User talk:Chaser/Archive 10

; Archives
	2006: Mar—Jun 19 \| Jun 20—Jul \| Aug—Sep \| Oct—Dec 17 \| Dec 17—31; 2007: Jan \| Feb—May \| Jun \| Jul \| Aug \| Sep \| Oct \| Nov \| Dec; 2008: Jan—May \| Jun—Aug \| Sep \| Oct \| Nov \| Dec; 2009: Jan—Apr \| May—Aug \| Sep \| Oct—Nov \| Dec; 2010: Jan—Jun \| Jul—Oct \| Nov—Dec; 2011: Jan—Mar \| Apr—Jul; 2012: Jul—Aug \| Sep—Dec ; 2013: Jan—Dec ; 2014: Jan—Dec ; 2015: Jan—Dec
	;

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Chaser. 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.

Archive 5

←

→

Attempt at AfD participation

Dear Chaser, I have attempted to discuss the following AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dawn_of_the_Dead_in_popular_culture. Please let me know if this is better or if you have additional advice and tips. Thanks again for all of your help! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Roi, I'm a bit disappointed. As someone who's been blocked for sockpuppetry, you should know how serious such a charge is. Collusion is a very different thing. If you're going to accuse someone of something, at the very least don't insinuate that the accusation is about something far worse.--Chaser - T 05:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello! I stated in big letters that I did not suspect sockpuppetry on any of their accounts. Rob's ANI thread on me that followed Eyrian's AN thread I suppose just had me at my wits end with people levelling inaccurate and hostile allegations at me that it seem appropriate to finally get out my own suspicions and to do so without actually bringing anyone to AN, ANI, check user, RfA, or elsewhere, i.e. to NOT put them in any kind of serious "danger." I saw double-standards in some of the criticisms levelled at me as numerous editors posted "per X" messages without being taken to task or that outright copied and pasted arguments from one AfD to the next without criticism. I understand that I had been blocked previously, but still. And after seeing Otto's hostile reply to DGG, I felt rather enraged. Anyway, maybe we should focus my efforts elsewhere? I've done a lot of welcoming and general article improvement and tried a small amount of "vandal fighting" as well. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

"I strongly believe that we should not jump to the sockpuppetry conclusion, but..." It doesn't matter what comes after "but", because at that point people are already on edge.--Chaser - T 05:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I see your point. How do you recommend I deal with stuff like what Eyrian did or Rob? I believe I can offer a lot to this site and spent a good deal of time welcoming new users and going through the grammar in articles today. I am working on a dissertation and so my volunteer time on something that I have found useful and I know my students use is time that I would like to spend without people who just disagree with me out of principal looking for ways to attack me and report erroneously on my edits. I want to help improve an online encyclopedia, not contend with random people harassing or stalking me or not assuming good faith for me. Also, I apologize for taking up so much of your time with this stuff tonight. I read that you're working on a law degree and so probably have limited time to spare as well for a volunteer project. I really do appreciate your help and I hope that you have an enjoyable labor day weekend. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Email

Dear Chaser, I am sending you an email in a moment. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

PbNation

i just made my first wikipedia page entitled "PbNation" and much to my surprise you deleted it. i was wondering what i did wrong, and if you could possibly help me do a new one, or possibly fix the one you just deleted. it's one of the largest forum sites on the web, i'm sorry but i fail to see how it is not "noteable" —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThatsWhatSheSaid12 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

There's a message about this on your user talk page linking to Wikipedia:Notability (web), the relevant guideline.--Chaser - T 21:20, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[1]

Resp

Thanks for telling me, sorry for the slow response and fix, my internet has been giving me hell all morning. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 03:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Supreme Court case lists

Hey, thanks for the explanation, Chaser...I've been on Wikipedia for more than a year and the syntax tags still confuse me a bit. Kind of makes me happy I went to law school instead of becoming a programmer. :-) --Eastlaw 07:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

List of notable United States Supreme Court cases

I've updated the code used on List of notable United States Supreme Court cases to no longer require redirects from the Template namespace, and then I subsequently deleted the unused template redirects. Great work on the SCOTUS up-keep. The lists look very professional and well done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 21:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and thanks. You do great work, MZM.--Chaser - T 21:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Mat Hilakari

You will find he is very notable student politician in Australia. Please leave the article alone. Monashblues 04:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I have reinstated the article, it is not complete. Don't you dare speedy delete it again. Thanks. Monashblues 04:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedied again. Did you read any of what I put on your talk page? The article still fails WP:BIO, miserably.--Chaser - T 07:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Atabek

I can understand the reasons for your warning, however, if I may ask, why was I banned when I never editted anything and hasn't even signed in between your warning and ban? In earlier case, User:Hetoum I was warned on his talk page, while I am being banned without proper warning. Also, please, explain in detail on how this [2], is supposed to be incivil, and how do you find [3], this comment "Adil Baguirov and the team..." to be an assumption of good faith or civil? I think checking what's going on with history of the page Khojaly Massacre after your ban of myself, should give a clear picture what's going on. Thanks. Atabek 18:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello Chaser, please note that Atabek violated your ban by revering then self reverting on two Iran-Azerbaijan related articles. Please also note that the user created "Controversies and Consistencies" on his userpage to incite other users and is clearly making this an ethnic/national issue comparing another event to something completely unrelated (Armenian Genocide). [4]

Also the link I removed was authored by and I quote "Created by Adil Baguirov and the team" I don't know if Atabek considers himself part of that "team" but both of them shared similar views when both were active. If indeed Atabek considers himself part of Adil Baguirov's team its just another reason to remove it. VartanM 20:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

VartanM isn't your statement right above called an assumption of bad faith? Atabek 21:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Self-reverting is not a violation of the ban. Although, I don't see how Brenda Shaffer, Israeli-American scholar, would be related to history of Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iran or Turkey, I self-reverted on that one as well. Also, [5], User:Hetoum I, party to the same ArbCom, is warned, while I am placed on ban without warning. May I still get an explanation, why? And would not User:VartanM's appearance on this page, right after my edit, be technically Wikistalking? As I explained User:VartanM before, the real inciting of conflict, are the attempts to remove the images and video links of victims of Khojaly Massacre from the page. There is nothing controversial and/or inciting in what I put on my user page. It completely fits WP:USER guidelines. Atabek 20:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Look carefully at remedies one and two listed here. I enacted a ban under the first remedy, which doesn't require a warning. Hetoum was warned under the second remedy, which requires a warning before a ban. Contacting an administrator about a user editing pages during a ban is not wikistalking. Finally, let's try to keep this on your talk page. Thank you.--Chaser - T 23:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I posted the response with clarification of how second remedy also applies to first remedy on my talk page [6]. Thanks. Atabek 06:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Confirmation

That did the trick. Apparently I must have triggered an auto-block when I tried to edit after the direct block. Everything is working fine now, thanks much. Xenophrenic 06:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Winter Soldier arbitration

I saw your post on the arbitration clerks' noticeboard and took a look at the case you mentioned. Its talkpage refreshed my memory that I had actually commented on this once before. I have added a "Clerk Note" to the decision which I hope represents the type of clarification you were requesting. Hopefully this will address the problem; if not, you might wish to seek a clarification directly from the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Regards, Newyorkbrad 19:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Newyorkbrad. That should be sufficient.--Chaser - T 19:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Government publications

Oops. Sorry, I must have missed that they become PD. Thanks for taking care of it, and I guess I learnt something. — Timotab ^{Timothy (not Tim}^dagnabbit!) 21:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Don't sweat it.--Chaser - T 21:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Atabek's accusation.

