User talk:Doczilla/Archive 2008

Yoking around

Re: No Problem. (Looking around for that mighty yoke of guilt to pass your way about adminship, and why having the extra set of tools might be helpful etc...etc...etc... : ) - jc37 10:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ask me again when January is over (if you still care to by then, of course). I'll know by then (probably by Jan. 22) if I'm going to be dealing with a COI issue that may come up for February. Someone I know may have something article-worthy come up in real life. It's probably just a 1 in 3 chance, but there are reasons why I'd rather not be a freshly inducted admin at the time should that occur. This also gives me some more time to contemplate the whole issue. There have definitely been two occasions in the past month, though, when it would have been useful. Doczilla (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough : ) - jc37 00:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FightTheDarkness

that's our old friend in a new sock, CreepyCrawler. You want to file it or should I? ThuranX (talk) 20:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting it, I went out to do real world stuff for a while. Jsut got back. ThuranX (talk) 03:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added more accounts to the report. UGH. Will we ever be rid of him, or find out what his thing is? The irritating thing is that I had a run in, over a year and a half ago, with the gifford sock, and didn't know it. guess it was before I 'met' CC. ThuranX (talk) 23:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is so sad that when I see your edit summary 'creepy', i immediately know it's the sock, and not an adjective about some article, comment or edit. ThuranX (talk) 14:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] I see sockpeople. ThuranX (talk) 06:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BG FAC

Hello again,

I've submitted Barbara Gordon for FAC, but I am having a bit of trouble with the first comment in the review dealing with in-universe style prose. I'm not sure how to correct this without using the phrase "The character" over and over again. Do you have any thoughts? Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 11:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton! I can see the difference. I'll scan the article again myself to weed out any other in-universe prose. Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 12:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something that been bothering me for a while- All the sources in the article clearly state that Babara Gordon was created by Julius Schwartz and Carmine Infantino. Gardner Fox happened to be the first person to write for the character. Should all three be cited as her creators or simply Schwartz and Infantino?Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 06:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the words of encouragement. I needed it. It just seems like kind of...i dont know how to put it. There was only one clear opposition and i correction all the issues he brought up. I wish more people had been involved. In any case, there really isn't much left to do to improve the article further, so after a month or so i try again.Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 11:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ice Hotel

Wierd - dunno how I did that - I removed a ton of blank lines I thought were still there :) Sorry 'bout that! Stephenb (Talk) 15:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Curiouser

I am wondering how this user accomplished changing his name. the previous username was User:Noahwoo and shortly after he comes off his vandal block, his name changes to User:Thylacinus cynocephalus. I am not sure that this is on the up and up, but I am asking you for your opinion on the matter. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One, he may have JUST changed his signature. Two, he asked for a name change, and got it. ThuranX (talk) 01:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unconstructive edits?

I don't use neither ur links nor the sandbox. Fuck ! --58.187.65.197 (talk) 13:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Wrist

If I may be so bold to ask: How? (And I wanna see the "other guy" : ) - jc37 12:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ladder slipped out from under me. Sure changes my plans for the rest of Christmas break. Doczilla (talk) 12:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well ouch, I bet. Looks like the "other guy" needed a ladder to take you down : ) - jc37 20:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, much sympathy. Heal soon. ThuranX (talk) 17:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback mistake to List of English Monarchs

Apparently you made a rollback mistake at the article List of English Monarchs to last version by User:81.149.44.2. Don't worry, I have reverted it, and good luck to your anti-vandalism patrol :-) E Wing (talk) 15:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think Vandal Proof goofed because VoABot II and I edited at the same time. VP is usually great, but once in a while, it makes an odd glitch. Thanks for catching that and thanks for mentioning it to me. Doczilla (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional topics

