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.

Thanks for restoring my talk page after it was spammed. Looking at your contribs history, it appears that that AnonTalk guy is a freekin' pain in the arse, hopping from IP to IP like he does... :( ...So, good on ya! Binksternet ( talk) 13:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

You had blocked one IP - 24.184.214.254 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I'm guessing this one is also, as it was posting the same nonsense: 81.10.100.124 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Got 'im! Thanks. The credit for the hard work in spotting that this was a spambot using proxies goes to Spellcast. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 17:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Naw, naw, naw. I mean, it's not like I expected to win. It's an entirely academic matter now anyhow (I wasn't going to charge up from behind at this point anyways). I felt a hanging judge was an option that should've been offered to the community, but I probably was the wrong person to offer that, and they don't seem interested anyways. Wily D 18:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Phew! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 18:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

This user is requesting to have the autoblock lifted. Would you be comfortable with that? They don't looke like socks, but I'd prefer you made the call. Daniel Case ( talk) 19:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Jpgordon blocked directly - CU proved that these certainly were socks. Thanks for letting me know! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 21:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Redvers! A user you have blocked, Needyourhelp, has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot ( talk) 21:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Denied by Ricky81682. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 21:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I think theres duplication with Kaohsiung American School and American School in Kaohsiung. -- Techfast50 ( talk) 02:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Deleted the latter (attack page) and created a redirect to the original page. Thanks for letting me know. Total sockfest there: going to have to move from protecting pages to blocking IPs at this rate. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 08:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Did you see the spam report? I don't understand why my report is being reverted. ANI clearly says to go to AIV for persistent spammers. Please advise. Spamicide ( talk) 13:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

this user is going out of there way to prove a point to me. I don't know what it is as I have not done anything wrong and have tried to talk with them. They even admitted that this is a SECONDARY wiki account that they use. Is that ok to do? why not show yourself and your clear agenda..... Hollywoodnorthreport ( talk)

Stop arguing on my talk page, the pair of you. Spamicide, AIV is for clear and present vandals and spammers only; you have said your report needs discussion and that is not the place to do it. Hollywoodnorthreport, you appear not be be editing harmoniously; you may wish to step back from the keyboard for a bit. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:37, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• I can understand the irritation, but in all fairness, I haven't argued with him anywhere inappropriately - he is stalking my post to you. However, you misunderstood - my report needs no discussion, it was wiped from the report page once for being mistaken as a personal issue. I re-added it with the discussion note as a way of saying "it's legit, ask me if there is something being misunderstood." I'm not looking for discussion - this report is obvious, blatant, longstanding. Note what is happening here. I am reporting a spammer (I have a proper report, proof, and many diffs), and he is following me to everyone's talk page and the report pages. Is this NOT a case of clear and present spam? Diffs: [1]

[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]

If you still think I'm going about this wrong after seeing that (and I do have more), then ok, but I feel like this spammer's kicking and screaming has caused the report to be incorrectly dismissed. Spamicide ( talk) 14:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Spam was the right route to go. AIV is for reports that require little or no investigation. This one requires investigation, so WikiProject Spam or WP:ANI are your friend. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for you edit here. – Jerry ^teps 09:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 09:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello.

I'm trying to build List of Forgotten Realms characters as a proper character list. Could you please restore the edit history of Danilo Thann for me, so that we can merge the content in? Thanks! :) BOZ ( talk) 04:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Done! Find it here for convenience. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 08:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! :) BOZ ( talk) 15:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Redvers. It looks as if you added {{ advert}} and {{ notability}} to the Vebnet Limited article I wrote. I don't agree with the advert criticism, however, I am aware that this is a subjective topic and would be grateful if you could indicate which words or phrases did not meet with your approval and I'll re-word accordingly. For the notability aspect, this article references sources from the Financial Times and the Scotsman both mass circulation broad sheet news papers and was written as an entry to the Companies Portal who's goal is to "seeks to analyse companies by country and industry".

I would be grateful for any feedback you may have on this matter. It looks as if I have to spend time constantly defending this article, is this normal for Wiki entries? Don't contributers get hacked off when their articles are constantly marked for deletion like this?

