This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

See subpart 12 of Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion#Straw_poll_guidelines. MBisanz ^talk 01:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:BLP is a policy on WP. Its use is not negotiable. If you can write a fully referenced, NPOV article about Jim Rohn, please do so! Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 16:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Please be careful when using rollback. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 16:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

recommend you stay off Huggle on April Fools Day. 68.237.239.228 ( talk) 17:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Although there may be some disagreement as to categorisations, your claim that my edit of the General Electric article constitutes vandalism is objectively false because the content of the article, as established by a citation already there, shows that General Electric has been convicted of two felony offences in United States District Court. Your revision of my edit is not only unconstructive and without merit, but your claims of vandalism are clearly defamatory. I demand that you retract your allegation and cease and desist from making further false revisions based upon your apparent failure to read the article in question. -- 213.166.90.130 ( talk) 18:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Would any of you please bother reading the relevant categories and links rather than making straw man arguments? As established, under the law, GE is a person and J.delanoy is therefore incorrect in claiming that GE is not capable of being considered a criminal. Moreover, if you bothered reading the links, you would be aware that GE defrauded the United States Government of $26.5 million and engaging in illegal arms sales abroad. Such fraud is notable in and of itself due to its scale and involvement in the international arms trade. Please also note that Martha Stewart is listed in the category, which you do not claim to be vandalism or inappropriate for the category due to the fact that her crimes were quite a bit smaller than those of GE in terms of the scale of fraud committed and the global impact of the crime. Also, the reference to GE's offences as federal felonies in the United States provide some context as to the nature of the criminal action and cannot constitute vandalism. Please admit that your allegations against me are false and commit yourself to understanding the nature of corporate personhood and the scale of criminal offences in the USA before your ignorance leads you to make similarly erroneous statements in the future. -- 213.166.90.130 ( talk) 13:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

If you wish to argue that it is clear that personhood for the purposes of the category in question only apply to natural persons, then you should rely on a description or definition from the appropriate context that excludes corporations. As you have merely pointed to the word person on multiple occasions, you have failed to establish any exclusion of corporations, much less that it is clear that only natural persons are the referent. In context, the criteria for conviction pursuant to law that has not been expunged suggests that the critertia is based upon the legal treatment of personhood and criminal cupability. You are also incorrect in claiming that a person must not be notable except for having committed a crime to be in the category. The ability to claim notability solely because of the crime as provided in the definition does not exclude those who have multiple claims to notability that are in and of themselves sufficient to warrant Wikipedia coverage. General Electric's crime is such that it can claim notability without referring to its other grounds for notability. If you disagree with me, then please show some consistency by alleging vandalism for the presence of Martha Stewart and James Tobin, and many others, in the category, as these people were more notable before committing their crimes. -- 213.166.90.130 ( talk) 17:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Invisible Barnstar
		For showing the most signs of Wikipediholism, volunteerism and devotion. Made real by exhibiting a mountain of edits in 2008, I award you the Invisible Barntstar   Marlith (Talk)  23:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No, you should have. I would have never known that you completed the quest if you didn't notify me.   Marlith (Talk)  23:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

As requested I've take care of changing the license for this image www.flickr.com/photos/thomascuelho/1402437722/ I hope this is the right license for your purpose.

Sincerely,

Thomas CUELHO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.2.23.39 ( talk) 06:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed, that had never occurred to me. J Milburn ( talk) 12:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Aprils fools day was a blast. Loads of users lightened up to have good old fashion fun. I want to thank you for taking part in editing this page in particular and even though I may not know you, embrace the same talk pages, or even edit with you in the near future, I'd like to award you this Barnstar for making Wikipedia a fun environment in which to contribute. Until next year. :) SynergeticMaggot ( talk) 13:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

As requested, I have changed the license to allow for non-commercial usage of this photo as long as credit is received. Please let me know if there is any other assistance I may provide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.86.223 ( talk) 17:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I actually was!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Liar, I've got maybe a fifth of the ones you do =P

weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 18:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I don't know what I've got. But sometimes it goes really fast, and sometimes it does nothing.. :/ weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 18:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Food for thought indeed...that would be the most likely reason. Although, it would be handy to tell us that in the software, maybe a little light at the bottom or something. weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 18:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That would be handy. Or we could ask Gurch to add it, just a thought =) Either way, it might not matter in a couple months time, as you say... weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 18:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I blocked the vandal attacking you and reverted his most recent bit of vandalism to your page. Happy editing, Malinaccier ( talk) 01:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Some people are freaks. He'll be back after his block expires, I'm sure. Next it will be my userpage, but I don't mind it. One particular vandal continuously vandalized my userpage for several weeks before stopping... Malinaccier ( talk) 01:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it would be too much of a problem if your userpage was semi-protected. If you want me to, I'll do it for you. Malinaccier ( talk) 01:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

