LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Technical Analysis PageThis is beyond a content dispute. If the person used his real ID, and preferably his real name, then we would have a much different story. He has accused me of lying about communications I had with John Murphy. I can prove them. I have the emails. jonkozer, happytech and the mystery URL all need to be blocked. I don't know how to go about requesting that. This is not a full time job. Please tell me the right steps. Thanks. Sposer 00:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
TaxobotGreat. Thanks for letting me know! Verisimilus T 08:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC) Is it necessary?Is it necessary to block Danna Shinsho indefintely? Just some misunderstanding on convensation results being blocked forever? If I am right, you are quite netural in this event. I think this is not the worst that you think. Please consider carefully whether it is a right decision to block her indefintely. I claim that I am netural to this. But I just don't want to stop a user's to make his/her contribution on Wikipedia. Thanks. ( Addaick 13:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC))
Page protectionHello. On User talk:Black Rhino Ranger, the talk page of a user who was indefinitely blocked for using sockpuppets, the user in question frequently uses the page as an attack page to broadcast his views on the pages he edits and his disapproval with several policies. Two users, Dora Nichov and CBFan, frequently edit war with Black Rhino Ranger on his talk page, and their discussions are more or less filled with incivility and personal attacks, particularly on CBFan's part (see this edit summary and this). As there really is no point in continuing this banter on the talk page of an indefinitely blocked user, I request that his user and talk pages be fully protected to cease this. Much appreciated. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 20:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
wrong use of fair useWhat are you supposed to do again if you come across an image that's supposed to be fair use but isn't justified? I just found this on Michelle Tea, and I can;t remember what I supposed to do with stuff like that. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: IRC, MedComCongratulations! I've given your MedComWiki account sysop, bureaucrat and checkuser rights. Do you use IRC at all? If so let me know your nick and sort access for #wikipedia-mediation. WjB scribe 00:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
QuestionWhat happy camper says here concerns me. I'm half tempted to believe him, but I want to know where did you get the CU evidence saying Farenhorst was a VoB sock? You have a link to the RFCU page, yet no specific case or talk page diff. Either would help. Kwsn (Ni!) 20:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
My RfAHi WJBscribe. I have replied to your oppose on my Rfa. Thanks. ~ Wikihermit 00:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Courtesy BlankingI believe that your courtesy blanking of Jeffrey Gustafson's punishment does not comply with the guidelines in WP:CBLANK. Please feel welcome to participate in the discussion on the talk page if you feel that I am incorrect, otherwise the page will be unblanked. Jfwambaugh 15:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC) Deletion StatsHi WJB - a quick question - I noticed that you commented at Useight's RFA regarding his deleted edits (i.e. from CSD tagging etc.). I appreciate admins have access to extra logs but is there a method/tool for non admins to get a count of deleted edits? I'm sure in the past there was a way of getting a server count but I could be wrong. Cheers. Pedro | Chat 15:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I confess I did it the old fashioned way - I looked through the deleted edits and counted all those where the edit was adding a speed deletion tag (his edit summaries are conveniently in the form({{db-attack}}) etc.). I you're interested, I'd say you tagged about 250 pages that have been deleted... WjB scribe 15:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the block of 71.114.247.243Just a question, why did you give him a mere 24 hour block? Over the period of 3 days, he POV pushed on one article, and made a blitzing attack on Human evolution. I'd like to push for a longer block. Cheers, Je t Lover ( Report a mistake) 22:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Request for mediation - EbionitesA request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ebionites, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, WjB scribe 23:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Please hold the acceptance period open for 14 days. I suspect this is a way to avoid responding. I'll let you know if Michael is actively editing on Wiki during this period. Ovadyah 13:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC) Award
BetacommandBotHe's tagging good images. Please block it. Cheers, Je t Lover ( Report a mistake) 03:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Mop closetSo did you give any more thought to one of those nominations so that you can leave messages like this more regularly?-- Chaser - T 06:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
My EmailHi! I have a GMail account specified now. Does that mean I get to be usurped for seven days? -- PNiddy Go! 14:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC) "15"I just came across your question on the significance of the "15" part of my name while going through the history. There is really nothing important about it. I checked for Phoenix5, Phoenix10 etc and I thought I'd remeber 15 better-- Phoenix 15 20:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
any one can edit wikipedia pages without logging inany one can still edit wikipedia pages with out logging in i —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.153.242 ( talk) 03:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 05:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Regarding deletionsI noticed that you were an administrator and I was wondering what to do with articles that are permitted to be deleted. This specifically applies to this page. Thanks. ~ Ambrosia- talk 05:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Scientific jury selection in the UKDo you know if so-called Scientific Jury Selection is practiced in the UK? All of my sources are American.-- Chaser - T 19:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I have added a section, entitled “‘the national fraternity’”, to Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Phi Kappa Psi. If you feel that this section is best omitted, then please just delete it and please let me know that you have done thus. — SlamDiego ←T 01:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC) I have nominated Elonka for adminship. I saw you nominated her last time, and may you would like to co. nom. Pat Politics rule! 23:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
~*~Grin~*~
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 21:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Can you delete this? I am going to reupload it to Commons under PNG formatting instead of here, and the reuploads are a little much.. — Moe ε 10:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Work that mop!Some doofus, with nothing but an unsourced claim that they heard it on a radio station, has changed the name of Britney Spears's fifth studio album to Piece of Me. I don't know how to change it back without screwing it up completely. You wanna do what the community has entrusted you to do????? How's it hanging, by the way? Jeffpw 11:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
About Poor Britney's new album: I will absolutely get that protection removed when the title is officially announced. We're all waiting with baited breath, especially since the MTV debacle last Sunday evening. Did you see it? Really tragic, but she did look bangingly hot, even to this confirmed bachelor! Jeffpw 11:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