Actually they're fiction topics. They are real topics about fiction. Doczilla (talk) 12:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm somewhat confused as to what you're referring to, and further, if it's something to do with Hiding's noticeboard proposal, then could you clarify? - jc37 00:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I thought you were the one who'd written that, but I don't remember where it was. Must have been the Darvocet interpreting things for me. Doczilla (talk) 05:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know someone who recently broke their ankle, so I sympathyze : ) - jc37 02:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's where I saw it:[2]. You did say fictional topic. The topics aren't fictional, though. Doczilla (talk) 16:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that was him. I think I just was repeating his usage. But besides that, I'm going to claim confused lack of information on the topic, then. Basically, I was just going to be BOLD and build the board, and let others go from there : ) - jc37 13:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To Doczilla, for me they are real articles about fictional topics. To Jc, the noticeboard is also being integrated into the rewrite of WP:FICT so I'd hold off being bold and implementing it. Hiding T 23:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree that they are fiction-related topics which makes you probably right. But my brain says that the fortress of solitude is a exists in a work of fiction, so is a fictional thing, therefore anything that discusses it discusses a fictional thing, and a board for discussing fictional things would be a fictional thing board and topic is another word for thing. That's how my brain goes. Grammatically I bow to the more educated, i.e you; colloquially I bow to me. :) All the best. Hiding T 00:06, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the suggested name for the board is, um, lost it, aha, Fiction-related Noticeboard, so you win. :) Hiding T 00:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal's unsigned message

Doc - I would appreciate if you stopped referring to my edits as "vandalism." how would it feel if i said the same about yours? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.22.238.100 (talk • contribs)

You blanked a page and replaced it with "lol". That's nothing but vandalism. You inserted "(lol)" onto the Buttocks page. Doczilla (talk) 07:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(lol) - jc37 02:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which which passed nem. con. with 45 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thank you for your support and all the kind words that were expressed. I will try to live up to the trust placed in me by the community. I now have my homework to do and then pass the Marigolds.

Sorry about the wrist, hopefully normal service will resume ASAP. Cheers Kbthompson (talk) 16:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brett Williams

Hi Doczilla, could I suggest that you withdraw this AfD nomination? It seems to be based on a vandalised version of the article? Phil Bridger (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rhetoric

you have edited a paragraph in the Rhetoric article. I think it is balanced. What was not balanced, however, was the assumed notion in the previous version that Ramism could have had an influence on catholic education, which, clearly, was ruled out, from the very moment Ramus took up chair at the Royal College, against the will of the faculty of theology at the Sorbonne.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.111.119 (talk • contribs) This is supported by the work of French scholar M Fumaroli (see ref somewhere below in the entry). In addition what I wrote helps explain the link between prayer and oration in the Jesuit frame of mind, and also shows that the Ratio was used for a long time indeed ( I myself was partly taught by it!). Hope you will not mass destruct the paragraph (and by the way I also have one, even two, PhDs and am a rationalist).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.111.119 (talk • contribs)

Giving vandal warnings to one IP because of another IP's edits

Can you check this edit please. I think you may have made a mistake http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:72.155.193.91&diff=183266925&oldid=183212641

I don't doubt that you're probably right. I have to double-check everything the VP program does because it has an odd glitch that once in a while causes a warning to appear on the page of someone else who edited the same article. I believe I got interrupted by someone else's message on my talk page before I could check that one. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Doczilla (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Letting you know ;)

I've put something at User:Oxymoron83/Blocking. I hope it isn't too complicated and the basics are readily identifiable although it's not perfect English ;) --Oxymoron⁸³ 01:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fun

I got a message say VP had a problem that wasnt aimed at you. What does that mean? 75.110.137.47 (talk) 03:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Do you want rollback? Per Wikipedia:Requests for rollback if you want it, I can give it to you. If you already have it, ignore me. Hiding T 12:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you have it. And you're welcome. I can't see you running amok. Not with that wrist, anyway. Hope that heals well. Hiding T 17:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I did weigh up your block log[3] quite considerably before deciding to solicit your request. :) Hiding T 19:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - And, sometimes, those that don't. ;) Hiding T 19:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - And there's enough questions to answer nowadays too. I'm glad I got in relatively early. Then it was just enough to have edited responsibly. Now you have to have balanced a ball on your nose and sung the national anthem at the same time as protecting four pages, one of which should be from a space other than the article space. Or maybe I'm a tad cynical. ;) Hiding T 19:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Without fact checking, I agree: Jesus was not in New York

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Good job reverting A LOT of vandalism these last few days. You are certainly keeping me busy at WP:AIV. Trusilver (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned question

Why are you messaging me? I don't know what areticle you are talking about, but I haven't edited anything.