It's slightly retaliatory in nature, but not a problem. IMHO, if a user vandalizes another's user page, they deserve a final warning and eventual block. If you're worried about the final warning, then you could start with a level 3 warning instead. I persoonally don't protect my userpage because I enjoy reverting the vandalism that it attracts because it tells me that I'm doing a good job =). Malinaccier ( talk) 01:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol, the deleted text isn't saved anymore. I haven't gotten any hate articles, but my userpage was moved to "Jay's Fat Dick" or something of the like about 2-3 times. If you want, you can email me the content of your hate article. Malinaccier ( talk) 02:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

That was pretty funny actually. That vandal should go into historical fiction. Malinaccier ( talk) 02:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Like using it to revert good-faith edits? I'd give them a non-templated warning/suggestion. They probably will be more than likely to correct their actions. Malinaccier ( talk) 02:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh. I don't think so. By throttle I thought you meant "strangle". =) Malinaccier ( talk) 02:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

It's just never happened to me before, so I had no clue what you were talking about. Malinaccier ( talk) 02:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done Malinaccier ( talk) 02:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I only protected for new and unregistered users. Would you like it to be "fully move protected"? Malinaccier ( talk) 02:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

re- Done Malinaccier ( talk) 02:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the shiny! It was no problem to protect your userpage and talk page, reverting the vandal, blocking the vandal, etc., etc. It was nice talking to you anyway and I look forward to editing with you in the future. If you need anything else, don't hesitate to ask! Malinaccier ( talk) 03:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For swiftly and kindly removing vandalism from my userpage - thankyou! ALLOCKE| talk 01:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I generally haven't taken the time to warn people, just rode herd on Recent Changes, revert, and hope the network of bots does something sensible. That edit was less a warning than a record for others. Thanks for the links. Mindstalk ( talk) 19:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't as descriptive as it could have been, but in this particular case it was rather apparent what needed to be done. :) Glass Cobra 19:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, that's fine. The blocking admin will do the legwork necessary anyway (hopefully :P). Glass Cobra 19:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I changed the licensing of my image at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mozul/311411210/ I looked up wikipedia's policy about insisting it allow commercial works of images and I see where they state that, but I don't understand why. Isn't Wikipedia a non-profit, therefore non-commercial organization? Why would they require images to allow commercial use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.221.224.7 ( talk) 21:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Was just wondering why you bothered to use a db tag on it - it's just a talk page, why not simply blank it and move on? - mattbuck ( Talk) 00:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for the Excellent Userpage award. My page was inspired by the pages of User:Sango123 and User:Fang Aili, but I have made many changes to it over time, which is why the number of edits in my userspace is so high. So yes, you could say that I designed it, through both borrowing and trial and error. Thanks again! -- Kyok o 16:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi J.delanoy. I would like to inform you that another editor has nominated a section of a page in your userspace ( User:J.delanoy/userpage#Funny Stuff) for deletion, along with the pages of other users, and the discussion is located here. Your input on the matter would be appreciated. -- Pixelface ( talk) 20:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm slightly offended by you treating it as vandalism. I'm only trying to make friends on wikipedia, so I can eventually become more active and knowledgable. What is wrong with making friends?

216.229.227.142 ( talk) 15:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand how friendship building can be construed as spamming/ vandalism. This is making me sad and discouraged. :-(

216.229.227.142 ( talk) 15:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have as you asked changed the licence on the Image in question.

If there isd anything else I can do please let me know.

Regards

Ray McFadyen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Speedpics ( talk • contribs) 23:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Answer the question, and prove it. Basketball110 _{pick away...} 23:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		I, Basketball110, hereby award you this barnstar for making 15000 edits in a single month. Basketball110 pick away... 23:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you an admin? Basketball110 _{pick away...} 23:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I was going to ask that next. But I won't now. I'll just show up on May __. Basketball110 _{pick away...} 23:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

You're lucky. Every time I go on Special:Random, I always end up on articles about esoteric persons and places. bibliomaniac 15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 00:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it was intended as an attack page, as the creator listed himself. Dloh cierekim 00:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I got a message saying "Hi, the recent edit you made to Drug abuse has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. " - I added a note to the definition of 'drug abuse' indicating that its us implied a negative judgement about the drug use in question - could you let me know why you think this was 'unconstructive'? Thanks!