Chase, with all due respect, I am surprised that you took his accusation seriously--it's clearly frivolous. I mean, come on--Vartan was quoting Adil's website when he used the "team" comment, he never said anything like "Atabek is part of the team"--in fact he said "I don't know if he THINKS he is in the team, but IF he is..." Obviously there is no definitive assumption of any sort, let alone that of bad faith. This kind of frivolous, petty, nitpicking accusaions should not discouraged, not dignified by warning the accused. --TigranTheGreat 01:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Tigran, please don't get involved in this. Someone who's a party to the first case is obviously not what I meant by an uninvolved editor reviewing. This is not a general comment board.--Chaser - T 01:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Sorry about it:) May the force be with you:)--TigranTheGreat 02:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your cooperation. It's not a big deal. :) --Chaser - T 02:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for doing the merge of double-hulled tanker into petroleum tanker. I wasn't looking forward to doing it myself! Maralia 04:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. There was nothing really to merge.--Chaser - T 04:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review on LAPD

Just a reminder that it is acceptable to notify all participants in the previous AfD. But if it does not succeed, I'll certainly help you in rewriting it. (And then go on to others). DGG (talk) 14:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey, there Chaser!

What's up? Figured out any more easter eggs?--The source of the cosmos... 22:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope. There aren't too many in that article I emailed you. I see you added a bit to User:A legend/XP. Good going!--Chaser - T 22:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

reply

left you a reply here. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 00:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope the mediation works out.--Chaser - T 01:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Classroom project idea

Hello! I have posted my idea for a small school project at the classroom coordination talk page and have also notified Durova as well as she is listed first on the list of members of that project. If you also have any additional suggestions, olease feel free to share any ideas there as replies before I create the actual project page and also if you a) think the idea is acceptable and b) think it is worthwhile. The class begins on Wednesday, September 19, 2007. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 02:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a fine idea as currently envisioned (just don't have them go posting in AFDs!).--Chaser - T 16:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

My big concern would be potentially having to explain why I was blocked before. Anyway, though, I would say something in the instructions about "Don't also post your arguments in AfDs," of course it is always possible that one or more students could already happen to be Wikipedians who already participate in such discussions. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hu1lee

Hi Chaser, Can I ask you to delete the page User:Grandmaster2 which redirects to my profile due to Hu1lee's vandalism? Thank you in advance. Parishan 02:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thought I'd gotten them all. Done.--Chaser - T 02:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Some reputable references for in popular culture articles

Hello! Another admin suggested that I include references in my AfD posts in the future. Anyway, good news: for two of the "in popular culture" discussions today, I actually found some excellent links. For Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jet_pack_in_popular_culture, I found a Popular Science article on how "From Buck Rogers to 007, the jetpack has fueled our greatest personal-technology fantasies," and for Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_three_wise_monkeys_in_popular_culture, I found an article published in a scholarly journal on the three wise monkeys' "truly astonishing impact on our popular culture." I am so elated that such articles actually do exist in published reputable sources and I found them incredibly quickly. Perhaps we should require AfD nominators to make some effort to find these sources first? Popular Science and Folklore are definitely reliable sources and these articles demonstrate that the whole "in popular culture" stuff actually is taken seriously by intellectuals outside of Wikipedia as well. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 15:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Excellent job! It is through hard work finding sources and making arguments related to them and policy that you have a good chance of getting these articles kept. Well done. As to your other point, it's good practice to do a cursory search through google, Google news archives, and perhaps the Library of Congress before nominating something for deletion. But making it a requirement? Instruction creep.--Chaser - T 16:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

My university has a bunch of search engines for scholarly journal articles that might not pop up on a regular Google search (you need to enter your university ID to access them). Anyway, as the Folklore article indicates, reliable sources are out there that some editors might be totally unaware of or not even find, because they're in published sources. So, I'll keep a look out for sources of this nature as much as possible. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

That's actually very helpful. Many WP editors just go to google as their only reference source, but JStor, Lexis, the Social Science Abstracts and others have loads of helpful articles that one just can't find online.--Chaser - T 19:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Therre are a wealth of sources available on JSTOR and Academic Search Primer. I do hope, however, that using these reference tools for Wikipedia references would somehow violate the fair use guidelines granted by being a university student to use those article search engines? Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean. There's no problem with Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Do you mean some university guideline?--Chaser - T 20:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I use university databases for research and it says "Database content may not be distributed to non-OSU users." So, I'm not sure if that would have any meaning here as I am an OSU user and a major reason why I contribute to Wikipedia is because thousands of OSU students use it. I just like to make sure I'm always doing things right. In any event, you may want to see what I found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King Kong in popular culture, as some of these in popular culture topics have books even written about them! The good news is that another editor has used these sources to rewrite the article and said a nice thing about me as well. I think that I may finally be getting the hang of AfDs! :) Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 20:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Turkish people

Please keep an eye on this article. I have restored a section which was previously falsified by some users, mostly by User:Turquoiseeyes. They purposely misinterprete scientific sources and insert original research into that paragraph (see here or here). The user claims that (citation) ... This genetic discovery gives Turks the privilege to state that ancient Turks are the fathers to most people on world and fathers to most civilizations on earth. .... This is clearly Turanian ideology and pseudo-scientific, and is a threat to Wikipedia's credibility. User:Turquoiseeyes has copied the same stuff into the Amazons article3 (see here), claiming that it is from National Geographic Magazine, which is not true. Some attention is needed. Thank you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.137.200 (talk • contribs)

I don't have time. Sorry, but no.--Chaser - T 01:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for your quick work implementing the blocks I'm requesting on AIV. Admin's don't get enough appreciation ;) I'll go back to my counter-vandalism now :) Pursey ^{Talk | Contribs} 19:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

No sweat. I can only do it when we have people like you doing excellent counter-vandalism work. Great job.--Chaser - T 19:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA close

Wotcha Chaser. Just a note I've removed the failed RFA as it was still transcluded when you closed it. Cheers. Pedro | Chat 19:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If you're going to close RfAs, please follow the instructions on WP:CRAT exactly, including the archival to unsuccessful adminship candidacies. --Deskana (talky) 19:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I got a sudden phone call. Anyway, it's all done.--Chaser - T 20:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: cat day.