I'd appreciate if you didn't send me messages warning me about something that I have no idea about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.185.205 (talk • contribs)

Replies:[4]

note

he's been blocked 12 hours. ThuranX (talk) 02:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yum. thanks. Hope the wrist is getting better. ThuranX (talk) 02:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When youre' feeling up to it, I'd appreciate your input. I'm considering asking for the Rollback button. Wanted to get some other thoughts on it, but not tonight if you're not up for it. ThuranX (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

Hi. It's not usually necessary to issue a vandalism warning unless you reverted the vandalism yourself – otherwise, the user is likely to end up with two warnings for the same edit. See for example User talk:24.168.0.59. And please, don't attempt to explain to obvious vandals what they did wrong. It's a waste of time. They know perfectly well already – Gurch 06:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you'll check the time on our warnings, we did them at pretty much the same time. The Vandal Proof program will send a warning through even if someone else warned slightly earlier. So when I started posting that, there was no original warning. And as for clarifying things for obvious vandals, well, it certainly never hurts, and trying to educate them is in the spirit of Wikipedia. Also, leaving a message with some explanation for a vandal who won't learn from it can educate someone else who happens to see it. Doczilla (talk) 06:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, what I mean is don't ask it to send a warning in the first place if it wasn't you that reverted the edit. Following other users around issuing warnings for their reverts just seems silly – Gurch 06:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It reverts and sends a warning at the same time. You hadn't reverted at the time I used it. !Doczilla (talk) 06:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... so it issues warnings even if the revert is unsuccessful? That just seems silly, and a waste of edits. What am I supposed to do, hold off warning a user after every revert to see if a vandalproof user warns them instead? – Gurch 06:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Notice Board thing

Hi, Doc. Let me wish you a Happy New Year, though I'm very sorry to hear about the broken wrist. As a late Christmas present, I won't make a joke about how it happened through a tragic Wikipedia-typing accident....!

Since I'm the first to post at [Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Requests_for_comment/Users/2008]] and WPC members might not yet be in the habit of regularly checking that page, I wanted to alert a few longstanding editors to a posting there that I think will be of interest. Thanks and best wishes for WPC in 2008, --Tenebrae (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Washington and Peanut Butter

You seem to be reverting edits at Harold Washington that is having the affect of restoring vandalism to the article. I'm not sure what the reason for this is? The peanut butter information there that's being removed by another editor appears to be vandalism. Perhaps this is an oversight on your part? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See link:[5] Doczilla (talk) 05:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I thought it had to be something like that. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

61.68.54.158

I said i wouldnt do it again. Lol How you find those edits so fast anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.54.158 (talk • contribs)

You said you wouldn't do it again by doing it again. Doczilla (talk) 09:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True that. Why isnt editing this counted as VANDALISM? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.54.158 (talk • contribs)

Can you provide me with ideas as to why this article needs clean up?

I came across this page which is said to require clean up: Roger Rabbit: The Resurrection of Doom. Any ideas as to what the problem with the article is? Thanks! Antiyonder (talk) 11:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mention that it would do better as a category rather than as it's own page? Now I have an idea on that. The idea is to merge it with Who P-P-P-Plugged Roger Rabbit? as they are both alternate follow ups to Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Who would I talk to about the merging idea and would you say it's a solution? Antiyonder (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since your user and usertalk are on my watchlist (since tha vandalism mess eons ago), I saw this, and bounced to that article, and gave the plot a first draft sort of clean up. take a look at the diff, and let me know if you're up for a bit more to help Antiyonder clean it up? ThuranX (talk) 15:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it's fun helping him. I had offered to mentor to Universal studios, but his subsequent behavior has made me withdraw that offer, at least, pending the socking decision. ThuranX (talk) 04:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Self-unblocking vandal

If I read this guy's edit history[1] correctly, he just tried to unblock himself. Doczilla (talk) 09:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC) P.S. And now he has signed it as you. Doczilla (talk) 09:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC) He must have seen that I reported that, or at least suddenly realized that wasn't the thing to do.[2] Doczilla (talk) 09:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol..! Thanks for the play-by-play, very strange..but very funny! And by the way, your anti-vandal work is impressive, it's nice to team up with you! Dreadstar † 00:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't testing it.