Thank you for your response - I think the issue is more complex. Since many drugs that are associated with accusations are not illegal (or, where they are restricted, abuse happens under medical prescription) I am not sure that the assumption that illegal = bad is fair. Furthermore legal definitions of drugs vary by jurisdiction - what is illegal in one place may not be in another. In addition, there is debate over which drugs should be illegal. I think it is important to point out that 'abuse' is a negative judgement, not a statement of fact. Do you disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.161.93.250 ( talk) 01:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

...It always makes you feel better when they acknowledge your good work, doesn't it? Thingg ^{⊕ ⊗} 00:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar! I didn't even realize that it came across as humourous until you pointed it out. ... discospinster _talk 02:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

I saw your comments on the user's talk page about copyright. I agree, the user shouldn't have been spouting legal threats, and he shouldn't have been removing secret from Out of This World (card trick) in that manner. However (and it was a shame that the user wasn't aware of it at the time), he could have removed it under guidance on magical exposure at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Magic#Magic_Methods_and_Exposure. I have dropped a note on the user's talk page, and also removed the secret, stating the reasons why. Hopefully this will be enough to satisfy all concerned. StephenBuxton ( talk) 13:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning them is literally a waste of time. Revert and report; most school-ips have an arm-long warning list anyway. HalfShadow ( talk) 16:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, if it's automated, that's different. But when you get to a page and you actually have to scroll down to the bottom of the page to add a warning... 16:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind comments. I'll take a closer look at the warnings page and see if there's an automated way of placing a warning on the discussion page of the vandal. I've thought about them but many times the vandal is coming from a random IP and I'm doubtful that said vandal would take the time to read the warning message on that IP's discussion page. Does the new message alert show up to all those who are accessing the pages from the same IP address? Twalls ( talk) 17:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Had absolutely NO clue where to post this, so here it is: I tried to edit something with what I beleived was true in fact, not jus my opinion. YOU said it was vandalism. I am terribly offended at this, and I don't mean to sound like I'm kidding. I really am. Now before people get kicked off because the editors of this site are too lazy to verify facts, please be a little less hasty in calling someone a "vandal". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.142.20.134 ( talk) 21:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your complement. I guess I'll not request for the rollback feature but wait for somebody to give it to me if they feel I deserve it. I've noticed that leaving warnings makes them (vandals) feel attended to. The best thing (in my opinion) is to just revert their edits speedily and they'll eventually get fed-up and leave. Only when you warn and threaten them will they think of challenging the system. I guess that's basic human psychology. That's why I feel leaving warnings are a waste of time. Thanks again!  S3000   ☎ 17:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Blocking isn't the answer. A hardcore vandal just has to reset his connection and he'll have a new IP address, simple as that. BTW is it a requirement in Wikipedia to warn vandals? Because I recall reading some page advocating that ignoring is a fine thing to do. I can't remember which page is it.

Perhaps if it is a requirement, and if I come across some real bad vandalism (e.g. inserting foul words etc.) or repeat vandals, I'll leave them a warning.

Well thanks again for your kind remarks. God bless.  S3000   ☎ 18:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Same IP for 7 months! wow! mine changes everytime I reset, i.e. it changes every day! As I said I'll try my best to leave warnings in future for selected vandals. Thanks for bringing this issue to my attention.  S3000   ☎ 18:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I copied it from some other Wikipedian (can't remember who)! But I think it's available in MS Word under symbols for Arial Unicode MS font. Just copy mine if you like it!  S3000   ☎ 12:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I noticed your rv of a potential vandal entry on James Arthur Ray. I had myself rverted this ip one edit earlier. But this edit that you reverted seems to be OK. It actually decreases all the 'advertisement'-like feel of the article. What say? Prashanthns ( talk) 17:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

