have mixed feelings about that. He's clearly motivated by a desire to be notorious, and having a huge category devoted to his sockpuppets is like having a huge trophy cabinet, and I think encourages him: I have used the "indefblockeduser" tag for several hundred of his socks for that reason. Yet I can understand the desire to put the "NCV" tag on so that new editors, admins, and RC patrollers can get an idea of what his typical behavior is. Antandrus (talk) 15:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I've blocked all the accounts that were listed at RCU, and the ones that were used on Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp. I ended up tagging some of the accounts with {{NCV}} and some with {{indefblockeduser}}; more with NCV, just because it was fewer keystrokes. (I figured it was good to have some of this batch in the "trophy cabinet" to show patterns in naming, like the "lentil" business. I think it's handy for less experienced admins like me to be able to see more of the history.) Thanks for the info, though, and I hope that Mackensen's range block takes care of the kid, for a while at least. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 22:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC) reply

that wikivandalism will never stop it may sleep or rest but never die off completly.....

Rob-0wns 21:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC) reply

(note to anyone else reading this: this is in response to my block log message here [8]) Antandrus (talk) 05:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You're right, in general: in the history of humanity there have been those who build, and those who deface and destroy: the former outnumber the latter, both in the history of civilization and in the microcosm of that which we have on Wikipedia. These things are universal and will never change. Yet each person has the ability to choose whether to be a builder or one who tears down. Why do you make your choice the way you do?

Genghis Khan tore cities down and killed their inhabitants because the settled way of life was a threat to his idea of what was the right way to live: always moving. Why would one want to tear down an encyclopedia? Is the accumulation of knowledge in one place a problem? I realize these are unusual questions to ask of a vandal, but think about them: do you really know why you do what you do? Antandrus (talk) 05:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hi,

User:TurkishHorde continues to vandalize various articles, and as you can see in his/her User talk:TurkishHorde page he/she does not heed your warnings and even challenges them, clearly demonstrating his/her true intentions. Therefore I propose that you ban this user from Wikipedia. Take care -- Xasf 10:38, 24 July 2006 (GMT+3)

Second the above motion. Also, do people live in such a breath-taking enviromnment? Amazing, thanks for the picture. Now I really have to visit my friend in LA and drive to Gaviota territories! Politis 11:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC) reply

How dare you delete my post because you chose to live in La La Land! The time before common sense and science! You are not gay and have never had to suffer with it. You are a hate monger! Enjoy your fake Bible. A book written by man for man. A book that has lead to millions of deaths due to war and hatrid! A book that anyone with common sense can see is fake! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.154.209.110 ( talk • contribs) .

You're making a lot of assumptions here. If only you knew. LOL. Antandrus (talk) 02:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the quick revert! Your work is very much appreciated. -- TeaDrinker 02:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Yeah, Antandrus, you politically correct ultra-conservative Christian! How dare you! :-) Mak (talk) 03:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

(Afterthought) I've been seeing a lot of very strange talk-page spam the last couple days... Odd. This one reminds me of this incident, which Squid caught. It was pretty funny :-) Mak (talk) 03:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I remember that. LOL.... that's a lot of information... Antandrus (talk) 03:35, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Speaking of TMI... being accused of homophobia and homosexuality within minutes of each other... that's impressive. I hope one day to be rouge enough to reach your obvious level of obfuscation of your actual nature. Cheers, Mak (talk) 04:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm actually laughing; yes, it's pretty funny (but come to think of it, I have known some gay homophobes; they were confused, angry teenagers, a lot like most of our vandals!) Antandrus (talk) 04:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Hey Antandrus! Thanks for catching the vandalism on my page. See you around! - Tapir Terrific 02:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Likewise for my page -- Brat32 04:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You're both welcome; cheers! Antandrus (talk) 04:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks also for reverting the vandalism on my page. It seems like I have attracted a Dickhead over a revert I made to Caledonian Road tube station. regards DavidCane 23:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You blocked her??? OH N0EZ! The Liberal cabal will be mad at you! Tito xd^{( ?!?)} 04:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Is it just me, or is the aggravation of getting an article up to FA status so completely not worth forty dollars for the foundation, no less. I'm kind of interested in helping anyway, partially because it seems like there's at least a little interest and possibly something I could help with. But I'm not looking forward to Tony1's "Why don't you have someone copyedit it, your turds of illiterate garbageness". But perhaps he won't say that. Mak (talk) 22:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC) reply

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I hereby award you this anti-vandalism barnstar for your tireless contributions towards countering vandalism and making Wikipedia a better place for all. Thanks. :)  G. H e 02:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I am apparently now using either meat or sockpuppets. And I thought I was being particularly nice in regards to this AfD. Oh well, just goes to show, being nice gets you crap on the intarwebs. Mak (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks for reverting my talk page! Looks like someone was trying to impersonate me. -- aishel 12:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Wayne Smith AKA Projectorion/UniverseToday/UniverseDaily/Flying Fox etc is on a tear:

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions&target=202.137.162.250

Altho many of his sockpuppets have been blocked, he is posting via a new IP

yale

Thanks for clearing up the vandalism on my user page. Reyk _YO! 08:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Will you add a suspected sockpuppet master tag to the user:coolcaesar page. He is currently a listed ArbCom Case, and has a suspected sockpuppet, user:Anaheimat but keeps deleting the tag. Until a checkuser is made, I think it needs to remain there. I would appreciate it. -- 69.227.160.83 07:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot for the message. It's good to know sometimes that people appreciate what I do - also nice to find another early music/Baroque enthusiast. The topic is slowly getting better on Wikipedia, but it's still a long way off (though Gregorian Chant is a very nice article to look at, and should get FA). Opera in general is still erratically covered, but the Opera Project is very active and we're getting there (mind you, I only did a bit with Henze - 1 fairly lengthy paragraph for the biography - and a whole load of one-sentence stubs for the operas; I think that Henry Flower was the one who really expanded the bio).

Anyway, about some real editing; I did a couple of stubs the other day, The Indian Queen and Erwartung, and I don't know if you're looking for something to do, but if you have a recording or have seen one or both of these the two of them could certainly stand some expansion. This last is a very long-term project, but I'm working on a "History of Opera" article that's currently gestating in my workspace (the link near the bottom of my userpage). It's currently only at the "vague outlines" stage but what I thought I might do was to get a more definite shape to the article and then ask specialists in various periods and genres to contribute (i.e Meladina for Russian opera; Ssilvers for operatic/musical crossbreeds, etc). Perhaps there's a particular section that you might enjoy creating? Anyway, the whole thing's very long-term and there's no real urgency, but it might be something to bear in mind. Thanks again for the encouragement. Cheers, Moreschi 20:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I really appreciate your fixing the vandalism on my talk page! -- Chuchunezumi 20:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

You're welcome; always happy to zap userpage vandalism. Antandrus (talk) 21:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I see that you are aware that someone is placing on various articles, under different usernames. Anything I can do to help? --  Jmatt1122  CVU  ^(Talk)  21:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I did not know that poem, it's interesting. I actually know about what we called "broken consorts", a number of my friends had one as their chamber music group one semester, it was pretty funny. One of my friends was playing a school bandora which had fixed frets in an approximation of quarter comma mean tone. It really pissed him off :-) I've just done Viola bastarda, because mindspillage likes the name, and it made sense as a companion article to division viol. In regards to literature critics never knowing about music, I agree, I wish altogether there were more and better interdisciplinary cooperation. It's something I would think the wiki would be really perfect for; however, I mostly see interdisciplinary cruft instead. Cheers, Mak (talk) 04:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC) reply