I know how Wikipedia works. 75.25.105.57 (talk) 22:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. At least someone at Wikipedia knows how to be nice. 75.25.105.57 (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV

Hi! Just dropping by to congratulate you on your work fighting vandals. However, I spotted your recent report at AIV (here) and removed it; I did so partly because the user's last warnings were last year, and they seem to have stopped after your warning. I'm thinking that the IP address was dynamic or shared, meaning that it was a different user than previously. For IPs, try to give the IP a full run of warnings if their last warnings were a while ago; as mentioned above, they can switch hands quite often. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 01:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I see what happened. The page revision history[6] shows that the Vandal Proof program goofed, warning User:81.171.128.242 about an edit by User:69.132.73.88, thereby making it appear that 81.171.128.242 had vandalized that page again after the level 4 warning when 81.171.128.242 had actually stopped. VP is a powerful tool, but I have to watch it carefully because it just does that once in a while. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I need the reminder so I double-check VP edits if I'm to use that program. Doczilla (talk) 01:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see! Well, sorry for intruding then. :) Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 01:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, gosh, there's nothing to be sorry for. I needed to know that VP had goofed again. Seriously, thanks for bringing that to my attention. Doczilla (talk) 01:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thanks

Hi Doczilla - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. I very much appreciated your kind words, and I will endeavor to prove myself as a worthy editor (and, hopefully, make my record stronger). Anyway, the RfA passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 09:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joker

I remember reading somewhere on the net that said that Wizard magazine rated Joker the first greatest villain of all time. Hey, it's really cool that you're in to comics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TK(film) (talk • contribs) 15:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

My request for adminship was successful at 64/1/2! Many thanks for your participation and I will endeavor to meet your expectations. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ox in a china shop

Hey,

So this is probably the completely wrong place, and possibly person, for this question, but, well honestly, I haven't got the patience to do it right.

To wit: I chose you because you commented on the Jung entry. I've known about Jung for a while and have just begun getting more interested in his work, but I'm held back by this nagging feeling that the archetypes are suspiciously a historical. The materialist in me just can't get her head around any kind of type that transcends all cultures. I mean, a hawk definitely means something different to me than it does to a New Guinean tribesmen. And of course I know I'm bumping up against the problem all materialist have addressing issues of spirituality, but what the heck, I mean I can bang my head against the wall as well as anyone.

I'm not suggesting that you weigh in on the topic of archetypal ahistoricism, but if you could suggest an article or two on the topic, I'd be eternally (sic) grateful.

ALH

aria@littlhous.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arialittlhous (talk • contribs) 02:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROmero

Nice question. I thought, having just seen that tonight, from your page, that he toally avoided the 'why do they like dressing like zombies' question. He should've opointed out that it's an opportunity to face one's own mortality and the limited lifespan, by even fantastically trying to concieve of the nature of immortality nad so on. i dunno. navel gazing. ThuranX (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joker

Even Wikipedia says that Joker is the 1st greatest villain of all time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TK(film) (talk • contribs) 21:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed unsuccessfully with 25 support, 18 oppose, and 6 neutral. Thanks for stating your rationales why I should not be granted this time and I'll try my best to deal with it. I'll look forward working with you. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 07:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Barnstar. You're great. We're great. Wiki is great! --BritandBeyonce (talk) 09:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hulk template...

I need a few extra eye looking at {{Hulk}} with regard to added character articles.

Thanks, - J Greb (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV.