Cat Day is actually a real celebration and festival in Wales, albeit, it's rather small, but sucsessful in its own right. The website is currently under construction, but as soon as, I'll show you it, to further proove my point! I'm not too sure how to use this site, is this vandalism what I'm doing now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imperfectcryyeah (talk • contribs) 23:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

No, not right now.--Chaser - T 01:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Quick note

I just noticed this edit. Anyway, I hope everything is okay and wish you all the best. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, no worries. Some family came to town and we went out to dinner. The only thing wrong is this stubborn sore throat, but that should blow over in a few days. Thanks for your concern.--Chaser - T 03:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, glad to read that. I saw the couple of "not right now" posts above and felt a bit worried. Have fun with your family and I hope you feel better soon! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Brazil

Thanks for catching the extra one. :). Hopefully the editors concerned will learn from this. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment

I did not reinsert. The alleged copyright violation no longer is pertinent, and (more important) the perspective of those involved is still presented. OK? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.14.6 (talk) 01:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

WJBscribe's RfB

Yes, Newyorkbrad left me a message on my talk page about that. Sorry for all of the confusion that has caused.--Wikipedier is now U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 20:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

No sweat. I saw that note after I left mine.--Chaser - T 20:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Quick note

Well, I actually found one that I thought should be deleted... Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

ANI thread I just started

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Incivility_by_User:Dannycali. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

Thanks for clearing that mess up on my page. Stormtracker94 18:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

It was another editor.--Chaser - T 19:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia (edit | [[Talk:Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hey Chaser; just as a notice, I've unprotected the above page - I just think we shouldn't protect it unless necessary, and vandalism pre-protection wasn't that bad. Of course, if things get bad then I'm fully supportive of re-protecting, but until then if you've objections to my action, don't hestiate to contact me. Kind regards,
Anthøny ん 19:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. The policy actually discourages preemptive semi-protection, but I think Wikipedia space pages prominently linked from the main page are a special case. I have it watchlisted and will attend to vandalism as necessary.--Chaser - T 19:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Blocking SilverBull

Back in August, you blocked a couple socks. User:SilverBull is the same user, I believe, and is now harassing another user. Can you look into this a little bit? (I'd ask another admin, but you have history here). Thanks --Matt 22:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

This seems to be the main account. I'm going to give him a chance to play nice. Drop me a line if this continues with any account.--Chaser - T 23:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Think User:Rudolph234 is the same person? --Matt 01:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Who knows? Rudolph is not here to write an encyclopedia, so he's not here.--Chaser - T 01:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Thanks for cleaning up my talk page too - I think, because of the immediate vandalism of my page and your page, it's probably Flippityflop. --Matt 01:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Mail

Enlighten me then, and this better be better than Pro not wanting the community to know. Ryan Postlethwaite 09:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

See WP:HARASS, and especially WP:BLP. The second provides guidelines for what may and may not be published about living persons from this site.Proabivouac 10:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

As I indicated in an email to Proab, I no longer think this is a good argument. Sorry about the revert, Ryan.--Chaser - T 19:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Assignment article

Please take a look at User:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles/Why in popular culture articles are an asset to Wikipedia and do not violate policies and feel free to add additional instructions or edit what I have to make it more acceptable if necessary. Thanks! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. More than likely, they won't care about AFDs, but I think your precaution is necessary and appropriate.--Chaser - T 19:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

DGG thought the article could be problematic and asked me to put the tag on, so I did so. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 20:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

the question is whether it would be seen as canvassing. I suggested a program of getting students to add sources. If you think I'm really wrong, tell me so. DGG (talk) 01:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought with the instructions it would be OK, but the program you suggest will have a better effect on articles. I don't really care either way.--Chaser - T 02:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I suppose there are still some other concerns that I could have with such an assignment, as I expressed to Durova. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the barnstar! I really appreciate it. Bláthnaid 23:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Old SALT vs New SALT

This is mostly an FYI to you as an admin who still uses the old, templated method for salting pages. That method of salting pages is depricated, and the template is now up for deletion. While things can still change, the current discussion definitely looks headed towards deletion. Assuming that this happens, you will no longer be able to salt pages with the old method, and will need to begin using the newer salting method that involves cascading protection on the title, and allows recreation to be blocked while still having no article at the name, leaving it as a red link. This new method of salting is centered at WP:PT, and the instructions for how to make it work are there as well. - TexasAndroid 13:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Problem with 30GB harddrive

Okay, I need to safely shrink XP to the lowest, okay Chaser? I hope you can help me! Thanks,--The source of the cosmos... 21:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to do that. Sorry.--Chaser - T 21:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh.... And, Chaser, can you please create a Sonic Heroes High Scores Tournament for me, please? It requires you use only the PS2 version. Only one to be used. And the high scores are always added up. Okay? Thanks!--The source of the cosmos... 22:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't do these kinds of things. I don't even have a PS2. Is there anything on Wikipedia you want help with? Perhaps we should work on that Easter Egg article some more.--Chaser - T 22:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure! How about the easter egg article, and a extension to the Pi page!--The source of the cosmos... 01:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Cumberland University

While I can see an article for Cumberland's athletics being unnecessary as there is little content to give it, most schools (or at least, most Division I schools) have athletic articles. See Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/MasterTeamTable for a list of them. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 22:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, right, Division I, and sometimes II. Cumberland has less than 1,500 students and there's not nearly enough content to justify a split. We usually split when an article gets too long as measured either by the kilobyte size (this is less than four) or the number of paragraphs (there are maybe two pages of text in Word and only one paragraph that would be split out). I could see a split if you want to add significantly to the athetics section, but otherwise, there's not much point and it's easier on the reader's to keep it all on one page.--Chaser - T 22:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, didn't quite realize it only had 1,500 students, particularly since it's been around since the 1840s. Since you probably know more about it than I do, would you please fill in some fields of the infobox I just added? :) —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 19:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Help

Hi Chaser, if you're not busy, can you please take a look at Khurshidbanu Natavan article, and help us remove the NPOV tag. Thanks --VartanM 06:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

What do you make of this? [7] Why is Grandmaster fixing other users reports against me? Why is the language of the report so similar to his own? where did Aynabend/Ulvi I who was absent for months returned was reverting articles in favor of Grandmaster. Grandmaster is clearly meatpuppeteering Aynabend if not sockpuppetering. I'm really tired of the baseless accusations by him and point fingering of others. This reminds of kindergarten (if I'm being punished so should everybody else) You can reply in my talkpage, I don't want to spam your talkpage. --VartanM 06:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no, I don't have time to deal with the POV dispute. Wikipedia:Requests for comment may be helpful there. I responded to the ANI thread. As to the sockpuppetry claim, please don't make that allegation without a lot of evidence, and certainly don't make it in the course of editing (that will get you included in remedy two). If you have a sockpuppetry claim to make, do so at WP:SUSPSOCK with lots of evidence and little drama and accusations.--Chaser - T 06:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I overreacted a little. Good night VartanM 06:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Zomg! Ban me!