(Butting in here, sorry WjBscribe) I actually noticed this earlier, the IP editor also changed the Template:Britney Spears. I don't know a thing about her, so I didn't revert it, but I think if it has not been confirmed, perhaps the template should be reverted as well? Ariel ♥ Gold 11:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I knew there was going to be trouble......when they deleted Category:Wikipedians who don't wish to become administrators (or whatever it was called). :) Thank you for the kind offer, it's flattering, but I lack the ambition or desire for an admin's powers and responsibilities. And even if it were my ambition, I would have to argue that I lack experience in some critical areas, like FA. But thanks again. Cheers, Xtifr tälk 12:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC) What banter?[1] He started it... :) -- DarkFalls talk 13:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Hi WJBscribe. I am nominating you to become a bureaucrat.-- Wikipedier is now U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 20:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi all. Thanks to U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. the kind nom. My last response to a discussion of this nature can be found at - User talk:WJBscribe/Archive 9#'Crat. I'm not sure that my opinions have changed greatly since then though I keep an open mind. I still think asking people to support my RfB is asking a lot when not only have I not been an admin for a year, but I haven't even been editing Wikipedia for a full year. I also note that there is no crat backlog at the moment and that 4 crats are presently doing renames. Seems to me my time is more helpfully spent elsewhere. In any event,there a few things I'm dealing with at the moment that mean I can't give this my full attention at present. It will prob be a few days before I decide whether to accept or reject this nomination. If I do decide now is too soon, I hope no one will be offended - I truly value the support. WjB scribe 01:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you all very much for your input. I've thought about this a long time and I do still think its premature. I take onboard some of the points made here and elsewhere and agree that maybe a full year as an admin isn't strictly necessary - however I still believe that a few more months of experience before asking the community to extend their trust of me is a good idea. Also, the present crats have everything more than under control and there are plenty of other things for me to be doing. I certainly won't let thing go undone however and would consider running whenever backlogs started to mount again. Otherwise, perhaps this is a matter we could revisit towards then end of this year, or start of next... Thanks especially to U.S.A. for a kindly written nomination. WjB scribe 12:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
SockpuppetsHello again. On a previous occasion (see here), I requested that the talk page of User:Black Rhino Ranger be protected due to soapboxing and related activities. On User talk:Snakezilla, the talk page of a sockpuppet of this user, he is attempting the same activities. This comment is particularly egregious. If at all possible, I'd request that the talk page of every single one of his accounts be fully protected, as he seems to move on from sockpuppet talk page to sockpuppet talk page in order to broadcast his views. Much appreciated. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 19:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Please elaborateI see here that you changed my tag, which I don't mind the change to a hard block, but my question is that on the Wikipedia:Usernames_for_administrator_attention page, there is absolutely nothing about using a different tag for a hard block. There is also very little guidance on when to and not to use a hard block. 17:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I guess what I really wants is a "The combination of your contributions and username lead me to conclude you have no interest in contributing productively here" template :-) ... WjB scribe 18:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
My RfAThanks for supporting my recent successful RfA and for *subtly* encouraging me. I haven't caused Wikipedia to collapse with any of my administrative actions yet! Cheers!! -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 03:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC) "It was entirely your choice"Bullshit: [4] That's called following the rules. Did you even stop to check, or do you just post what sounds true to you? If there's something personal you'd like to discuss, use e-mail. Otherwise, WP:LEAVEMEALONE. Proabivouac 12:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I am not a "senior editor" - there is no such thing as a senior editor of Wikipedia. All contributors hold the same editorial standing as you well know. You seem under the impression that you are a subject in this encyclopedia - you are not. We have no article about you. There are some records within this site of your conduct as a volunteer who edited this site - those contain your full name only because you chose to edit under that name. Otherwise your name would not be contained - you are to this day free to deny that that is your name and nothing would change. You seem to wish to blur the line between our internal proceedings relating to our contributors and our encyclopedic content - they are separate things and must be governed by different rules. For example, if you agree to cease editing this website, there would be little need for us to keep most of their records. They are however necessary in order to chart disruptive behaviour by those who contribute. WjB scribe 12:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I have not found one single example of behaviour from Proabivouac that came close to the digusting viciousness of His Excellency. I have found some example where he was a bit provocative, which would likely never have happened if His Excellency had been banned indefinitely, for his vile, disruptive behaviour. Again, I admit I'm not particularly familiar with the case, but there was nothing in the submitted evidence that suggested that Proabivouac was harming the encyclopaedia. His Excellency seems also to have made several accusations of bigotry against Proabivouac. Now, I don't edit Islam articles, so I don't really know how Proabivouac behaves there, but having seen the posts from His Excellency, I certainly wouldn't take any of his accusations at face value, would you? (I also notice that Proabivouac seems to have the support and friendship of at least one Muslim, which would be unlikely if he were at Wikipedia for the purpose of spreading anti-Islamic racial hatred.) Yet His Excellency's accusations of bigotry, made by a repulsively vicious anonymous troll against a person who was at worst slightly provocative and who was using his real name, remain visible for any potential employer to find when he googles the names of job candidates. It's rather unjust to blame someone for registering with his real name, when that was what was recommended at the time. A lot of reasonably intelligent, decent people might not have realised the possible consequences for real life harassment. I'd ask you to examine His Excellency's personal attacks (many of which were made against Proabivouac's real name, while to this day His Excellency's identity remains unknown). Ask yourself would you be comfortable in having that kind of person free to write anything he liked about you with your real name, on one of Google's top ten websites, so that potential employers could see it? It's possible that the answer may be that you wouldn't mind, as some people have jobs that are extremely secure, and care little about their personal reputation. Others are more vulnerable and care a lot. It's not really for us to judge another person's circumstances. In any case, whether you think Proabivouac is right or wrong, what is the harm in making a little effort not to make things worse for him? He seems to be upset. You seem to think it's ridiculous. Fine. Is there anyway that you can keep that opinion without goading him? Remember that he did inform several administrators. Remember that several innocent people have suffered serious harm as a result of their Wikipedia usernames being linked to their real life identity. Remember that he did not use a sockpuppet to do any double voting or reverting, or to evade a ban. Do you think that real life harm is an appropriate punishment for violating a Wikipedia policy? Do you want to increase that harm? Do you think it would have done serious damage to Wikipedia if the committee had made an announcement that Proabivouac was under probation for one year, for reasons which he wished to remain private? Do you think that it would have done serious damage to Wikipedia if the committee, after Proabivouac's probation evasion became known to them, had offered him by private email the option of leaving Wikipedia for one year (or even permanently) as an alternative to having his identity published? It's a very very sad thing if Wikipedia administrators do not even have a desire to find some solution, where possible, that doesn't involve causing the risk of real life harm to an editor who has violated a rule. ElinorD (talk) 13:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
"For example, if you agree to cease editing this website, there would be little need for us to keep most of their records."