I'm not sure if it's because you're using VPRF, but you reported a couple of users at AIV too early; I warned one, and had to wait a bit to block the other. Cheers, and thanks for helping get rid of these vandals. :) · AndonicO ^Hail! 12:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, and I hope your wrist heals soon. · AndonicO ^Hail! 12:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note for the record: The vandal in question had removed warnings from that vandal's user talk page, making it appear that I had reported prematurely when, in fact, the vandal had numerous warnings, including at least three level 4 warnings.[7] And the "other" was an obvious sock of that one. Doczilla (talk) 12:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the history, and there was only one edit (I guess that must have been the sock then). How I do hate warning blanking... *sighs* · AndonicO ^Hail! 15:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thx

Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 60/0/0 on Monday!

I want to thank Mrs.EasterBunny and Royalbroil for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. To paraphrase a president ... I wish my mum and dad could see the comments made. My dad would be so proud to see the comments ... and my mum would have believed them". I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and you may be surprised to find that I have not deleted all of the pages by accident..... yet).

Thanks again, Victuallers (talk) 13:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An early RFA meeting to decide if Victuallers can be included as a sysop - use cursor to identify.

STOP SENDING NOTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.59.22 (talk • contribs)

That's a lot of punctuation, right thar. the_undertow ^talk 05:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sh'it is crazy; Do(c). the_undertow ^talk 06:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hell Week in my fraternity, where I woke up naked, next to what may or may not have been some sort of cattle, was better then this week on wiki. And I'm not even supposed to be here today! the_undertow ^talk 06:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Posthumous

appreciate the support, please go tot he category talk and add to the topic there if you have time. Thanks. ThuranX (talk) 07:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comic Arts Conference

...I'm sorry I took your point as some kind of accurate statement, I didn't think everything needed references. Could you explain what you mean by "too many problems ", before I re-edit it again..? What else do you think was 'wrong'? ntnon (talk) 01:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was a lot of hard work, I'm trying to work out what else you might find objectionable. I've cut the specific part you refer to, so it will read:

"The Comics Arts Conference (CAC), (also called the Comic Arts Conference, depending on the source) is an academic conference..."

Is that acceptable? I've also, according to the Style Guidelines cut out the frequent CAC emboldening (which I had been misinformed was standard), and taken out some of the headings' extraneous capitalisation (there was only one), as per the guidance you pointed me to... didn't recall reading that specific part before. How odd. Will it be enough of a fix? I've checked the Style pages, and can't see anything else glaringly out of line, so if you have an objection, please let me know, so I can try to do it in one edit (using the 'Show preview' key to parse for other slight errors). ntnon (talk) 02:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping with this. :o) (Any reason for the dozens of edits, though..? I try to use the "Preview" key to avoid cluttering the History too much. It would allow you to editorialise a little less, too. Some of your comments are quite pointed, and mildly offensive.)

I'm not sure what you mean by "adding too much material that shifts the focus away from the conference and onto a specific co-founder. He has his own article." The things I see you've cut out to that effect are some of the quotes from Dr. Coogan (which I disagree with you on - I think they are about CAC, not about him. The 'See also' point is probably unnecessary, but Peter Coogan redirected to CAC until I created a page for him, so I wondered about it, but it's not necessary, you're right. Otherwise, the Wold Newton aside may well be extraneous, too, but was intended to note that the COMIC Arts Conference has broadened its remit.
On your point that the article reads like a call for papers ad, I respectfully disagree! It's clearly necessary to talk about the CAC calling for papers, and include facts and links to that effect. Ironically, the one part I was wary of (the "We seek proposals.." quote) is the most like a call for papers, but you've kept that in your revised version...!
The link to Power of Comics also looks like spam in its present form. I'm going to fix that, though. Quite right. Good work. I wasn't sure how best to approach that - I was going to give it another look over today, but...
If anybody who stumbles upon that article thinks it reads like promotional material, they might get the article deleted altogether, and that would waste all our efforts. I do agree, but I don't think anybody could JUSTIFIABLY read it that way! It's an article about a Conference, so naturally it's a bit dry and descriptive and talks about what is required rather than what occurs, since every CAC is different.
I'll give you a chance to trim that some more yourself since you inserted those things in there. :o) I appreciate all your points on this, and I'll try and address them all and get it "right-er" next time! Fingers crossed... ntnon (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. :o) See what you think now, then. I've left in a 'red' link to Mr Harvey because I think there'll be a page for him sooner or later, and I prefer to future-proof (within reason), but I've tried to remove/reword most of the "Call for Papers" stuff - although maybe an external link to the Call for Papers website would be relevant..? I think I've done enough that it's not longer overly-Cooganic, too. The 'History' part is now more historical, but I think it's best (and standard) to have a capsule description and then flesh it out a little below. No doubt there are typos, but hopefully I've addressed your major concerns. Let me know! ntnon (talk) 03:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and parse for unnecessaryily passive sentences later, then. But otherwise I really hope (and think) the article as currently edited now covers your major (stated) concerns. It reads fine from several perspectives here, which is surely key. Rest your wrist! ntnon (talk) 16:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just saying hi