Yeah, I've heard about it...that IS how I chose the name ;) Thanks for your note. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 07:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

AIV

Hello. May I ask why you declined this AIV report? The user got three warnings, and after his final warning, he (again) removed a speedy tag. Melsaran (talk) 18:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Your report was valid, but the editor has given up. I have the article watchlisted in case he starts again.--Chaser - T 18:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I see the article in question was deleted. Melsaran (talk) 18:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Dungeons & Dragons

Just noticed that you protected Dungeons & Dragons on 9 September 2007. The article now is on the Main Page. On one hand, Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection addresses this. On the other, Dungeons & Dragons is listed at #1 at wikirage.com. So, I'm not sure whether you need to increase or decrease the protection level. Just thought I would post a note. Please take what ever action you feel is necessary. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 02:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Alkivar has already upped the protection level. I've been preemptively move-protecting every featured article of the day, but certainly endorse raising the edit protection when any administrator thinks necessary to reduce vandalism. No need to consult me about it. Anyway, thanks for the note.--Chaser - T 03:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

"stale listings declined; not empty"

I'm new to reporting vandals, not exactly sure what "stale listings declined; not empty" means[8] -- can you explain? --Dragonfiend 04:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I just left somebody a message regarding this. It's summarized in {{uw-aiv}}, but you were right (this IP was doing the same thing several days apart, which I didn't notice the first time). I've blocked it for a week.--Chaser - T 04:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks fror the explanation. -- Dragonfiend 04:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Red Storm Rising (film)

HI! Chaser,

The entry has been deleted citing copyright violation (http://vikalpblr.org). The info posted there has been provided by me to them and I'd put in the same into the wikipedia entry. So there is no violation of copyright. Could I restore the entry pls? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srikrishna1 (talk • contribs) 05:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's no longer a candidate for speedy deletion. Look at Wikipedia:Notability (films) before resubmitting. If it doesn't qualify, it will probably just get deleted again via a slower process.--Chaser - T 05:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks.sri 11:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

IP Vandals

Sorry about that. I thought I reverted the edits...but I reverted one to an edit where the other had previously vandalized so I ended up reporting both of them at once. I'll just report the active ones as I see them.--Mike Searson 05:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Hidden note

Hey Chaser, just to say thanks, that works for me -- I'm a little tired of having to create those reports too. Main motivation now is the RfA in question; the article this user goes after is on semiprotect until Oct 5 so this user can't trouble that article for a few days anyway. Best wishes. --Yksin 23:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure. You can probably also re-open closed sockpuppetry cases if they're just recently closed and still transcluded on the main suspected sockpuppetry page, but since you already opened it, let's just hope number three can be the last one.--Chaser - T 23:54, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay that's good to know. The first one I did on this person yesterday is the first sock report I ever made. Anyway, some of the problem might go away once the RfA in question closed on the 17th. --Yksin 00:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

DRV Archives

You recently converted the monthly DRV archives to link to the daily log pages rather than transclude them. I can't find any prior discussion of this change. If one occurred please direct me to it. If not, I will start one on Wikipedia Talk:Deletion review. I think that linking is clumsy and in many cases actually slower since it requires an additional click and page load, but it depends on the connection speed and expectations of users which one is best. Eluchil404 05:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

There's no prior discussion that I know of. If you want it that way, just revert me. It annoyed me when I was looking for something, but I'm really quite indifferent now.--Chaser - T 06:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

This particular user seems to have a bias against the page in question (I have no idea why). Given the volume of the edits he has made, this page was simply a place for me to organize them. My intent was (and still is if the edits continue) to report them to RfC and RfA (sequentially), but IAW your advice (and yes it was taken as advice even without the disclaimer), I may try WP:ANI first. This page is specifically meant ONLY to organize my thoughts in relation to this situation. BTW, THANK YOU for being so clear as to how a situation like this should be handled. — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Any way you could revert the page back to its original state, so I can avoid a violation of the 3RR? — BQZip01 — ^talk 08:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

BTW, you have just made a new friend on Wikipedia!!! — BQZip01 — ^talk 08:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) Makes it hard for me to be neutral, though.--Chaser - T 08:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh...in that case. You're a jerk! [/sarcasm] — BQZip01 — ^talk 09:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

No can do. I realize it's rather ridiculous when you can't discuss the other editor's POV concerns on the talk page with him. If you want to copy/paste his comments onto the talk page, he could engage in dialog about his concerns that way.--Chaser - T 08:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

RFC/USER discussion concerning (ThreeE)

Hello, Chaser. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning ThreeE's conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by "ThreeE" in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ThreeE, where I would appreciate your participation and comments. — BQZip01 — ^talk 12:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello Chaser, I hope you don't mind, but considering that an RFC has been filed I thought it would be fair to unblock User:ThreeE so that he can participate in the RFC. I have asked him not to make edits to other pages until his original block would have expired. Johntex\^talk 18:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that's fair. I'm pretty sure it's also standard practice. Thanks for the note.--Chaser - T 18:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted material request

Hi Chaser. Would it be possible to get a copy of the deleted article MTV in popular culture put into my userspace here? Thanks Bláthnaid 22:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and restored the full history to User:Blathnaid/MTV. Having the history eliminates any licensing concerns should you use any of the old article to do a rewrite. Cheers!--Chaser - T 23:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Bláthnaid 11:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Arrogant adminitis