SchoolblockI'm not an admin, so I hope you don't mind my censoring your editorial on User talk:66.207.113.221. Since these are clearly schoolkids, would you consider adding {{ Schoolblock}} to that page instead of the more generic block? Simply offering the option of requesting unblock from that address is unlikely to be productive. / edg ☺ ★ 14:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
AdminshipHello WJBscribe, I'm posting again in regards to adminship. OK being now at 24 000 edits including 1 800 Wikipedia articles/talk edits (including about 25-30 afd discussions, 150 AVI and 140 RFPP), editing 10 000+ articles, created something like 360 articles, 9 templates and 6 categories, and now having edit summaries in both minor and major at close or at 100% I believe now that giving some requests by other users to try out again at AFD So from now on I will accept any nomination of me at WP:RFA. I Still though have possibly some issues in regards to the sockpuppet and image policies (although the latter I can just stop adding images or do less so often even though I'm at 160+ image edits and close to 80 images downloaded). Thanks!-- JForget 16:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Why did you delete an item from my talkpage?Hello. I'd like an explanation for this. I've read enough Wikipedia policy to know that manipulating another user's page is a serious violation of rules. Citadel18080 05:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
QueryWanna give me your take on this user subpage? Jeffpw 13:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see you've been your charming self again ;-). Still - I do hate that sort of collection of "evidence" against other users. It really does need to go... WjB scribe 13:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Betacommand's RfAThanks for your help at WP:BN. Everything seems to OK, as it has been past 7 days and the support was below 50/50. Thanks again.-- U.S.A. ( talk contribs) 15:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Ready to rockFYI. Michael Price has returned to active editing, and all editors have agreed to mediation for the Ebionites article. :0) Ovadyah 22:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Look who the cat dragged upHey mate. How you doing? ➔ This is REDVEЯS 22:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
PPAThanks for your quick response. I'll certainly tread carefully, SqueakBox 23:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Please unprotect Midge PottsThere is no edit war going on. The discussion regarding the pronoun use was, for all intents and purposes, over. The last statement made by any other editor was well over a week ago and it does not appear that Schumin wishes to take part in discussing the edits I made and defended. He's obviously watching the article as he was quick to revert my edits, so he should've known how the discussion was faring and should've made his thoughts known. What justification is there in protecting a page when the person requesting the protection does not wish to discuss the issue, opting instead to make mean-spirited comments in the edit summary (see here)? Furthermore, this alleged edit war has been going on only for a matter of minutes and between just two people. I've never - NEVER - seen a protection request fulfilled so quickly and with so few edits and editors involved. I've made protection requests before that were rejected due to there being not enough activity. The activity involved on this article is far, far, far, far less than that. Based on this and the above, I see absolutely no justification for this page protection. Jinxmchue 00:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
When you have a minute, dearCould you read this Rfc I am formulating? This is my first time doing this, and don't want to make a mistake. I haven't posted it yet. Gonna think if I need to add or change anything. Thanks in advance. Jeffpw 18:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
G7Hi WJBscribe. Would you please delete User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A./Barnstars and User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A./Sandbox. Just some housekeeping. Thanks.-- U.S.A. ( talk contribs) 23:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Birmingham meetupHi there, I noticed you put your name down as interested in a Birmingham meetup. Just letting you know, the date is now set as Saturday 20th October. We really need input on where, and what time we will meet, so comments would be much appreciated on the page. Thanks. Majorly ( talk) 13:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC) Do not editThe rules don't prohibit me from editing. There are changes that have been suggested and discussed for months. you have done nothing. The rules say the actual person can make the changes. Why don't you just respond to the changes I've made? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemarine ( talk • contribs) 15:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC) Who Makes these Edits??This last edit is just a farce: Worldnetdaily
This is a false statement and I'm not sure how or who wrote it, or why they wrote it in a way that seems to diminish my contribution to Worldnetdaily. I'm FEATURED on WND, and this is one of the top 20 traffic sites in the world. "Beginning today, reporter Matt Sanchez, currently embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq, will provide WND readers with a glimpse into the Iraq war most Americans have never heard from a press increasingly hostile to the war"[1] My schedule is currently between 1 and 3 articles PER WEEK. Not "occasionally". This should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemarine ( talk • contribs) 20:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
You might be interested...Reply -- H 2O 23:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC) The nanny stateI'm just in a finger-wagging mood. Now go and play outside with the other boys :o) ➔ This is REDVEЯS 20:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC) Pagemove vandalismLol thanks for the help on Grazielle Pinheiro Nascimento / Destroy!. I was in limbo since the author recreated the page over the pagemove vandalism :P -- slakr\ talk / 23:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC) ManukauThe discussion for this signalled an obvious no consensus - the respondents were clearly evenly split on what should be done with the article. Instead, the closing admin ignored the discussion and substituted his own opinion, which was made clear in his stated reasons. The rest of the closes in that batch were perfectly fine, and I saw no reason to go through the drama of a DRV for one obviously bad close. Rebecca 00:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Re: Image:Dx-06I don't know what you really mean on being double? Zenlax 09:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC) Re: why did you delete my pageRob's links, there was nothing wrong with it Request for Comment on User Conduct - Matt Sanchez / BluemarineHello, may I ask for your participation in an RFC established for user Bluemarine/Matt Sanchez? The reason for the Request for Comment is set out in the RFC summary here. Whether you support or oppose it, your input would be appreciated. Typing monkey 18:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Note... ( WP:PT)I've moved New entry to Wikipedia:Protected titles/Deliberate redlinks for no reason other than it seems the more appropraite place. Hope you don't mind :) GDonato ( talk) 21:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
My 11th Millenium RFD closeYeah, you're right. I didn't read that as well as I should have. It's been fixed now. ♠ P M C♠ 03:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC) :)Not too far off now I think - Satu Suro 00:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Barneca RfA spamThank you for participating in my RfA. I appreciate your taking the time to comment, and plan on learning from the experience and keeping the criticism in mind. If, in the future, you see me doing something that still concerns you, please let me know about it. -- barneca ( talk) 13:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC) AVHope I didn't step on your toes with my block..! I was just about to post the same shared-ip tag. I'm still learning the ropes..! Dreadstar † 17:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC) The now-traditional RFA thank-spamClick there to open your card! → → →
CreditsThis design was RFA Thanks!Thanks for your participation for my RFA bid and for your support.-- JForget 23:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC) ThanksThanks for the message about my Rfa, I will certainly work on those things as mentioned. I should have been reverting more in the food and drink related pages. I probably have the most pages attached to my watch list out of anyone in the project as I have rated a large majority of the articles associated with our project. As I had stated in the nomination process, even just applying gave me quite a bit of Wikipedia knowledge in things to watch. Thanks again and I look forward to seeing you on here. -- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 02:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC) You blocked a number of accounts associated with NORDKAPP after the checkuser came back "likely", but two of the accounts listed at the suspected sock puppet page are not block. See my comment in the "Conclusion" section there, and consider blocking those two accounts. Thank you, and best regards, Shalom Hello 02:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Blatant sockpuppet of indef blocked editorThis doesn't seem like much of an apology to me. It's also a clear evasion of a block. -- ElKevbo 20:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