Anyway, all help and guidance greatly appreciated. BinoIchi ( talk) 00:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Right, first, never remove maintenance tags without doing the maintenance requested. You did the right thing coming here to discuss the tags, but removing them is just not on.

The two issues here are with the PR language in the article and the notability concerns. Are you being paid to write this article? If not, then you why are you advertising them for free? Vebnet provides individual solution components or a full end-to-end service covering reward consultancy, benefit scheme design, communications, brokering, technology, helpdesk and outsourced administration. This sentence is meaningless except in a press release or on their own website: it's just puff, sales language, nothing an encyclopedia would want. And the capitalisation of the key peoples' names in the infobox - why?

For the notability, you will (or should) have noticed it was tagged to have the article expanded or rewritten in such a way as to assert notability, not tagged for speedy deletion. The closest the article comes to asserting notability for the company is the award it got... except it didn't - ING Direct got the award, this company is only mentioned in passing. So nowhere does the article reach-out and say "this company is in this encyclopedia because..." Biggest? Fastest-growing? Most successful?

Those are the problems the tags are asking you to address. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 08:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Whoops! Sorry about that Redvers, still pretty new to the wiki protocols and procedures, I would say that it was late when I removed your warnings but that is no excuse, please be aware that I am suitably chastised and it will not happen again. Thanks for taking the time to leave me some meaningful feedback, this type of detailed critique helps a lot when writing articles especially when you are new to this format. I will take on board what you have said and will try to re-word the article so it does not sound like an advertisement for the company (perhaps you can point me in the direction of a company based article which you deem suitable as unfortunately the template I chose initially for this article would probably not pass mustard today). I also take on board the notability tag and will endeavour to produce better examples which back up the article.

Once again thanks for taking the time to respond in a constructive manner, I will try to make the changes over the next few days and will update this entry when they are completed.

BinoIchi ( talk) 20:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello Redvers. Sorry to bother you but I'm wondering if you could advise me re: Barry Foy. A notability tag was recently placed on the article, which was subsequently removed by User:82.42.54.71 citing it as 'vandalism' in the edit summary. This user has in the past edited in good faith.

I have re-added the tag, suspecting that this article might not satisfy the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia ( WP:BIO & WP:NOTE). From what I have ascertained from the article and its edit history, it appears to be promoting an possible non notable person with historically unsourced/badly-sourced weblinks [13] [14]. It appears from the remaining legitimate IMDb references that the subject is a bit-part actor/extra. Previously, due to the amount of unverified garbage which had been added, I had (wrongly) suspected the article was a hoax. Having made this mistake in the past and with little experience in the best way for nominating an article for deletion, I would like a second opinion from an experienced admin as to whether this article warrants deletion. Thankyou for your time. Cheers Snowy 1973 ( talk) 01:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

If in doubt, send it to AfD is my policy. So I have. Feel free to make the above arguments at the discussion page. Cheers! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 08:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help in nominating this for deletion. I'm amazed that you've had dealings with this article before and it had previously been considered a hoax by others. Snowy 1973 ( talk) 18:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Two years ago... I'd forgotten it completely (it must be about 200 AfD nominations and about 10,000 speedy deletes since then, they all blend into one). To be fair, the article I nominated for deletion in 2006 was sort-of a hoax, in that it was unverifiable, with sources that didn't refer to the subject of the article and mashing together two people called Foy. Interestingly (well, to me, who follows this type of stuff), in 2005 and 2007 the community would have kept an article that mashed together two people, despite the result being insane nonsense. In 2006 and 2008, the community was much more willing to throw out such abominations. Thus does the Wikipedia pendulum swing... :oO ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 22:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

_David ^WS _(contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy holidays! _David ^WS _(contribs) 19:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Redvers! A user you have blocked, Callum405, has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot ( talk) 09:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

You're mentioned in passing as an admin who might have some clue about this dispute [15] so could you perchance take a look at this swamp and help me figure out who's more in the right? I have a preliminary opinion, but I'd like to see if you agree with it before I go speaking about it.. (Incidentally, I read your essay on Commons, and I must tell you I'm appropriating your phrase "fuck that for a game of marbles" for my own future use. Lovely!) GJC 21:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

At first glance, it would appear that Sarvagnya is gaming the system by making it impossible to discuss an article: if an editor turns up to talk on Sarvagnya's talk page, they're turned away and told to talk on the relevant article talk page; when they go to the article talk page, Sarvagnya removes the comments because of various supposed rules. Very circular.