Your tone of this message is unacceptable. Sometimes edits have to be reverted. It is normal and two reverts may but does not necessarily constitute a disruption. But most importantly, you should learn how to deal with committed content editors before trying to advise them on following the policies and guidelines in such an arrogant manner. Your current attitude only fits to dealing with vandals. Until you learn to change it, please stick to vandal patrol with your block button. --Irpen 04:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I am explicit to ensure the message isn't blown off. You seem to want to accomplish the same with rudeness. I prefer my method.--Chaser - T 07:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Accomplish what? Could you elaborate what you intended to "accomplish" by coming to lecture in arrogant tone to the talk page of a well established and committed content editor threatening blocks for restoring the factual and referenced content in the article? And how exactly is my message "rude"? Yes, it is "explicit" because your attitude is clearly inappropriate. How else should I have said that to you? Anyway, the only thing I to relay to you that you should reconsider the way you deal with Wikipedia editors. The "method you prefer" accomplishes nothing but contributing to bad editing climate. --Irpen 08:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Irpen, Chaser merely warned you about edit warring. He did not insult you and he ended his post with a "thank you." I have had plenty of experience with editors and admins issuing "unacceptable" comments to me; Chaser's to you seemed reasonably polite by comparison. Calling him "arrogant" is a bit harsh. Anyway, I hope that everyone can keep their heads cool! :) Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Nothing that Chaser said was over the line by any stretch of the imagination. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. Are you saying that undoing the removal of the referenced info in the article repeated for the second time is already an "edit war" and justifies the block threat? --Irpen 19:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm saying that an administrator warning a user about the repercussions of engaging in an edit war is perfectly valid. You are reacting to his tone, which was entirely appropriate in my opinion. The threat of a block was there only because that's the end result of edit warring. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Administrator "warning" an experienced user in a lecturing tone about "repercussion of engaging in an edit war" and threatening blocking while the only issue at hand was the restoration of blanked referenced content, even if it was done two times, is inappropriate. There is no clear-cut definition of what amounts to "edit war", but reverting the content blanking for just two times does not amount to it by any stretch. Administrator who does not realize that reverts may be warranted on some occasions and two reverts does not necessarily comprise an "edit war" should stick with vandal patrol as far as the block button is concerned. --Irpen 23:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Nothing personal, but experienced users are just as capable of violating rules as newbies. The crux of your argument seems (to me at least) to be that you feel you are above the warning you got. Your calling Chaser arrogant and repeatedly belittling his administrative abilities doesn't exactly convince me that I'm wrong in my assessment. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

You are being mistaken. Anyone is capable of violating rules and no one is above them. The crux of my argument is that there was no activity to warrant any warning in this case, especially with the block threat. If Chaser thought that two reverts in a short time were alarming, he should have studied the matter first. I believe that most people would not see anything alarming in this particular incident. Two repeated restorations of referenced blanked content just do not add up to "disruption". Even if Chaser would have concluded otherwise he could have left a polite and courteous inquiry at my talk page asking for an explanation of what was going on. He, however, preferred to jump the gun, show who is the boss and leave a rude and totally unsubstantiated warning with the block threat on top. This was clearly unwarranted and offensive. Trivial inquiries over minor editing disputes are not made in this manner. --Irpen 04:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this thread can be very useful anymore. I thank EVula and Roi for coming to my defense and thank Irpen for his criticism. Regardless of whether the originating post was warranted, a long thread on my talk page is a bigger waste of the time of two productive contributors to this encyclopedia than the original message. I'm happy to let Irpen have the last word and let this go.--Chaser - T 05:39, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you very much for your support at my RfA. Regards, Jogers (talk) 09:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit Warring

You are right, my apologies Tymek 12:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC). Anyway, did Irpen get the same message?

Interesting difference in attitude.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Piotrus, there is now one less page in Wikipedia where you have not followed me with your taunting comments. And did not you say earlier that you were unwatchlisting my page? (Hint: if you do, I won't mind). --Irpen 18:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I was following Tymek, a relatively new user, whom I also wanted to caution against revert warring in FAs. I'd expect you to know better - both in terms of revert warring, as well assuming good faith towards me and Chaser.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Where did I doubt Chaser's "faith"? His message at my talk was inappropriate (see above) but was not a bad-faithed one. Two reverts of the removal of a well-referenced info were not a revert war by any stretch of the notion. And your diff points to my page and my edit, not Tymek's. Anyway, I am used to your "reviewing my contributions" all the time, Piotrus. This is just how you do things. --Irpen 18:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Irpen, let me urge you to draw a table comparing your talk page contributions with those of Piotrus and immediately submit a report on stalking. This has become ridiculous. I don't believe that anything short of a block will put an end to the guy's abuse of his editing rights. --Ghirla^-трёп- 06:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, but not on my talk page, please (this is not a comment on the validity of such an action).--Chaser - T 07:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Copy of deleted article "OK-Desktop"

Could you please supply me with a copy of my article "OK-Desktop" that was deleted. I am confused as to why it was deleted as i compared it to other articles about linux distributions and i beleive that it conformed vary closely to others, in fact i used another distribution article as a template for creating my article. I also went to great pains to make sure that links were created throughout the article to other articles within Wikipedia. I also beleive that this distribution goes beyond being just a operating system and applications. That it has a strong impact on both humanitarian issues and education, as such i beleive that it is a new breed. I would appreciate any suggestions of yours as to how the article may be changed so that there is no possibility of deletion in the future. My email is shaw.mark@gmail.com Thanks in Advance for your assistance.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdavidshaw (talk • contribs)

I'm emailing the first revision to you. The article was deleted because it exclusively promoted that Linux distribution and would have needed a fundamental rewrite to become a neutral encyclopedia article. Sentences such as "We believe that this entitles it to be considered a new breed standing in a class by itself." and section titles like "Features: Easy, Safe, Compatible..." and "OK-Desktop focuses on Usability" contributed to this problem. If you can rewrite it to make it more informative and less like an advertisement, that would solve most of the problem. There may still be a notability issue that will put such an article at risk of deletion.--Chaser - T 04:39, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Happy Chaser's Day!

Chaser has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Chaser's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Chaser!

Love,
Phaedriel
00:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
A record of your Day will always be kept here.

Why thank you, Phaedriel. That's enormously kind of you and I appreciate it.--Chaser - T 00:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

After your extremely kind words at my RfA at Simple, my friend, letting you know how deeply appreciated your great work is (which I have noted extensively in you long time as an editor and admin), was the very least I could do ;) May this humble token of recognition brighten your day a little, dear Chaser! Enjoy your special Day! Love, Phaedriel - 00:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. You deserve every compliment you get, Phaedriel. You're the single greatest source of wiki-love we have!--Chaser - T 02:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, now that's alot of love!--The source of the cosmos... 21:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Possible copyvio

Please compare Alfonso esposito with this page. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

It's been deleted. For future reference, articles with blatant copyvios in every version in the history can be tagged with {{db-copyvio}} (with the URL) and get speedy deleted. Other problems can go to Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Cheers!--Chaser - T 02:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the reply. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 14:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the Element Box

Me, I just rearrange atoms...you've made their properties intelligible. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.121.17.67 (talk) 08:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.--Chaser - T 08:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Danny

Please see this discussion. Now, he's accusing me of "stalking" him, because I happened to participate in a few discussions he participated in, which is somewhat funny, because as I indicated in my reply to him, I participate in a number of discussions, many of which he has not participated in. I think he is trying to distract for discussing the content of the articles by attacking the posters instead. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 14:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Chaser, just to point something out from the history of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Florida Taser incident:

19:22, 19 September 2007 Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles (Talk | contribs) (35,224 bytes) (k) (undo)

19:43, 19 September 2007 Dannycali (Talk | contribs) (38,137 bytes)

Therefore, Danny has already posted in an AfD after I posted and after your reommendation that you made at 18:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC). Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Our work, our pleasure

Hey, there Chaser! Why don't we create a team article or section? It would even be cool if we added info. about Firefox 2.0.0.7! I just had it downloaded automatically.--The source of the cosmos... 21:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

That would be fine. How do you want to start?--Chaser - T 21:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Dunno.. Maybe you can decide?--The source of the cosmos... 21:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't see that as my role as your adopter, but I can help direct you. Look here and see if anything catches your eye that we can work on together.--Chaser - T 22:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Question

Hey, there! Can you please translate a accurate algorithim to calculating Pi to addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division? Thanks!--The source of the cosmos... 21:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't know where to begin.--Chaser - T 22:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Opinion

You think I broke 3RR here?[9] I only see two. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 22:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Help creating a bot to help Wikipedia automatically

Well, I just want a good bot, and I don't know where to start!--The source of the cosmos... 00:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia bots contains all the bots we have. Were you looking for a bot to do something specific to help Wikipedia?--Chaser - T 00:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I want to create one.--The source of the cosmos... 01:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

That requires coding ability that I don't think either of us has.--Chaser - T 01:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Let's ask a member if he/she can make a bot for me with the name LegendBot--The source of the cosmos... 01:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

If you'd like to request bot work, see WP:BOTREQ. For help creating a bot, see WP:MAKEBOT. --MZMcBride 01:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Burgz33 CheckUser case

An FYI, since you were involved in the sockpuppet case. Feel free to add anything to this case that you see fit. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

My userpage

Just stopping by to say thanks for cleaning up vandalism on my userpage. :) OSborn^arf 05:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.--Chaser - T 05:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

JJJ999

follow up on your previous comments at AfD yesterday

I've noticed [10]DGG and also [11] which is an admission of stalking. (talk) 09:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, now that user alleges I "know" the people whose articles I support as keeps, which is of course absurd. In all of the AfDs I've participated in, I can say with some confidence that I have never met or corresponded with any of the subjects! Also, if you head over to this discussion, you'll notice the user in question has apparently participated to disagree with DGG. He's also mocking us (DGG, Mandsford, and I), and apparently alleging some kind of collusion or something (notice, I have avoided responding to him or Danny in any AfDs today. And the canvassing continues. After an editor voted to keep an article the other editor in question nominated for deletion, the editor in question also followed that editor to an RfA to discredit him. Finally, he's threatening to just renominate it until it's deleted. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Warned.--Chaser - T 06:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. You may also notice some ungoing incivility. On a totally unrelated note, I attempted to improve the article you had most recently created. I hope that was okay to do. If you would like for me to help find references for any other articles, please let me know. If you'd rather I avoid your articles, that's fine too. I was just looking for something constructive to do tonight other than just post in AfDs or welcome users. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, DGG is an admin, so if he needs my help, I'll let him come to me. I don't mind, and indeed encourage you to edit articles I edit (or any articles, for that matter). Expanding recently created or stub articles is a good way to help the encyclopedia expand content while simultaneously preemptively avoiding conflict. Cheers, Roi.--Chaser - T 04:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the reply. I am simultaneously reading English History in Napoleon's Note Books, drinking Diet Pepsi Jazz Black Cherry French Vanilla, and listening to Countdown with Keith Olbermann on the television, while editing Wikipedia! Here is to multitasking! By the way, if you were curious a new discussion has been opened on that user as well. Also, notice how the following similarities: [12] and [13]. On a more positive note, you may be pleased with this reply to one of my posts in an AfD! Also, an AfD was withdrawn after I cleaned up the article as well. Aside from the occasional bad mouthing from Danny, I really think I'm getting the hang of these and that they're going much nicer now. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 04:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Yay for multitasking. Good work on the rewrite and I'm glad to see you've joined the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron. It looks like a good organization. Regarding the Tough Guy references, did you know that the NY Times has opened their web archives. This could be very helpful for weblinks of those sources. If you want, one proper course is to make a note in that ANI thread along the lines of "Also, their userpages are similar [diff] [diff]". That alone isn't a persuasive indicator of sockpuppetry, but small bricks of evidence build big walls.--Chaser - T 22:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Chaser, thank you for the reply. I do seem to be getting more positive reactions to my posts lately. Anyway, though, I am a bit concerned that if I post anything at ANI on these editors, I only invite more harassment as less than civil disputes seem to continue. I did contact one of the contributors to the ANI thread for his insights. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

An odd flame

I hate to do this, but I feel I must report this odd flame I got today: [14]. Bearian 21:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

and some canvassing of a rather aggressive sort. [15] DGG (talk)

In a small world, sort of WP thing, I met DGG at the NYC Wiknic about 7 weeks ago. But I don't know him. Anyway, who is this JJJ person? I can not ascribe good faith to him any longer. Bearian 14:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I wanted to be there and meet everyone in real life. Unfortunately, real life responsibilities kept me home. To answer your question, I don't know any Wikipedian in real life. I know people only by their contribution logs.--Chaser - T 19:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

thank you

Dear Chaser, Thanks for your quick attention to the sock puppet issues. When the checkuser comes back, can Duty2love take the sock templates off of his pages? (I ask because they have my name on them!) I'm glad the Wiki system works; it sucks to be falsely accused! Best wishes, Renee --Renee 15:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome and thank you for doing such a thorough report. Usually we get "they're the same user, go dig through their contributions for an hour and see for yourself." When the sockpuppetry case closes (sometime after the checkuser comes back) you can remove them.--Chaser - T 16:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I had an immediate gut reaction that it was him because of his tone/writing style, but didn't think evidence such as, "I know because I'm psychic," would fly... Thanks again and I'll watch for the other case to close. Renee --Renee 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Note

I reported an editor who made apparent threats on your page at ANI. Haemo has blocked him. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Yikes! You're right...

In my mind Rushmi is Shashwat and Shashwat spent an enormous amount of time on the SRCM page before it was disambiguated. This morning I was thinking that it would be dishonest not to notify him that we're looking at deleting these pages. But, I looked at the edit history of these pages and you're right, neither Rushmi nor Shashwat have ever edited these new disambiguated pages. I've undid the entry. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Renee 20:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you think I should put them back on? Also, I saw on your face page that you're going to Southern Italy. We lived in Rome, Italy, this past year and BOY was it an experience. Email me if you're interested in some tips for survival. Best wishes, Renee 20:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Trip

I just noticed the tag on your user and talk pages. Anyway, I just wanted to wish you a safe and pleasant trip! If you're flying, I hope it isn't too much of a hassle. In mid-November, I will likely be gone for a week or so at a history conference in another state. By the way, you requested that Danny and I not participate in an AfD that the other one did. I participated in one on the 21st and this followed. Please also note that discussion was the second to last such discussion I posted in and the only one he posted in so far today. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 20:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, my request was for both of you to voluntarily do something, so there's not much I can do. Try to avoid conflict with Dannycali, as you would with anyone.--Chaser - T 04:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification and again, I hope the trip went well. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

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} 23:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser declined?