John Stallings (model)Is there a way you can get a copy of the John Stallings (model) page that was deleted and put it in my userspace? I'm not sure how that works, but it is an admin thing, isn't it? -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 21:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC) I owe you a big thank you for supporting me in My RfA, which was successful with 67 supports and 20 opposes. - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 23:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Over a week ago, you left a message on The Behnam's talkpage, asking him to remove this page. He acknowledged reading it, but has done nothing to remove the page so far. Perhaps you need to discuss this with him further. Or should I just go ahead and delete it, and let you know if he re-creates it? Jeffpw 06:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Name to watchPlease watch User talk:Xaviersutton - a vandal in progress. Auroranorth 13:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC) I need revision for the post "To Speak"the post was previously as the reason given was "no advertising" however, the post has be edited, furthermore to speak has been speeched at Montreal film festival. and it was deleted again, the reason given was "Please do not recreate this article without prior approval from an administrator or you may be blocked from editing". pls help to revised the decision. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesslynism ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
user:198.108.222.3FYI: You recently blocked 198.108.222.3 ( talk · contribs · email) for 3 days for vandalism. This user has now resumed his/her disruptive editing. Perhaps a longer (indefinite?) block is in order? Yilloslime (t) 16:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
user: 70.91.195.205Dude when you put up the shared user template you neglected to notice my warning about this user. The IP is registered to Qualters Middle School in Mansfield Ma. If you could please change that I would be most grateful. Thank you Foxtrotman 21:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC) AIV statsI got that information you wanted about that candidates AIV stats. I put them on my sandbox. The link is to the edit where the report was added, but the label is the information regarding its removal(a bit non-intuitive, but I just hacked up this report format). I checked them over and it did not seem to make any mistakes in this case. Thanks for encouraging a double check on my part. ( (1 == 2) ? ( ('Stop') : ('Go')) 13:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC) User:195.229.236.250WjBscribe, I appreciate your fight against vandalism, but this IP address is shared by the entire internet service in the UAE. Therefore, blocking this IP address blocks an entire country instead of blocking one user. I don't know how we can fight vandalism through this IP, but surely there is an alternative to blocking an entire country. Thank you for considering this message. Merond e 12:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Fabrictramp RFAThank you for your support in my Request for Adminship, which passed with 50 supports, 1 neutral, and 1 oppose. My goal is to keep earning your trust every time I grab the "mop". (And I'm always open to constructive criticism and advice!) Again, thanks. -- Fabrictramp 16:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Seeing as your one of the main people that deals with checusers, I thought I'd let you know that a backlog is starting to form at the page. I'm letting you know so that the backlog can be taken control of before it gets any worse. Thanks, Davnel03 18:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Stanley Dunin AfDHi there, some serious concerns about the sources in this article have been raised and whether the claims made in the article are really backed by the citations. Could I ask you to have a careful look at these citations and see what you think? Thanks Tim Vickers 00:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, I found this NASA history of geosynchronous orbits. It doesn't mention Stanley Dunin at all. All the best Tim Vickers 17:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC) I think my comment on the AfD is still valid: "Aerospace engineer published in his field. Head of the astrodynamics section of a NASA project and part of a team that launched the world's first geosynchronous communications satellite." I don't think he needs to have been the first to work out the geosynchronous orbit to be notable. The article suggests his role was in the engineering over the project, not the theory behind it... The article contains OR and some elements may be overstated but I am satisfied the underlying person is more worthy of inclusion than the ridiculous number of minor modern celebrities kept at AfD every day. WjB scribe 18:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Well I have absolutely no reason to think its untrue - just unverified. I don't know much about the field but my experience of other areas is that those who develop the theory tend to be more widely mentioned in publications than those whose job it is to put it into practice. I remain reasonably happy that we should have an article about this man. WjB scribe 18:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Things are a bit clearer now. I wandered into Matt57's talk page when trying to get feedback from previous contributors to this article. Reading the thread in the admin noticeboard that was linked from there I now see why some people in this AfD discussion have made such heated comments. Can I reassure you that I have no personal opinions whatsoever about any of the past wikidrama surrounding this set of articles and have just been trying to apply WP:V to the subject. Tim Vickers 16:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Little intellectual puzzle for youHey, Sugarplum! You're a lawyer, so maybe you can help me out. I'm copy editing a translation of a German article and can't make heads or tails out of the legal mumbo jumbo in this paragraph. Can you give me a nice English sentence to fill in the blanks with????? Without further ado, here's the paragraph:
Thanks, kiddo! Jeffpw 14:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Occasionally, actual " slave contracts" are set out in writing to record the formal consent of the parties to the power exchange, stating their common vision of the relationship dynamic. Such documents have not been recognised as being legally binding. Contracts that are contra bonos mores (contrary to public morals) are generally illegal, and such contracts can even be constitutionally prohibited. In Europe, such agreements may be contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights which grants a general freedom from "unhuman or degrading treatment". This right had been held to be absolute and no limitations or derogations are permitted by the Convention. Nevertheless, the mere existence of such purported contracts has resulted in banner headlines in yellow press publications and uninformed third parties are periodically led by seeing such information out of context towards rejecting and condemning the relationship it describes.
contributorsA contributor is what he writes. Matt Sanchez 21:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Will, do you think the AfD should be deleted too? I think it should be kept for record purposes... CO 2 22:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC) VandalismThanks for blocking RandomSheepSaysBah. An apparent buddy of his, Bitch.Im.l337 (vandalised mostly the same articles) is itching to be blocked as well, if you're interested. Precious Roy 20:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
P.E.O. Sisterhood vandalismGreetings WJBscribe! Just wanted to let you know that the recurrent vandalism, blocked for several months by having the page protected, seems to have resumed at P.E.O. Sisterhood now that you've removed the block. I'm not sure if my repeatedly rvv'ing the page amounts to edit warring, so rather than continue down that route, I'm instead drawing this to your attention and asking for advice. Thanks, -- 24.21.106.174 05:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Arbitration of an XFDAs I have seen your work on Wikipedia and trust your knowledge of the system I would like to ask a question of you. I submitted an article for AfD recently and after a number of responses I want to remove the AfD submission, how do I go about doing that?-- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 07:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Will. Thanks for your reply, even if it wasn't the one I wanted. Anyway, if the page was going to be protected, what format would it be protected in? Would it include the disputed information or not? Regards :) ~~ [Jam] [talk] 21:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Unfortunately, even the talk page might need protecting as the user(s) have now moved to that in a prevention of the discussion continuing! ~~ [Jam] [talk] 21:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Will. I've put in a request for content to be added to the protected page - my rationale being that the anonymous users have had time to discuss the addition of the content, but have not. Therefore, I'd like to the content to be added to see if we can get them into the debate proper. If you get chance, can you take a look at my request please? I've added an editprotected tag like you are meant to. ~~ [Jam] [talk] 09:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Edit album name of Britey Spears?I think we should chance the name to pieces of me because: www.play.com has confirmed pieces of me, HMV confirmed pieces of me, people magazine confirmed pieces of me and a radio station confirmed pieces of me! Isn't it about time that we say the album is called pieces of me? I mean they all are pretty reliable sources! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkomuitnederland ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Featured ArticleSorry didn't realise that - its not immediately obvious from the heading and the picture on the main page that those 2 articles are the same (though I can see that they are now). Kelpin 17:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC) ApologiesSorry about the comments on Jwales talk page, but it wasn't exactly a PA as it wasn't aimed at any editor in particular. I will change the comment and try not to be annoyed by various things on wikipedia. I mostly am a good editor. The sunder king 16:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Can you help?I feel like I am being unfairly harrassed and targeted re my involved in the paedophil;e articles. i refer specifically to this page, 3rd similar accusation in a week and Dyklos is using the same timing ideas as did the anon whio filed the second complaint, and exactly the same "you are Pol64 allegation" with no new evidence or accusations, just the same old accusations. This, this and this also appear to me to be edits made in bad faith. Some body or some group of people a[ppears furious at the recent blocks of Farenhorst and Mike D78 and they are blaming me for it and I have no desire to be trolled by themn on this site, SqueakBox 19:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What Now?Sir: I am in an edit dispute in which the other party refuses mediation (Mediation Request). What might you recommend as a next step? Many thanks. JerryGraf 14:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The argument that it "did not go my way" is connected with two (2) posts made by third parties. One of them acknowledged the validity of a key part of my argument. The other is a suspected sock puppet of Rogue's. Link JerryGraf 17:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Dysepsion said they were valid statements but did not belong on Hefner's page, He said they belonged on PEI's page. Rogue Gremlin 18:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Other forms was accepted, He just doesn't like other had to say. After people keep disagreeing with what he was trying to put on the page. He is now just on a fishing expedition, trying to find someone to agree with him Rogue Gremlin 19:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
|
LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Technical Analysis PageThis is beyond a content dispute. If the person used his real ID, and preferably his real name, then we would have a much different story. He has accused me of lying about communications I had with John Murphy. I can prove them. I have the emails. jonkozer, happytech and the mystery URL all need to be blocked. I don't know how to go about requesting that. This is not a full time job. Please tell me the right steps. Thanks. Sposer 00:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
TaxobotGreat. Thanks for letting me know! Verisimilus T 08:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC) Is it necessary?Is it necessary to block Danna Shinsho indefintely? Just some misunderstanding on convensation results being blocked forever? If I am right, you are quite netural in this event. I think this is not the worst that you think. Please consider carefully whether it is a right decision to block her indefintely. I claim that I am netural to this. But I just don't want to stop a user's to make his/her contribution on Wikipedia. Thanks. ( Addaick 13:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC))
Page protectionHello. On User talk:Black Rhino Ranger, the talk page of a user who was indefinitely blocked for using sockpuppets, the user in question frequently uses the page as an attack page to broadcast his views on the pages he edits and his disapproval with several policies. Two users, Dora Nichov and CBFan, frequently edit war with Black Rhino Ranger on his talk page, and their discussions are more or less filled with incivility and personal attacks, particularly on CBFan's part (see this edit summary and this). As there really is no point in continuing this banter on the talk page of an indefinitely blocked user, I request that his user and talk pages be fully protected to cease this. Much appreciated. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 20:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
wrong use of fair useWhat are you supposed to do again if you come across an image that's supposed to be fair use but isn't justified? I just found this on Michelle Tea, and I can;t remember what I supposed to do with stuff like that. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: IRC, MedComCongratulations! I've given your MedComWiki account sysop, bureaucrat and checkuser rights. Do you use IRC at all? If so let me know your nick and sort access for #wikipedia-mediation. WjB scribe 00:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
QuestionWhat happy camper says here concerns me. I'm half tempted to believe him, but I want to know where did you get the CU evidence saying Farenhorst was a VoB sock? You have a link to the RFCU page, yet no specific case or talk page diff. Either would help. Kwsn (Ni!) 20:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
My RfAHi WJBscribe. I have replied to your oppose on my Rfa. Thanks. ~ Wikihermit 00:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Courtesy BlankingI believe that your courtesy blanking of Jeffrey Gustafson's punishment does not comply with the guidelines in WP:CBLANK. Please feel welcome to participate in the discussion on the talk page if you feel that I am incorrect, otherwise the page will be unblanked. Jfwambaugh 15:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC) Deletion StatsHi WJB - a quick question - I noticed that you commented at Useight's RFA regarding his deleted edits (i.e. from CSD tagging etc.). I appreciate admins have access to extra logs but is there a method/tool for non admins to get a count of deleted edits? I'm sure in the past there was a way of getting a server count but I could be wrong. Cheers. Pedro | Chat 15:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I confess I did it the old fashioned way - I looked through the deleted edits and counted all those where the edit was adding a speed deletion tag (his edit summaries are conveniently in the form({{db-attack}}) etc.). I you're interested, I'd say you tagged about 250 pages that have been deleted... WjB scribe 15:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the block of 71.114.247.243Just a question, why did you give him a mere 24 hour block? Over the period of 3 days, he POV pushed on one article, and made a blitzing attack on Human evolution. I'd like to push for a longer block. Cheers, Je t Lover ( Report a mistake) 22:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Request for mediation - EbionitesA request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ebionites, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, WjB scribe 23:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Please hold the acceptance period open for 14 days. I suspect this is a way to avoid responding. I'll let you know if Michael is actively editing on Wiki during this period. Ovadyah 13:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC) Award
BetacommandBotHe's tagging good images. Please block it. Cheers, Je t Lover ( Report a mistake) 03:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Mop closetSo did you give any more thought to one of those nominations so that you can leave messages like this more regularly?-- Chaser - T 06:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
My EmailHi! I have a GMail account specified now. Does that mean I get to be usurped for seven days? -- PNiddy Go! 14:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC) "15"I just came across your question on the significance of the "15" part of my name while going through the history. There is really nothing important about it. I checked for Phoenix5, Phoenix10 etc and I thought I'd remeber 15 better-- Phoenix 15 20:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
any one can edit wikipedia pages without logging inany one can still edit wikipedia pages with out logging in i —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.153.242 ( talk) 03:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 05:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Regarding deletionsI noticed that you were an administrator and I was wondering what to do with articles that are permitted to be deleted. This specifically applies to this page. Thanks. ~ Ambrosia- talk 05:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Scientific jury selection in the UKDo you know if so-called Scientific Jury Selection is practiced in the UK? All of my sources are American.-- Chaser - T 19:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I have added a section, entitled “‘the national fraternity’”, to Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Phi Kappa Psi. If you feel that this section is best omitted, then please just delete it and please let me know that you have done thus. — SlamDiego ←T 01:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC) I have nominated Elonka for adminship. I saw you nominated her last time, and may you would like to co. nom. Pat Politics rule! 23:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
~*~Grin~*~
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 21:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Can you delete this? I am going to reupload it to Commons under PNG formatting instead of here, and the reuploads are a little much.. — Moe ε 10:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Work that mop!Some doofus, with nothing but an unsourced claim that they heard it on a radio station, has changed the name of Britney Spears's fifth studio album to Piece of Me. I don't know how to change it back without screwing it up completely. You wanna do what the community has entrusted you to do????? How's it hanging, by the way? Jeffpw 11:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