On another note, I was wondering if you can send me Huggle by email. I think the people there are very busy and have not responded to my request by email. So, I am asking some of the other counter-vandalists.....could you? Prashanthns ( talk) 18:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. Mail sent. Prashanthns ( talk) 18:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Have started 'Huggling' :) THanks again. Any idea how one can get the latest version? Prashanthns ( talk) 20:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again! Prashanthns ( talk) 20:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence § t/ e 17:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed your comments over there, he appears to be a returning sock of Soapfan91. See what you think. [1] Redrocket ( talk) 20:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Goodness, you're fast! you beat User:PseudoBot to the reversion there :) Pseudomonas_{( talk)} 20:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) -- Bfigura ^{( talk)} 01:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Its been 2 weeks since you added your name to Vandal Proof, how long does it normally take for someone to get accepted? Maybe you should get in touch with one of the moderators who does the accepting and see what they say. They're obviously busy. Thanks, keep up the good work. Roadrunnerz45 ( talk) 08:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. -- Shark face 217 20:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Why are you all saying im vandalising - im telling the truth - MARK SPEIGHT IS DEAD! Its been confirmed on Sky News and whenever i post it on his page - you say its vandalism! I suggest you check your sources before accusing people of vandalism! Ammera ( talk) 20:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and i told them to p**s off because they reverted my edits even though its been confirmed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ammera ( talk • contribs) 20:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I will only be cival to people who respect me too - that includes not reverting edits i have made that are reliable and sourced. They only have to log on to Sky News website or flip there TV's over to have it proved Ammera ( talk) 20:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I guess, I started off very similarly, and after 2 bad edits, and immediate reversions, thankfully, yet no damage done! I'll keep it in mind though! But powerful tool against vandals! Prashanthns ( talk) 20:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course! Well understood, well taken. Prashanthns ( talk) 20:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Me and my friends put that wiki page up just to fool one of our friends, but we didnt read the rules, so we weren't realizing what we were doing!!! Just erase that page if you can!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bronxboi ( talk • contribs) 00:12, April 14, 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou for your recent comments on my edits. I'm now a little more aware of what I can do and not do.

I was actually going to amend it back, but you got to it first. I only amended it so I could make fun of the guy I'm presently in the office with which is the depot manager mentioned.

Thanks Again

ianse23 (Ian) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianse23 ( talk • contribs) 00:36, April 14, 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks! NawlinWiki ( talk) 00:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I saw you reverted the attempt to change even the name of the Magazine. If you look at User talk:98.209.184.114 you'll see I've already warned him. Because he'd been warned before by me, I'm giving him another warning. He makes a hobby of this, he's done it elsewhere (Minoan article) -- ditto Pangaea/Pangea, and capitalizing pronouns when they refer to God.-- Doug Weller ( talk) 14:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Original title — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_presidential_election_controversy%2C_vote_suppression

This was not vandalism. Please discuss any problems you have with my edits on the discuss page. Thanks! Bonewah ( talk) 16:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my Talk page. We do bump into eachother quite often on these vandal hunts, don't we? If you were on the same continent I'd buy you a drink ;-)  Channel ®    16:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Please reinstate my edits to the Passion Fruit article. Thanks. 92.232.121.101 ( talk) 16:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Why not? Do you even know why you removed them? I don't know how to work work sources into an article, but it's all there. It tells you the origin of the plant/fruit, and some other stuff. Please review it again. Thanks. 92.232.121.101 ( talk) 16:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

He's reinstated one of your changes, but you also referred to Passion Fruit as a "planet." That probably needed to be changed, don't you think? Redrocket ( talk) 16:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I just posted on his talk page explaining what happened. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 16:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks 92.232.121.101 ( talk) 17:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You were right to tag it, but it was a difficult one. CSD#A1 (No context) would probably have been the best. Regards, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The main point is that it is a table of planets that are mostly gas giants on a page which is about terrestrial planets. 131.111.8.96 ( talk) 21:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the interesting discussion and insight into the Wikipedia culture. Since I do not have the time or will to fight this one out, I have attempted what I hope is a reasonable compromise and annotated the table so it does not mislead naïve readers who might have some ridiculous expectation that the table on a page about terrestrial planets would be a table of terrestrial planets. I must confess I do not see why a table of planets which are mainly gas giants (i.e. planets which are not terrestrial planets) helps a page about terrestrial planets, but I can't say I particularly care. I hope the annotations are ok with you. Nice talking to you, bye. 131.111.8.96 ( talk) 22:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Your correction was wrong. It was right as it was. For taxa above the species level, we use a plural naming on the taxobox. For species and lower, we use singular. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I shoudl have said. Wallaby was the article in question. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