As usual with these types of dispute, nobody comes out of it smelling of roses (Fowler, for instance, needs to stop putting talk comments in a table as that somehow just looks rude; Sarvagnya has OWNership issues with articles on this subject and is tag-teaming with Dineshkannambadi, who needs to understand that people who disagree with them are not per force trolling, and so forth...) but there doesn't yet seem to be an edit-war, just a case for tapping with cluesticks. Perhaps WP:RM for a proper, cool (and therefore policed, natch) debate on the article title - neither of the current choices being perfect. Other than that, it's "wait and see" to my mind. But your mileage may differ! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 09:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

May I quote you on this? He's not gonna take "no" without backup. GJC 16:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, in a heartbeat. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 22:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

w00t. Thank you!! GJC 22:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice to see some admins have a sense of humour with your talk page warnings instead of the usual template messages. Does it seem to work? I guess with the block button you can teach them a lesson or two. By the way, i like the messages you have at the end of your sig. Very intriguing, i must say. You never seem to disappoint. Best for the festive season Monster Under Your Bed ^{( talk)} 12:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, missed this one! D'oh! Difficult to say about the "personalised" warnings. I think they work slightly more than the templates, especially with younger editors, because it shows clearly that there are other human beings floating around the site, rather than it being a pretty automated type of place. But your bog-standard vandal will ignore a typed message just like they'll ignore a template. Horses for courses, I suppose. Happy holidays to you too, BTW! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 08:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

...but I feel compelled to ask nonetheless: What's the sitch with User:Nicholsy? I know he left a pissy message at User: Elbutler's talkpage, but that's just BARELY blockable, and I didn't see any other really vandalicious edits--what did you see that I didn't??? GJC 02:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The message was threatening and spiteful, not conducive to harmonious editing. Elbutler has suffered harassment from this person elsewhere apparently and the message left was promising more. When warned, they responded to Berean Hunter with a further worrying message. I really can't see what they're here for: from those two messages, it doesn't appear to be for useful editing. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 11:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, I knew there was a good reason. (It looks to me like the acrimony is not entirely one-sided, however; let's just say I've been watching some issues evolve, and I have questions re: the veracity of certain claims that have been made by certain parties. We'll see, though...) Thanks for the explanation... GJC 13:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there was some evidence of attempts to poke Nicholsy with a stick to see what would happen, but that didn't justify the messages Nicholsy left. I paid no attention to what apparently went on at Wikia, but that's because I have neither the authority nor the ability to be arsed to check it out and thus take it into account! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 16:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad that you decided to participate in the debate. Despite your rather negative comments on occasions, I note from the constructive comments sense that you are on board, whilst reserving your rights. I know Admins have fears, and they need to be assuaged. There are still many details to be worked out, and I would prefer it if you would at least assume a bit more good faith and stop repeatedly calling it a kangaroo court before it has already taken shape. It is of course with your input that we can ensure that it is not. Cheers, Ohconfucius ( talk) 02:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm still of the belief that it's a kangaroo court in the making. I could use a different euphemism but it'd make more sense to keep warning of this very real possibility so that people don't sleep walk into drumhead trials. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 11:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

To a degree, I share your concern, and it would do little harm to keep everyone on their toes, so long as that is the sole objective. You appear to be exhibiting a "healthy scepticism" although others might consider it borderline uncivil. I think that the choice of words would only be semantics if the approach remains as apparently provocative as it is at present. Ohconfucius ( talk) 16:14, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's no intention to be incivil to anybody, and I don't see how calling a page - and a user page at that - a kangaroo court when I actually believe it is a kangaroo court can be incivil. If I'd said "you are acting like a judge in a kangaroo court" or "you're intending to build a kangaroo court" to anybody, then, possibly, since it'd be commenting on a contributor. But I haven't said that. I've just said that one is being built. And I believe that it is. Not saying anything about that would be counterproductive: Wikipedia has many processes that nobody likes but nobody sums up what is wrong with them. Adding another - in the form of a kangaroo court - would be a mistake. I won't be silenced on that. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 16:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe anyone is trying to silence you. You have a great deal of experience dealing with problems on WP, and your criticisms of the proposal are a much needed input, in my view. I would, however, note that there is much anger in your 'no to commons' essay, and I feel has unhelpfully spilled over onto the discussion we are having on AdminWatch. Ohconfucius ( talk) 03:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