About Poor Britney's new album: I will absolutely get that protection removed when the title is officially announced. We're all waiting with baited breath, especially since the MTV debacle last Sunday evening. Did you see it? Really tragic, but she did look bangingly hot, even to this confirmed bachelor! Jeffpw 11:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
(Butting in here, sorry WjBscribe) I actually noticed this earlier, the IP editor also changed the Template:Britney Spears. I don't know a thing about her, so I didn't revert it, but I think if it has not been confirmed, perhaps the template should be reverted as well? Ariel ♥ Gold 11:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I knew there was going to be trouble......when they deleted Category:Wikipedians who don't wish to become administrators (or whatever it was called). :) Thank you for the kind offer, it's flattering, but I lack the ambition or desire for an admin's powers and responsibilities. And even if it were my ambition, I would have to argue that I lack experience in some critical areas, like FA. But thanks again. Cheers, Xtifr tälk 12:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC) What banter?[1] He started it... :) -- DarkFalls talk 13:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Hi WJBscribe. I am nominating you to become a bureaucrat.-- Wikipedier is now U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 20:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi all. Thanks to U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. the kind nom. My last response to a discussion of this nature can be found at - User talk:WJBscribe/Archive 9#'Crat. I'm not sure that my opinions have changed greatly since then though I keep an open mind. I still think asking people to support my RfB is asking a lot when not only have I not been an admin for a year, but I haven't even been editing Wikipedia for a full year. I also note that there is no crat backlog at the moment and that 4 crats are presently doing renames. Seems to me my time is more helpfully spent elsewhere. In any event,there a few things I'm dealing with at the moment that mean I can't give this my full attention at present. It will prob be a few days before I decide whether to accept or reject this nomination. If I do decide now is too soon, I hope no one will be offended - I truly value the support. WjB scribe 01:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you all very much for your input. I've thought about this a long time and I do still think its premature. I take onboard some of the points made here and elsewhere and agree that maybe a full year as an admin isn't strictly necessary - however I still believe that a few more months of experience before asking the community to extend their trust of me is a good idea. Also, the present crats have everything more than under control and there are plenty of other things for me to be doing. I certainly won't let thing go undone however and would consider running whenever backlogs started to mount again. Otherwise, perhaps this is a matter we could revisit towards then end of this year, or start of next... Thanks especially to U.S.A. for a kindly written nomination. WjB scribe 12:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
SockpuppetsHello again. On a previous occasion (see here), I requested that the talk page of User:Black Rhino Ranger be protected due to soapboxing and related activities. On User talk:Snakezilla, the talk page of a sockpuppet of this user, he is attempting the same activities. This comment is particularly egregious. If at all possible, I'd request that the talk page of every single one of his accounts be fully protected, as he seems to move on from sockpuppet talk page to sockpuppet talk page in order to broadcast his views. Much appreciated. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 19:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Please elaborateI see here that you changed my tag, which I don't mind the change to a hard block, but my question is that on the Wikipedia:Usernames_for_administrator_attention page, there is absolutely nothing about using a different tag for a hard block. There is also very little guidance on when to and not to use a hard block. 17:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I guess what I really wants is a "The combination of your contributions and username lead me to conclude you have no interest in contributing productively here" template :-) ... WjB scribe 18:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
My RfAThanks for supporting my recent successful RfA and for *subtly* encouraging me. I haven't caused Wikipedia to collapse with any of my administrative actions yet! Cheers!! -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 03:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC) "It was entirely your choice"Bullshit: [4] That's called following the rules. Did you even stop to check, or do you just post what sounds true to you? If there's something personal you'd like to discuss, use e-mail. Otherwise, WP:LEAVEMEALONE. Proabivouac 12:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I am not a "senior editor" - there is no such thing as a senior editor of Wikipedia. All contributors hold the same editorial standing as you well know. You seem under the impression that you are a subject in this encyclopedia - you are not. We have no article about you. There are some records within this site of your conduct as a volunteer who edited this site - those contain your full name only because you chose to edit under that name. Otherwise your name would not be contained - you are to this day free to deny that that is your name and nothing would change. You seem to wish to blur the line between our internal proceedings relating to our contributors and our encyclopedic content - they are separate things and must be governed by different rules. For example, if you agree to cease editing this website, there would be little need for us to keep most of their records. They are however necessary in order to chart disruptive behaviour by those who contribute. WjB scribe 12:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I have not found one single example of behaviour from Proabivouac that came close to the digusting viciousness of His Excellency. I have found some example where he was a bit provocative, which would likely never have happened if His Excellency had been banned indefinitely, for his vile, disruptive behaviour. Again, I admit I'm not particularly familiar with the case, but there was nothing in the submitted evidence that suggested that Proabivouac was harming the encyclopaedia. His Excellency seems also to have made several accusations of bigotry against Proabivouac. Now, I don't edit Islam articles, so I don't really know how Proabivouac behaves there, but having seen the posts from His Excellency, I certainly wouldn't take any of his accusations at face value, would you? (I also notice that Proabivouac seems to have the support and friendship of at least one Muslim, which would be unlikely if he were at Wikipedia for the purpose of spreading anti-Islamic racial hatred.) Yet His Excellency's accusations of bigotry, made by a repulsively vicious anonymous troll against a person who was at worst slightly provocative and who was using his real name, remain visible for any potential employer to find when he googles the names of job candidates. It's rather unjust to blame someone for registering with his real name, when that was what was recommended at the time. A lot of reasonably intelligent, decent people might not have realised the possible consequences for real life harassment. I'd ask you to examine His Excellency's personal attacks (many of which were made against Proabivouac's real name, while to this day His Excellency's identity remains unknown). Ask yourself would you be comfortable in having that kind of person free to write anything he liked about you with your real name, on one of Google's top ten websites, so that potential employers could see it? It's possible that the answer may be that you wouldn't mind, as some people have jobs that are extremely secure, and care little about their personal reputation. Others are more vulnerable and care a lot. It's not really for us to judge another person's circumstances. In any case, whether you think Proabivouac is right or wrong, what is the harm in making a little effort not to make things worse for him? He seems to be upset. You seem to think it's ridiculous. Fine. Is there anyway that you can keep that opinion without goading him? Remember that he did inform several administrators. Remember that several innocent people have suffered serious harm as a result of their Wikipedia usernames being linked to their real life identity. Remember that he did not use a sockpuppet to do any double voting or reverting, or to evade a ban. Do you think that real life harm is an appropriate punishment for violating a Wikipedia policy? Do you want to increase that harm? Do you think it would have done serious damage to Wikipedia if the committee had made an announcement that Proabivouac was under probation for one year, for reasons which he wished to remain private? Do you think that it would have done serious damage to Wikipedia if the committee, after Proabivouac's probation evasion became known to them, had offered him by private email the option of leaving Wikipedia for one year (or even permanently) as an alternative to having his identity published? It's a very very sad thing if Wikipedia administrators do not even have a desire to find some solution, where possible, that doesn't involve causing the risk of real life harm to an editor who has violated a rule. ElinorD (talk) 13:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
"For example, if you agree to cease editing this website, there would be little need for us to keep most of their records."