If you aren't an admin, sonny, then why are you harassing me? Go away, I'm 90 and I know what I'm doing. ProfessorEwing ( talk) 00:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Because he's damn good ! Toddst1 ( talk) 00:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I was talking to ProfessorEwing (sort of) whom I just blocked, referring to you. Sorry if it wasn't clear. Toddst1 ( talk) 00:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The way I read it, you have about almost 30,000 edits, and are one of the most prolific vandal fighters around. Why aren't you an admin? Toddst1 ( talk) 00:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, when you're ready let me know. I'd like to at least co-nom. Toddst1 ( talk) 01:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering how do I post warnings on Talk pages of people that vandalize Wikipedia? I was wondering if there are guidelines to the warning mesages. Thanks! Joedaddy09 ( talk) 01:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at this and this and this and finally this, it's pretty easy to see how you can get 15,000 or even 30,000 edits a month. I'll have to try that trick myself sometime. 74.234.39.218 ( talk) 01:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

That would be great, except that if you look at my contribs, you would find very few instances of that happening. I do make mistakes, but I would estimate that I may get one mistake in 250 edits, which is roughly 1% corrections, so out of my 15000 edits, 150 are correcting my mistakes. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I have neither the time nor the inclination to go through your contributions. If you were possessed of a bit more humility you would acknowledge that, to one visiting your page for the first time ever, and visiting under the circumstances I did, it looked a bit malodorous. A statement admitting mild embarrassment might have been impressive and earned you another fan. But you apparently have enough adulation going on already. 74.234.39.218 ( talk) 01:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I was not asking you to go through my contribs. You effectively accused me of "statpadding" my edit count, so I defended myself and exhibited evidence to support my claim [that I am not "statpadding"]. When I accidentally warned you, I reverted myself (which means I knew I was wrong), removed the warning from your page, and apologized. Since I do not frequently make erroneous reversions, I see no reason to be "mildly embarrassed" and I am not looking for "another fan" nor am I seeking "adulation". I made a mistake, so I fixed the problem and apologized. I fail to see what further action I should take. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Look, I know what happened. I'm not a total idiot. I'm just saying that it was an ironic juxtaposition; me finding four edits from you inside of two minutes that didn't change anything anywhere. And looking at your page, where people are fawning all over your impressive edit count, it just looked a bit off-key. Like I said, you could have recognized the situation for the mild irony that it presented and made a humourously self-deferential comment. Instead I get a sermon. It's all in the attitude, buddy, and you're just a bit too defensive for my taste. Go on and chill now; you need to take yourself less seriously, in my most humble opinion. 74.234.39.218 ( talk) 16:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For all your quick reverts that keep Wikipedia together Prashanthns ( talk) 11:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Ha...sure thing. Really...Huggle sounds sooo...soft, and nice, one hardly associates such power with it. If you do start that pettition, count me in! Prashanthns ( talk) 16:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

For this. SWik78 ( talk) 17:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

And this. SWik78 ( talk) 17:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Did you actually look at the edit I made? I would like you to review it and then let me know if it was unconstructive. MillieTant ( talk) 17:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for looking at it again. MillieTant ( talk) 17:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi jondelanoy,

I'm in the process of registering a Wikipedia account. Plan is to upload a cropped version (taken from the original RAW file) to Wikipedia and license the cropped version under one of the license structures you proposed.

The original photo on Flickr.com will remain copyrighted as is.

I have one question though. I do not have written (or spoken) permission of the Lou Ye to use his portrait. I have had no complaints of using his photo within the context of my Flickr photostream, but publishing on Wikipedia and making the photo available for everybody to use it, would be a different story.

As you may know, the photographer usually has copyright on the photo (as I do in this case), but the subject has portrait right on any image that he appears on in a recognizable way. So I may get in trouble for making my portrait photo of Lou Ye available in this way.

Do you have experience with this? Can you point me to a reliable source that tells me that I will not get in trouble for licensing a portrait without consent of the subject?

Thanks

(please reply through FlickrMail)

JeromesPOV 62.212.134.21 ( talk) 19:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jon,

I can definitely relicense this photo for use on the wikipedia page. One question -- can you link the photo back to my flickr home page (www.flickr.com/photos/nightjar)? That would be the only request I'd have if you can do it. Let me know.

If there are other photos you want to use in the future, don't hesitate to let me know.