Dear Chaser, the checkuser was declined here. What does that mean? Is it possible to close the case against Duty2love and myself? Thanks, Renee 00:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Renee, Shashwat, and Myself

Hi, You blocked me on complain filed by Renee, without even giving time for me to respond ? why this haste ? why were in such great short of time that you didn't even waited for me to clarify things that I am not Shashwat, you blocked one account which was not active since last 3 months i guess. As i had made it clear that I am in process of writing a book regarding cults and Sahaj Marg is my first group where i am doing research. In this course i have come in contact with many people, including Shashwat Pandey, many more, Shashwat informed me that he is Reneeholle's use to be pretty close to him, and there was difference of opinion regarding Sahaj Marg, which Renee is a member of, and according to Shashwat's view, that group is a cult, now who-so-ever opposes Sahaj Marg, Renee thinks that its him. Can you please explain the reason as why you blocked me and Shashwat without even asking/waiting to get response ? Renes prefer's to communicate through email rather then using wikipedia talk pages just to hide her view, see this for instance [16] this is evident form her numerous email requests, to many people. and somehow i feel either she approached you directly or through one of her friends IPSOS or BKS with whome she is in direct touch via e-mail. (This is just my wild guess). If you think that you have made a mistake then please revert your block not only on me but also on Shashwat as well in any case since their relationship is over so he is no more interested in editing sahaj marg article. if you think you have not made any mistake then we will carry this discussion further so that i can clarify things more. --Rushmi 05:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I became aware of this case while perusing Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets, as I sometimes do. Nobody emailed me about it. Renee's sockpuppetry report was incidental; I blocked you because the evidence indicates you and Shashwat are the same person. Besides the evidence listed there (only some of which I find persuasive), there is:

Misspelling sexual as "sextual" [17] [18]
Using apostrophes to make plurals (instead of possessives) [19] [20]
Inconsistent use of capital letters to start sentences (almost every post from both accounts)
Misspelling appreciate as "appritiate" [21] [22] (This was mentioned in the report, and I find it very persuasive. I considered the possibility that it was a localized misspelling, but I don't see any evidence for that in the google results for it.)
A similar stream-of-consciousness style of writing, with similar patterns of minor grammatical errors, etc.

I didn't wait to hear your response because I'm not interested in it. The evidence above, combined with interest in exactly the same articles, indicates sockpuppetry. There's not much to be said to refute it. You're unblocked now and welcome to continue editing.--Chaser - T 06:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup", etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 18:50 23 September 2007 (GMT).

Yeah, I didn't know we had {{Mergefrom-multiple}}. Thanks for fixing that.--Chaser - T 06:51, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Cleanup

Just a thanks for approving and reviewing my sockpuppet report :) Mattie ^TK 17:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.--Chaser - T 17:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

hey i need a help

Italic text they dont have frist arabs-israel war, formation of PLO, and inasion of afghanistan. can u help me out to find it for my soical studies class. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Let it go Girl 94 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you'll find what you're looking for at Template:Campaignbox_Arab-Israeli_conflict/1948 Arab-Israeli War, PLO#History, and War in Afghanistan (2001–present). Wikipedia:Academic use and Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia are also worth a read.--Chaser - T 22:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd gladly

I'd gladly post under my real name, as was my original intention, if Wikipedia were only to honor its pledge, and the duty of any responsible publisher (which Wikipedia is not,) to refrain from publishing malicious attacks against its volunteers and other living people. Had they not been allowed, there would have been no Arbitration case to discuss.Proabivouac 10:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Squash Racket

It's a Possible on the geographic sense, but given Squash Racket isn't using the same IP range that VinceB seems to use... Inconclusive overall I think. Now I wish people had taken Mackensen's request to create {{whothehellknows}} more seriously. --Deskana (talk) 17:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like we just need to give you the magic wiki pixie dust permission. ;) Thanks, Deskana.--Chaser - T 22:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Question on Afds

Dear Chaser, Thanks again for your swift work on the sock puppetry issue. All four articles nominated for deletion with regard to the meditation system Sahaj Marg have been deleted.

My question is, what happens if someone tries to re-create? Will it appear on our watchpage as the same page? Is there any quality control over re-created entries? (I ask (and am very sensitive to the issue) because one editor (the sock user) has posted OR, blogs, and most recently tried to argue that a newspaper article found defamatory by a trial court should be a legitimate source.) Thanks, Renee --Renee 22:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, your watchlist retains deleted pages and you can even add pages that haven't yet been created. As to recreations, those can be speedy deleted under G4 by tagging with {{db-repost}} as long as the recreation is substantially identical and does not address the reasons for the prior deletion. Conversely, deletion review is the avenue to contest an old deletion decision (like when there is substantial new material).--Chaser - T 22:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. Good to know both sides of the coin. Much appreciated. --Renee 22:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Pilot (Smallville)

You protected the page yesterday, for its appearance on the front page, but I don't think the protection stuck. There has already been vandalism to the page by IP users. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

That was just move protection [23]. If a page is edit-protected, the log entry looks different, like this one: [24]. Generally, we don't edit-protect the featured article of the day.--Chaser - T 00:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Oooh. I just saw protection and couldn't figure out how the page got vandalized. Thanks for the clarification. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

BalanceRestored

Thanks for your help.BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 08:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Danny

As a userbox indicates on my user page, I am a WWE fan and it's a topic I feel somewhat knowledgable on. So, although I have avoided a good number of AfDs Danny posted in, i.e. any that didn't have to do with "in popular culture" or other topics I feel somewhat strongly about and of which discussions I have participated in all summer, I posted in a wrestling one that invited more allegations from him, which I responded to, and now he has edited my post along with another agreesive reply. I am doing my best to avoid engaging him and as you can see I have participated in all kinds of AfDs and have avoided a number of those he was in just because he was in them. I would like to just ignore him, but now if he's even going to be editing my posts, I don't know what then. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

You have mail

I am sending you an email now. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Ending wikibreak