SchoolblockI'm not an admin, so I hope you don't mind my censoring your editorial on User talk:66.207.113.221. Since these are clearly schoolkids, would you consider adding {{ Schoolblock}} to that page instead of the more generic block? Simply offering the option of requesting unblock from that address is unlikely to be productive. / edg ☺ ★ 14:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
AdminshipHello WJBscribe, I'm posting again in regards to adminship. OK being now at 24 000 edits including 1 800 Wikipedia articles/talk edits (including about 25-30 afd discussions, 150 AVI and 140 RFPP), editing 10 000+ articles, created something like 360 articles, 9 templates and 6 categories, and now having edit summaries in both minor and major at close or at 100% I believe now that giving some requests by other users to try out again at AFD So from now on I will accept any nomination of me at WP:RFA. I Still though have possibly some issues in regards to the sockpuppet and image policies (although the latter I can just stop adding images or do less so often even though I'm at 160+ image edits and close to 80 images downloaded). Thanks!-- JForget 16:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Why did you delete an item from my talkpage?Hello. I'd like an explanation for this. I've read enough Wikipedia policy to know that manipulating another user's page is a serious violation of rules. Citadel18080 05:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
QueryWanna give me your take on this user subpage? Jeffpw 13:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see you've been your charming self again ;-). Still - I do hate that sort of collection of "evidence" against other users. It really does need to go... WjB scribe 13:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Betacommand's RfAThanks for your help at WP:BN. Everything seems to OK, as it has been past 7 days and the support was below 50/50. Thanks again.-- U.S.A. ( talk contribs) 15:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Ready to rockFYI. Michael Price has returned to active editing, and all editors have agreed to mediation for the Ebionites article. :0) Ovadyah 22:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Look who the cat dragged upHey mate. How you doing? ➔ This is REDVEЯS 22:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
PPAThanks for your quick response. I'll certainly tread carefully, SqueakBox 23:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Please unprotect Midge PottsThere is no edit war going on. The discussion regarding the pronoun use was, for all intents and purposes, over. The last statement made by any other editor was well over a week ago and it does not appear that Schumin wishes to take part in discussing the edits I made and defended. He's obviously watching the article as he was quick to revert my edits, so he should've known how the discussion was faring and should've made his thoughts known. What justification is there in protecting a page when the person requesting the protection does not wish to discuss the issue, opting instead to make mean-spirited comments in the edit summary (see here)? Furthermore, this alleged edit war has been going on only for a matter of minutes and between just two people. I've never - NEVER - seen a protection request fulfilled so quickly and with so few edits and editors involved. I've made protection requests before that were rejected due to there being not enough activity. The activity involved on this article is far, far, far, far less than that. Based on this and the above, I see absolutely no justification for this page protection. Jinxmchue 00:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
When you have a minute, dearCould you read this Rfc I am formulating? This is my first time doing this, and don't want to make a mistake. I haven't posted it yet. Gonna think if I need to add or change anything. Thanks in advance. Jeffpw 18:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
G7Hi WJBscribe. Would you please delete User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A./Barnstars and User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A./Sandbox. Just some housekeeping. Thanks.-- U.S.A. ( talk contribs) 23:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Birmingham meetupHi there, I noticed you put your name down as interested in a Birmingham meetup. Just letting you know, the date is now set as Saturday 20th October. We really need input on where, and what time we will meet, so comments would be much appreciated on the page. Thanks. Majorly ( talk) 13:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC) Do not editThe rules don't prohibit me from editing. There are changes that have been suggested and discussed for months. you have done nothing. The rules say the actual person can make the changes. Why don't you just respond to the changes I've made? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemarine ( talk • contribs) 15:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC) Who Makes these Edits??This last edit is just a farce: Worldnetdaily
This is a false statement and I'm not sure how or who wrote it, or why they wrote it in a way that seems to diminish my contribution to Worldnetdaily. I'm FEATURED on WND, and this is one of the top 20 traffic sites in the world. "Beginning today, reporter Matt Sanchez, currently embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq, will provide WND readers with a glimpse into the Iraq war most Americans have never heard from a press increasingly hostile to the war"[1] My schedule is currently between 1 and 3 articles PER WEEK. Not "occasionally". This should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemarine ( talk • contribs) 20:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
You might be interested...Reply -- H 2O 23:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC) The nanny stateI'm just in a finger-wagging mood. Now go and play outside with the other boys :o) ➔ This is REDVEЯS 20:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC) Pagemove vandalismLol thanks for the help on Grazielle Pinheiro Nascimento / Destroy!. I was in limbo since the author recreated the page over the pagemove vandalism :P -- slakr\ talk / 23:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC) ManukauThe discussion for this signalled an obvious no consensus - the respondents were clearly evenly split on what should be done with the article. Instead, the closing admin ignored the discussion and substituted his own opinion, which was made clear in his stated reasons. The rest of the closes in that batch were perfectly fine, and I saw no reason to go through the drama of a DRV for one obviously bad close. Rebecca 00:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Re: Image:Dx-06I don't know what you really mean on being double? Zenlax 09:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC) Re: why did you delete my pageRob's links, there was nothing wrong with it Request for Comment on User Conduct - Matt Sanchez / BluemarineHello, may I ask for your participation in an RFC established for user Bluemarine/Matt Sanchez? The reason for the Request for Comment is set out in the RFC summary here. Whether you support or oppose it, your input would be appreciated. Typing monkey 18:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Note... ( WP:PT)I've moved New entry to Wikipedia:Protected titles/Deliberate redlinks for no reason other than it seems the more appropraite place. Hope you don't mind :) GDonato ( talk) 21:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
My 11th Millenium RFD closeYeah, you're right. I didn't read that as well as I should have. It's been fixed now. ♠ P M C♠ 03:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC) :)Not too far off now I think - Satu Suro 00:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Barneca RfA spamThank you for participating in my RfA. I appreciate your taking the time to comment, and plan on learning from the experience and keeping the criticism in mind. If, in the future, you see me doing something that still concerns you, please let me know about it. -- barneca ( talk) 13:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC) AVHope I didn't step on your toes with my block..! I was just about to post the same shared-ip tag. I'm still learning the ropes..! Dreadstar † 17:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC) The now-traditional RFA thank-spamClick there to open your card! → → →
CreditsThis design was RFA Thanks!Thanks for your participation for my RFA bid and for your support.-- JForget 23:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC) ThanksThanks for the message about my Rfa, I will certainly work on those things as mentioned. I should have been reverting more in the food and drink related pages. I probably have the most pages attached to my watch list out of anyone in the project as I have rated a large majority of the articles associated with our project. As I had stated in the nomination process, even just applying gave me quite a bit of Wikipedia knowledge in things to watch. Thanks again and I look forward to seeing you on here. -- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 02:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC) You blocked a number of accounts associated with NORDKAPP after the checkuser came back "likely", but two of the accounts listed at the suspected sock puppet page are not block. See my comment in the "Conclusion" section there, and consider blocking those two accounts. Thank you, and best regards, Shalom Hello 02:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Blatant sockpuppet of indef blocked editorThis doesn't seem like much of an apology to me. It's also a clear evasion of a block. -- ElKevbo 20:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
John Stallings (model)Is there a way you can get a copy of the John Stallings (model) page that was deleted and put it in my userspace? I'm not sure how that works, but it is an admin thing, isn't it? -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 21:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC) I owe you a big thank you for supporting me in My RfA, which was successful with 67 supports and 20 opposes. - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 23:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Over a week ago, you left a message on The Behnam's talkpage, asking him to remove this page. He acknowledged reading it, but has done nothing to remove the page so far. Perhaps you need to discuss this with him further. Or should I just go ahead and delete it, and let you know if he re-creates it? Jeffpw 06:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Name to watchPlease watch User talk:Xaviersutton - a vandal in progress. Auroranorth 13:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC) I need revision for the post "To Speak"the post was previously as the reason given was "no advertising" however, the post has be edited, furthermore to speak has been speeched at Montreal film festival. and it was deleted again, the reason given was "Please do not recreate this article without prior approval from an administrator or you may be blocked from editing". pls help to revised the decision. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesslynism ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