Thanks and Best regards, Michael

If you like at the HUNDREDS of people already in this category you will find many if not most of them were already famous as sports, political or entertainment figures BEFORE their convictions. John celona ( talk) 14:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

		Sonic Unleashed Barnstar
		I present this to you for outstanding participation in the Sonic Unleashed page. Happy Editing and keep up the good job.-- Lbrun12415 15:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It is a sad day for Wikipedia when adding the truth about GOD is seen as vandalism. If this is what you believe then you are all going to Hell. GOD HAS WITNESSED THIS. HE SEES EVERYTHING. GOD KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BLASPHEMY. JemmaBrossel ( talk) 19:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not back down. The editor you have questioned on this topic is wrong and you are right. If you list the pages he has added this category to where the subject is not primarily notable for being a criminal, I would be happy to delete it. David in DC ( talk) 22:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind dealing with Celona's reversions today? I have to run. Additionally he has violated the 3rv rule, and I have posted a notice of his behavior on the admin noticeboard. Feel free to chime in. -- Jkp212 ( talk) 17:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Will you stop reverting user's contributions from years ago in many instances while this category is an RFC at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:American_criminals#What_should_be_the_threshold_for_inclusion_of_this_category.3. Your edits are only going to be promptly reverted. John celona ( talk) 19:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I will not violate WP AN#. I will report you for vandalising hundreds of editors work-many from years ago. All you are doing is making me friends as I am sending notice to the users whose work you are vandalising. John celona ( talk) 19:29, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Right now, this is the subject of an RFC at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:American_criminals#What_should_be_the_threshold_for_inclusion_of_this_category.3 I have agreed not to add any names to the category while the RFC is in progress. Other users have posted on that talk page IN SUPPORT of allowing convicted criminals who are otherwise notable to appear in both categories, as they have for years. Literally as we speak, while the RFC is pending, user J. delanoy has unilaterally deleted over 100 articles from the list. Many of which were put on by editors years ago. To do this mass purging while the very issue subject is under an RFC is nothing short of vandalism. John celona ( talk) 19:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping that pesky little bugger off of my page. I was in the middle of putting a warning on his page when all of that when down. Again, thanks for the sharp eye. Cheers!!! Baegis ( talk) 00:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just trying to pitch in. We appear to be worthy of such vandalism and trolling for some reason. I wonder how we won such an honor. C'est la vie. It is a shame that so many editors purporting to be Christians insist on actions that are clearly contrary to their beliefs. I don't seem to remember a passage about vandalizing other's work or calling them atheists as I was prepping for my first communion. Of course, that was years ago, maybe they changed it. Baegis ( talk) 01:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For all your quick reverts that keep Wikipedia together iDosh! ( talk) 01:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You deserve it! iDosh! ( talk) 01:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps the criminal issue should be brought to discussion. Sf46 ( talk) 01:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Just letting you know I've declined the speedy tag on this one. By the time I saw it, it didn't clearly fit into a CSD in my opinion. I suspect a different admin might find it a SD but it wasn't nonsense. It certainly should be PRODded or AfDed and I doubt it would get far in AfD. It seems clearly "something made up one day". Cheers, Pigman ☿ 02:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It still looks like a made up word to me. The only source isn't about the word, it's the Univ. anthem that the word was supposedly in reaction to. I'm PRODding it now though I expect it to be contested. Cheers, Pigman ☿ 03:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I removed (per the template instructions) the speedy delete tag you applied to Astreal, on the grounds that the article does in fact assert notability: specifically, that the band has put out two albums on major labels, thus meeting WP:MUSIC C5. — Quasirandom ( talk) 20:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries. You're doing nothing like Ziggy Sawdust's disruption -- metric-dumptruck-load of AfDs and speedies, large numbers of them highly inappropriate. — Quasirandom ( talk) 21:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, J.delanoy! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β^_command 04:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed on my WatchList that User:John celona has re-added Oklahoma Governor David Hall to Category:American criminals despite your removal of the category, and a subsequent revert of his edits by another user. I was wondering if you have any thoughts on how to resolve this matter beyond contacting an administrator, which I already intend to do. -- TommyBoy ( talk) 13:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I've been helping User:Gillianfc in response to her question on the New Contributors' Help Page here and I notice you issued her a vandalism warning for her edits, prompting her request for help. She's obviously a good-faith but inexperienced user, and I suspect her attempt at adding a UK postcode was interpreted by you as a random string of malicious nonsense or a test edit. In the interests of non-biting of newbies, would you consider revisiting her talk page and rescinding your vandalism warning? Thanks :) Ka renjc 14:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Y Done J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 14:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Ka renjc 15:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I thoroughly enjoyed your list of funny things and I have come across one which may warrant inclusion. [2] You have to be careful who you thumb a lift off these days. James086 ^{Talk | Email} 15:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, I understand that you want to be careful. Infact I think I will keep an eye out while on vandal patrol from now on for anything worth collecting myself. See you round, James086 ^{Talk | Email} 16:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I would file a report if there is even 1 more (i.e. since the warning) reversion related to the category for 2 reasons; he has broken the 3RR on Billy Preston and has broken the spirit of the rule (if not the letter) on the others. I'm tired so I won't take action but I definitely would endorse a block based on what I've seen if the behaviour continues. James086 ^{Talk | Email} 16:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