My Say no to Commons essay was written ages ago. Whilst I do have "issues" with Commons (not anger, more annoyance) I don't see why this should spread elsewhere. The accusation is a bit ad hominem, really. All I'm doing on the process's page is to ask questions and, where invited, to give opinions, which count as much or as little as anyone else's. Yet people don't really seem happy with that. How odd. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 21:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could take a look at something for me, since you were the admin who originally deleted Laurie rozakis. A couple hours ago, the page Laurie Ellen Rozakis, Ph.D. was created. I tagged if for speedy deletion (A7), but the author removed the speedy tag while I was out. They also created the page Laurie Rozakis, so I just redirected Laurie Ellen Rozakis, Ph.D. to it. My question to you is what I should do, perhaps prod it? In my opinion, the article reads more like an advertisment then anything and the person doesn't seem all that notable besides a few books (which don't have great sales, since I have access to Neilsen BookScan). Thanks for your time! -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 06:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I've thinned the advertising out and tagged it as a CoI (the author is clearly the daughter Sammantha). It's not a speedy delete any more and I'd question whether AfD would delete it. But you could prod it, yes. I'd give advertising, CoI and "questions as to notability" as reasons (via the books sales you mentioned). ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ takes life at five times the average speed 21:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I agreed with you and, with the help of your recent edit, I am satisfied with the articles inclusion on Wikipedia. I probably should have done something similar, so I will make sure I do so in the future. Cheers. -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 22:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

There's never anything wrong with getting a second opinion. All the best editors do. Lazy people like me don't. You win :o) ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 20:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I did an error on the counties of california, well i attempted to re do that picture but it came out all wrong House1090 ( talk) 20:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I reverted to a previous version that did work. It looked like the new file was corrupt or broken. Try looking at your local version (on your own computer) again by closing your editing software and reloading the image. Does it work? If yes, reupload it to a different name (ie, the name it has, but with "2" at the end) and see if that works. If no, then you'll need to recreate the image. Tell me what happened next and we'll go on from there. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 20:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks i was worried sick people would think it was vandalism, thanks for the help and i will try it again House1090 ( talk) 21:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, they might, but they'd be wrong. We have a very important policy that's being overlooked of late: assume good faith. If what you've done has gone to crap and someone appears saying anything other than "can I help?", wave " WP:AGF" at them. We're all allowed to make errors. My policy is that no week on Wikipedia is complete without doing something really daft. Been working for me for 4 years so far! :o) ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 21:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

See you beat me to it. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 21:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

No worries! Just happened to be on the spot :o) ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 21:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well i uploaded a new version and it came out great but its under a new namecheak it out: File:New California counties map.JPG ... House1090 ( talk) 21:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ohh no thats fine and thanks for the extra help, have fun wditing and Merry Christmas! House1090 ( talk) 04:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

You'd be a dashing fellow even in a no horse open sleigh. Just calling by to wish you a fine festive time, mind out for that bob-tailed bay (speed two-forty recommended for optimal performance)!-- Alf ^{is laughing all the way} 09:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

And a Happy New Year to your good self! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a reasonably good buy 16:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

• Nuddsy ( talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count)

If you have a look at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Hamish Ross, and some of the deleted edits, you'll see that we've been here several times before, since at least 2006. (There are quite a number of additional accounts not in the category because their user pages have since been deleted, too.) Uncle G ( talk) 06:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Gah. If I'd known about that, I could've saved us all some trouble and nuked him right off. ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ a reasonably good buy 16:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I've noticed that you've previously spotted socks of GMTV Chart Show ( talk · contribs). Can you have a look at JLS2 ( talk · contribs) and see if it matches the profile as another sock, I suspect it does. Cheers, -- JD554 ( talk) 17:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Well spotted. Blocked and article deleted. Thanks! ➨ ❝ ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 01:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)