Just as an update, I am encouraged by this post, this block, and these closures that maybe the environment is better again. I still may participate in a limited capacity for the immediate future nonetheless. In any case, I hope you're having a nice weekend! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh, and I'm trying to get JJJ999 unblocked. Well, I'm glad you're back. Those are great AFD closures you diffed. I think the recent Mzoli's case may have made the community lurch a little to the inclusionist side of the divide.--Chaser - T 06:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Durova suggested that I maybe request a checkuser, which I'll consider doing if I notice more similarities. I do think something is up with some of those in the "in popular culture" discussions and just noticed a similar pattern of attack incivility by an anonymous IP, which I brought up here. That IP strikes me as some registered user (based on the aggresiveness against those types of articles and writing style, it feels a lot like someone who has already been participating in those discussions) and the aggressiveness seems a bit familiar as well. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I was going to respond to your first version of this comment that sockpuppet hunting is a generally tedious, stressful, and tiring endeavor and suggest you avoid it as it's proven counterproductive so far for you. However, if you want to do it with Durova's supervision, I guess that'd be OK. She's very busy, but also very good at difficult cases. I suggest you keep all evidence off-wiki until you're ready to file a report, then run it by me. Here's an example of hard evidence from a recent case: [25] and case page.--Chaser - T 07:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Because JJJ999 is currently blocked and Dannycali and 68.163.65.119 have not posted again since the 27th of September, I'll hold off for now, unless if JJJ999 is unblocked and Danny and the anonymous IP start up in the same AfDs and with the same level of incivility. Might I recommend the JJJ/Dnany enter into adopt an editor as well? Also, more positive reaction: [26]; never mind that it means "pumpkin", not citrus, but no big deal. :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Ha, well, we aren't all blessed to speak the most sensual language in the world. Some of us are stuck with the most beautiful. L'italiano è come la musica. I always thought of the adopt-an-editor program as a way to put people in touch with someone who can answer questions and show them ropes. If there's a way to teach someone how to assume good faith, I haven't found it yet.--Chaser - T 04:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Danny's first edits today after not posting since the 27th were in AfDs immediately after me as well as some aggression in an old one: see [27], [28], and [29]. And here he calls a different user's argument "total junk." These even after your edit (check the times). Please note that I have avoided saying anything directly to him, but seriously, he doesn't post for two days and his first post back are immediately after mine with delete posts (I guess your recommendation for him to avoid me is just being totally ignored) and then he makes one in that other AfD in which he calls another editor's argument "junk"? By the way, Italian is a fine language as well and is closely related to French as Romance languages. And also, I have overall enjoyed you as a mentor. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I blocked Dannycali for 48 hours due to the latest comment. I can't separate you. Only you (plural you) can do that.--Chaser - T 09:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm still likely going to be "on break" to avoid undo stress, but I did want to reply to you, because something still could be up with the above discussed editors. Please consider these new diffs as well as the old ones: [[30] and [31]; [32] and [33]. Again, I'll avoid direct communication with either editor and will likely to generally hold off editing for the time being, and I'll avoid taking anything new to AnI, etc., but it's there for your consideration. All the best in any event. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to spend the next few hours looking through contribution logs.--Chaser - T 05:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, if you need any further clarifications or anything please let me know. I'm going to spend the next few moments welcoming new users and checking for vandalism, while reading a chapter on the French Enlightenment. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I've been doing this intermittently, but I don't see any hard evidence of sockpuppetry here. I think they're unrelated and suggest you stop pursuing the sockpuppetry angle.--Chaser - T 08:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, take care. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Resuming break

Dear Chaser, I am bit concerned about something I noticed and as a result am resuming my break for the time being. I'd rather not elaborate. Thank you for your time and efforts. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Never mind with the break; I may be on a little less frequently, but "break" isn't entirely accurate. Also, I have seen some encouraging stuff again: [34], [35], [36], [37], [38] and [39], although I do continue to see some more unsettling allegations continue to be tossed about by someone who posts after the user being accused, but I'm avoiding posting in those discussions for obvious reasons! So, some things seem pretty encouraging and I'll do what I can to avoid being targetted by some of the others. Have a great night! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Getting nice comments from people is one of the best things about editing Wikipedia. It's always good to be appreciated for one's efforts. Unfortunately, the nasty comments do a lot to take the joy out of it. BTW, JJJ999 was blocked this evening for 24 hours.--Chaser - T 05:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I see that with JJJ. On his talk page, he again, reiterates the allegation against DGG, which again, is strange since JJJ has also posted immediately after DGG. If you check my talk page, you'll see that I got a similar allegation from a user who has multiple times posted immediately after me in AfDs as well. I don't care if people post after me or other editors, but it's not really right for people to accuse others of wikistalking when the accusers do what they accuse others of as well and especially when those being accused aren't not even doing what they're accused of. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I think I follow that and agree with you. There's a saying: "Be gracious: Be liberal in what you accept, be conservative in what you do." Put another way, apply your own rules to yourself more strictly than you apply them to others.--Chaser - T 06:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Milestone

I now have over 5,000 edits!! :) Thanks for all of your help in my "return"! :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations. Don't thank me! It was your conscientious effort that got you back and got you so far on the wiki. Do remember as you celebrate this important quantity milemarker that quality, such as your work expanding articles or adding references, is always the most important thing. Anyway, congratulations on making it to 5,000 edits!--Chaser - T 05:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you and if there's ever any articles I can help you find sources for, just let me know and I'll be glad to help out as best I can! :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd say the best thing you can do for me (and the encyclopedia) is add references and/or rewrite pop culture articles. If you come across something that lists every reference in every minor videogame, don't hesitate to mercilessly edit someone else's work and even do a complete rewrite. Suggesting that a mysterious "someone" should fix article problems in an AFD is well-and-good, but fixing those issues yourself is the best way to get such articles kept. You're making excellent strides here. Try to duplicate that effort elsewhere. Referencing and rewriting will save articles. AfD participation? Meh. Pennies by comparison.--Chaser - T 06:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll continue to see what I can find for the Textile/Clothing article over the next few minutes, but it's getting a bit late here (2:14 AM my time). Thanks for the feedback! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 06:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, there!

Hey, there, Chaser! How are you today?--The source of the cosmos... 01:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, just the usual stressors. What's up?--Chaser - T 01:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm okay. Just ate spaghetti.--The source of the cosmos... 01:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Burgz33

After seeing the latest from him I changed the block to indefinite. I left a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:Burgz33 again. If you feel I shouldn't have extended the block then please feel free to change it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Henry, Bishop of Uppsala

According to the logs for the above page you protected it - but its been vandalised (a lot) by ips today. Not sure how or why but I thought you should be aware - I've requested protection for the page here [40] in case you're not online. Kelpin 16:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

See #Pilot_.28Smallville.29, a few sections up.--Chaser - T 18:24, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Questions about GW template

Hi, I had some questions about the GW template, can you look at that page? --AW 20:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)