user:198.108.222.3FYI: You recently blocked 198.108.222.3 ( talk · contribs · email) for 3 days for vandalism. This user has now resumed his/her disruptive editing. Perhaps a longer (indefinite?) block is in order? Yilloslime (t) 16:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
user: 70.91.195.205Dude when you put up the shared user template you neglected to notice my warning about this user. The IP is registered to Qualters Middle School in Mansfield Ma. If you could please change that I would be most grateful. Thank you Foxtrotman 21:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC) AIV statsI got that information you wanted about that candidates AIV stats. I put them on my sandbox. The link is to the edit where the report was added, but the label is the information regarding its removal(a bit non-intuitive, but I just hacked up this report format). I checked them over and it did not seem to make any mistakes in this case. Thanks for encouraging a double check on my part. ( (1 == 2) ? ( ('Stop') : ('Go')) 13:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC) User:195.229.236.250WjBscribe, I appreciate your fight against vandalism, but this IP address is shared by the entire internet service in the UAE. Therefore, blocking this IP address blocks an entire country instead of blocking one user. I don't know how we can fight vandalism through this IP, but surely there is an alternative to blocking an entire country. Thank you for considering this message. Merond e 12:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Fabrictramp RFAThank you for your support in my Request for Adminship, which passed with 50 supports, 1 neutral, and 1 oppose. My goal is to keep earning your trust every time I grab the "mop". (And I'm always open to constructive criticism and advice!) Again, thanks. -- Fabrictramp 16:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Seeing as your one of the main people that deals with checusers, I thought I'd let you know that a backlog is starting to form at the page. I'm letting you know so that the backlog can be taken control of before it gets any worse. Thanks, Davnel03 18:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Stanley Dunin AfDHi there, some serious concerns about the sources in this article have been raised and whether the claims made in the article are really backed by the citations. Could I ask you to have a careful look at these citations and see what you think? Thanks Tim Vickers 00:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, I found this NASA history of geosynchronous orbits. It doesn't mention Stanley Dunin at all. All the best Tim Vickers 17:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC) I think my comment on the AfD is still valid: "Aerospace engineer published in his field. Head of the astrodynamics section of a NASA project and part of a team that launched the world's first geosynchronous communications satellite." I don't think he needs to have been the first to work out the geosynchronous orbit to be notable. The article suggests his role was in the engineering over the project, not the theory behind it... The article contains OR and some elements may be overstated but I am satisfied the underlying person is more worthy of inclusion than the ridiculous number of minor modern celebrities kept at AfD every day. WjB scribe 18:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Well I have absolutely no reason to think its untrue - just unverified. I don't know much about the field but my experience of other areas is that those who develop the theory tend to be more widely mentioned in publications than those whose job it is to put it into practice. I remain reasonably happy that we should have an article about this man. WjB scribe 18:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Things are a bit clearer now. I wandered into Matt57's talk page when trying to get feedback from previous contributors to this article. Reading the thread in the admin noticeboard that was linked from there I now see why some people in this AfD discussion have made such heated comments. Can I reassure you that I have no personal opinions whatsoever about any of the past wikidrama surrounding this set of articles and have just been trying to apply WP:V to the subject. Tim Vickers 16:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Little intellectual puzzle for youHey, Sugarplum! You're a lawyer, so maybe you can help me out. I'm copy editing a translation of a German article and can't make heads or tails out of the legal mumbo jumbo in this paragraph. Can you give me a nice English sentence to fill in the blanks with????? Without further ado, here's the paragraph:
Thanks, kiddo! Jeffpw 14:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Occasionally, actual " slave contracts" are set out in writing to record the formal consent of the parties to the power exchange, stating their common vision of the relationship dynamic. Such documents have not been recognised as being legally binding. Contracts that are contra bonos mores (contrary to public morals) are generally illegal, and such contracts can even be constitutionally prohibited. In Europe, such agreements may be contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights which grants a general freedom from "unhuman or degrading treatment". This right had been held to be absolute and no limitations or derogations are permitted by the Convention. Nevertheless, the mere existence of such purported contracts has resulted in banner headlines in yellow press publications and uninformed third parties are periodically led by seeing such information out of context towards rejecting and condemning the relationship it describes.
contributorsA contributor is what he writes. Matt Sanchez 21:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Will, do you think the AfD should be deleted too? I think it should be kept for record purposes... CO 2 22:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC) VandalismThanks for blocking RandomSheepSaysBah. An apparent buddy of his, Bitch.Im.l337 (vandalised mostly the same articles) is itching to be blocked as well, if you're interested. Precious Roy 20:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
P.E.O. Sisterhood vandalismGreetings WJBscribe! Just wanted to let you know that the recurrent vandalism, blocked for several months by having the page protected, seems to have resumed at P.E.O. Sisterhood now that you've removed the block. I'm not sure if my repeatedly rvv'ing the page amounts to edit warring, so rather than continue down that route, I'm instead drawing this to your attention and asking for advice. Thanks, -- 24.21.106.174 05:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Arbitration of an XFDAs I have seen your work on Wikipedia and trust your knowledge of the system I would like to ask a question of you. I submitted an article for AfD recently and after a number of responses I want to remove the AfD submission, how do I go about doing that?-- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 07:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Will. Thanks for your reply, even if it wasn't the one I wanted. Anyway, if the page was going to be protected, what format would it be protected in? Would it include the disputed information or not? Regards :) ~~ [Jam] [talk] 21:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Unfortunately, even the talk page might need protecting as the user(s) have now moved to that in a prevention of the discussion continuing! ~~ [Jam] [talk] 21:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Will. I've put in a request for content to be added to the protected page - my rationale being that the anonymous users have had time to discuss the addition of the content, but have not. Therefore, I'd like to the content to be added to see if we can get them into the debate proper. If you get chance, can you take a look at my request please? I've added an editprotected tag like you are meant to. ~~ [Jam] [talk] 09:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Edit album name of Britey Spears?I think we should chance the name to pieces of me because: www.play.com has confirmed pieces of me, HMV confirmed pieces of me, people magazine confirmed pieces of me and a radio station confirmed pieces of me! Isn't it about time that we say the album is called pieces of me? I mean they all are pretty reliable sources! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkomuitnederland ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Featured ArticleSorry didn't realise that - its not immediately obvious from the heading and the picture on the main page that those 2 articles are the same (though I can see that they are now). Kelpin 17:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC) ApologiesSorry about the comments on Jwales talk page, but it wasn't exactly a PA as it wasn't aimed at any editor in particular. I will change the comment and try not to be annoyed by various things on wikipedia. I mostly am a good editor. The sunder king 16:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Can you help?I feel like I am being unfairly harrassed and targeted re my involved in the paedophil;e articles. i refer specifically to this page, 3rd similar accusation in a week and Dyklos is using the same timing ideas as did the anon whio filed the second complaint, and exactly the same "you are Pol64 allegation" with no new evidence or accusations, just the same old accusations. This, this and this also appear to me to be edits made in bad faith. Some body or some group of people a[ppears furious at the recent blocks of Farenhorst and Mike D78 and they are blaming me for it and I have no desire to be trolled by themn on this site, SqueakBox 19:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What Now?Sir: I am in an edit dispute in which the other party refuses mediation (Mediation Request). What might you recommend as a next step? Many thanks. JerryGraf 14:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The argument that it "did not go my way" is connected with two (2) posts made by third parties. One of them acknowledged the validity of a key part of my argument. The other is a suspected sock puppet of Rogue's. Link JerryGraf 17:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Dysepsion said they were valid statements but did not belong on Hefner's page, He said they belonged on PEI's page. Rogue Gremlin 18:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Other forms was accepted, He just doesn't like other had to say. After people keep disagreeing with what he was trying to put on the page. He is now just on a fishing expedition, trying to find someone to agree with him Rogue Gremlin 19:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
|