That's ok. Besides its midsemester break where I am so it's no big deal. Thanks for the cookie, James086 ^{Talk | Email} 03:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I must say that I completely disagree with your comment. You were more than civil and there was no reason for you to let a bully get away with his nonsense. I can't think of any other way to describe someone seeking out articles to brand people a "criminal." It's pure nonsense, and as a member of the community we have a responsibility to stop it. -- Jkp212 ( talk) 15:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. In addition to not waiting for RFC, he has broken 3RV rule repeatedly over the last few days, and should be blocked for it. It's worth a notice, with the inclusion of the evidence demonstrating how he keeps breaking policy -- Jkp212 ( talk) 16:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I got your note. Thank you for addressing this.-- Jkp212 ( talk) 16:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. User Celona is aware of the 3RV rule, based on previous edits where he mentions it, but I thought it wouldn't hurt to add it to his talk page. -- Jkp212 ( talk) 16:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Point well taken, thank you. -- Jkp212 ( talk) 16:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I am well aware of the 3RV rule and have not violated it. I have NOT added any persons to the American Criminals category while it is under a RFC. What I have done is revert over 100 articles that were improperly removed from the category while the subject is under an RFC. The vast majority of the articles were put in the category months and years ago by users other than myself.

how was my comment unconstructive? i think it shows great strength to miss only one game after taking the puck in the groin area at ~90mph. doesnt that describe what kind of a player patrick thoresen is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny902 ( talk • contribs) 17:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello J.delanoy. I see that at User talk:John celona you said the following about WP:3RR: "There is one exception to this rule". In fact, there are several exceptions, and they can be found here: Wikipedia:3RR#Exceptions. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist ( talk) 17:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user discussion page. I was so busy with patrolling recent changes I didn't even notice it. Rob Banzai ( talk) 22:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you know something about this article? There is a truthfulness tag at the top of the article. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 22:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I mean do you have any knowledge on the subject? I don't have any knowledge on the subject. I was confused seeing a truthfulness tag at the top of the article. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 22:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For editconflicting me 10 times in 30 minutes when I've tried to revert vandalism, I award you this for your speediness. CrazyChemGuy ( talk) 22:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

You put a warning on the talk page User talk:24.30.38.213 for an unconstructive edit to the WDCG article. This person has reverted my attempt to reverse his edit twice. Once I went to the talk page, I realized you had already reverted the work and warned the person, but obviously this person went back and did it again.

I put the information in a different part of the article and used the proper format for the references this person used, and yet this person keeps putting the information back, in a different place, making no attempt to correct the improper formatting of the references he/she used.

I tried the page for reporting vandalism, but it's not really vandalism and that page confuses me too much. This person apparently thinks that we are telling him his/her information is inappropriate, but that's not the case. I merely put it in a different part of the article, added some more details (some of which made it more balanced), and put the references in proper form.

If I revert it again, this person will likely just revert it back. Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 13:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait, you're not in the WDCG history. I guess the template just assumes you reverted the work.

Anyway, I remembered that the person reverted my references section as well. This has been done again and there are no properly formatted references there Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 13:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC).

Thank you. That sure was fast. There are references, but just not in the proper form. Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 13:53, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Unconstructive edit? How's that? Reference was added. WDCG 128.243.220.21 ( talk) 13:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I never considered the possiblity that the warning was an error.

Here is what happened. The person added a section in what I believed to be an improper place, and then failed to put the references in the proper form or place.

I came up with the idea of just adding the " < Refe rences/ >" under "References" so mine would appear. It will be obvious that some of the sources the other person used are under there. Some of that person's sources are not in what I used (it's the same information repeated over and over), and one won't work. That person's information is also in what I added elsewhere in the article. I didn't delete anything.

It could be true that this much detail is not needed in the WDCG article but should be under Bob and the Showgram. But I don't want to mess up what was done there. Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 14:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

why does all of my stuff that's true get deleted? its annoying! Dmanskater11 ( talk) 14:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)dmanskater11

Thanks for your helpful response to my email! I'd really appreciate if you could "Wiki-adopt" me. Would you mind looking at a page I just edited & advise how to get the footnote to appear at the bottom of the page? Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Kmak

Is this how to sign? Pegasonic ( talk) 13:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OH THANK YOU!! You fixed it & I GET it!!! Now for some more fun - how to add a photo to the page that falls in line with the copyright rules? I have over 200 pictures but I don't know how to put one on there or if it's OK to use... I've read through the rules & I'm not getting it. If it's a promo shot used by the band from their old website, can I use it?

Pegasonic ( talk) 14:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I won't be able to change it until Sunday night but I will do so then... I will also post-process it a little more and put a higher resolution version online. Thanks for your interest ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kheldar2002 ( talk • contribs) 14:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC) Ralbot|talk]]) 16:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OK pic is now available at this address: http://www.flickr.com/photos/frenchkheldar/2457350312/in/set-72157604295625362/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kheldar2002 ( talk • contribs) 16:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

...but true nevertheless ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.125.138 ( talk) 14:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Just add your name here. User:21655/.01 Cabal#Waiting for acceptance 21 655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 14:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Please examine the edit. There was a typo in the title. This will now have to be corrected again. Please read before reverting.

If you really want to be useful there are a lot of changes recommened in the GA review that need doing.

There are also a number of things that need adding: the primate vector species listing needs subgenera for all the given species and this then needs reorganising by subgenus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.121.108 ( talk • contribs)

Moved to your talk page by Malinaccier ( talk) 14:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Gauthier is a lesbian, that's a fact. Read the article and you'll discover that. Seeing as it's a big part of her act, and there's nothing wrong with being a lesbian, please can you revert my edit (like you did a couple of days ago, erroneously). Thank you. 92.232.121.101 ( talk) 20:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Wow, you have been keeping me extremely busy at WP:AIV the last few days. Keep up all the good anti-vandalism work. Trusilver 16:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the barnstar, which I wasn't expecting at all! I guess I have been pretty active with vandal-fighting today just 'cause the need was there, especially in the past couple of hours.

Just wanted to say also that your anti-vandalism efforts are amazing. Thanks again. :) All the best, Jamie S93 17:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Good job with that! That was among the biggest blow-ups of vandalism I've seen in a while. My hands are cramped up from an hour of issuing blocks. Trusilver 18:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Next time you update your vandalized counter, I bet it's over 200! Enigma ^message 18:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

No sweat, just going through tagging a bunch of nonsense articles. Czolgolz ( talk) 20:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand that you don't think my edit was constructive. But I did it to be destructive. I created the site. It is on the AfD list. I want to get rid of it. I even wrote a letter to the admin about me being in favor of deleting it. I was just speedy deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anfish ( talk • contribs) 21:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

It's okay! I'm going to delete it again right now so be careful this time! I'm not mad:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anfish ( talk • contribs) 21:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Had absolutely NO clue where to post this, so here it is: I tried to edit something with what I beleived was true in fact, not jus my opinion. YOU said it was vandalism. I am terribly offended at this, and I don't mean to sound like I'm kidding. I really am. Now before people get kicked off because the editors of this site are too lazy to verify facts, please be a little less hasty in calling someone a "vandal". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.142.20.134 ( talk) 21:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Once again, wrong place, but no clue where to post and this can be deleted so... anyway, we learned in AP Euro that the similarites between Narnia and The Russian rev. were through that inteligencia(spelling is wrong) movement. The beaver and eventually the faun both represented new intellectuals who while pretty worthless by themselves because they were more into knowledge about the situation than action, let Lenin(Aslan) do the actual work for them. of course, i guess this could be like when everyone was SO sure that Lord of the Rings was about WW2... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.142.20.134 ( talk) 21:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I added your comment to Lara's talk page. Trusilver 02:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping take care of the vandalism on the Karaoke Revolution songlist page from earlier this month! 70.236.10.83 ( talk) 15:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Some AW keeps editing (or reverting) the page before I can fix the link. Oh well. They said you can't use Wikipedia as a source. Is that some new rule? Where does it say that? FX ( talk) 17:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Signed my comment. Damn, I always forget to do that. FX ( talk) 17:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

the deletion was not vandalism, please see the talk page for explanation. CP Guy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.76.89.7 ( talk) 17:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism by a now-indef blocked user on my talkpage!
JGHowes ^talk - 19:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.