And wishing you a speedy recovery. I hope your wrist heals soon.Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 04:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Rfa

My effort to regain adminship was unsuccessful, and I'll do what I can to ensure your opinion of my suitability for adminship improves. Thank you for taking some time out of your day to voice your opinion.--MONGO 04:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which was unsuccessful with 19 support, 18 oppose, and 5 neutral. I have signed up for admin coaching and will retry later on in a couple more months.

I'm sorry you felt I am inexperienced to become an admin. I hope that by performing more edits on Wikipedia in the next few months that I could possibly change your mind by my next RfA, possibly around May 2008. In addition, if you have reviewed my edit history, you would have found that I have edited pages covering aviation, higher education, Hong Kong, San Francisco Bay Area, Florida, engineering, roads and highways, schools, and my latest project, getting WP:ROBO up and running actively. This includes participation in WP:FLA, WP:UNI, WP:HK, WP:SFBA, WP:ENGINEERING, and others. I hope by participating in more AfD discussions and NPP work that I can expand my work to even more categories so I may change your mind. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 04:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changeling/Morph edits

Isn't Wikipedia supposed to be where anyone with knowledge can contribute to the overall community? I have made contributions to two pages in Wikipedia, Morph (comics) and Changeling (Comics). These edits were based upon input in the respective discussion pages. But four times now (the last by you) my changes were undone. All of my edits were constructive and not vandalous in nature. Is this what Wikipedia is about? Everybody can contribute, but only so long as they hold to the opinions of a collective few? -robertcoogan 16:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My last changes were not vandalism (again). I added to the discussion on a discussion page. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you should label me a vandal out of spite. Please do us all a favor and remember your responsibilities.-robertcoogan 06:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.233.211.96 (talk) [reply]

Refurnishing

		The Comics Star
		For long-term effort to bring some sanity to the comics articles. Pairadox (talk) 11:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's been entertaining watching you renovate and get comfortable;[8] I feel like I should get you a housewarming gift. Have you been awarded one of these yet? (I hope it goes with the decor.) Pairadox (talk) 11:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe you've been overlooked for so long. Pairadox (talk) 12:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

That's very kind of you sir, tugs forelock and doffs cap. All the best! Not sure how I've avoided getting one before, but there it is now. Ta! Hiding T 12:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Past-last warning

When we revert vandalism by someone who already received a level 4 warning, any other warnings make it seem like, "Oh, we didn't really mean it when we said that was your last warning," like the parent who says, "This is the last time I'm going to tell you" five times before taking action. What about something like this:[9] I'd like some feedback on this as a possible template for non-admins to use when they revert past a level 4 warning. Thanks. Doczilla (talk) 10:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, I just remembered my other big reason for suggesting this: So any admin responding to the AIV could see at a glance that the level 4 warning was for a violation earlier than the last one. Doczilla (talk) 10:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea

Looks fine to me. I'd have no problem using that. Ian Cairns (talk) 09:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point. That has been my beef for a while too. It always seemed awkward and rather silly to me. You idea is great and I'm all for it. -- Alexf⁴² 11:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work. I like it. Trusilver 17:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh indeed. I could honestly see this helping myself and the other admins when we are researching through a potential block. Good work! Jmlk 1 7 19:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that User:Doczilla/Template:Uw-vandalism4x is a good idea - although ideally, the best thing would be for admins just to check contribs/warnings better. I do agree with the notion that repeated level 4 warnings (for instance) are like crying wolf, so I do support this proposal. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 10:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nay

It's an interesting idea, but as you have it now, it isn't very useful; telling vandals they've been reported usually makes them vandalize more, or try to find AIV. Either way, not a good thing. Maybe something similar to the {{uw-bv}} template? · AndonicO ^Hail! 10:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd offer to help test, but I'm using WP:HUG, which already has the warnings built in (it automatically asks you to report to AIV/block if the vandal has had a uw-vandalism4 though, so you might like it). · AndonicO ^Hail! 10:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We'd still have to check through the user's contributions to make sure the that the warnings were valid, and that the user vandalized after the last warning. · AndonicO ^Hail! 10:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be surprised how quickly AIV is cleared up; actually annoying how fast people do it sometimes. :P · AndonicO ^Hail! 10:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with you there. However, I think what would be more helpful in that regard would be standardizing AIV reports: using a template like for all other processes, maybe including whether or not the user was previously blocked, and the diffs of the last warning and most recent vandalism. · AndonicO ^Hail! 10:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I see the point. Reporting someone means "if I was an administrator, I would have blocked at this point", and assuming the report is actually valid, that is what will happen. Telling a user "you are going to be blocked" only to have someone else tell them "you have been blocked" a few minutes later when they may well have made no edits in the intervening time seems pointless. If someone has already recieved three or four warnings, the chances that they will suddenly decide to pay attention to another one is negligible, and even if they do, since they will be blocked anyway what good does it do? The "problem" you describe doesn't exist; if you revert someone who already has a level 4 warning, you don't warn them, you report them and wait for them to be blocked. Please get out of your head the idea that every reversion of vandalism has to be accompanied by a warning – Gurch 13:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Gurch says, there's really no point; if somebody keeps vandalizing after their last warning they should just be reported, not warned again. Telling them that an administrator is coming seems to be a bit useless; if anything, it seems like that would just encourage a vandal to vandalize more quickly in what time they have left. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 13:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, glad to be of assistance. And it's a good proposal, just I think a tad redundant. Someone should bring it up at WPT:AIV, maybe. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 03:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I meant WT:AIV, my mistake. I'll comment in it there if I can. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 03:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also agree with Gurch on this, It actually would be a great if they weren't(usually) going to be blocked fairly soon anyway, using Huggle, after the final warning it reports the vandals to AIV, so the way I see it, the last template would serve as a "you're going to be blocked better make it count" template, almost WP:DENYish. Dureo (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the star!

Thanks for the star! It's nice to be noticed. :) --GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar! Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 06:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:AIV

Thanks, but with IPs we have to account for the possibility that they are shared, ie. the person using the IP today is a different person from the one using it yesterday. That's why the WP:AIV has "have vandalised after sufficient recent warnings" as an essential criterion, with "recent" in bold. Waggers (talk) 09:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly- the question in the edit summary still stands. The previous user of the IP may have received a level 4 warning, but we have to assume that this user is new, and therefore starts with a clean sheet. Waggers (talk) 09:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re. Input

Hi, I replied on my talk page. In short; support. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 10:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changelings & Morphs

All we can really do at this point is move forward and see what happens with the merge discussion. And who knows, the 2 week lock could help push that along. - J Greb (talk) 11:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The InuYasha characters

About every InuYasha character fails WP:NN and that one you appointed me to shouldn't even have an article. Though I don't know anything of the character you appointed me to I haven't been working on the InuYasha characters lately. A BIG merger discussion needs to take place, I don't feel like starting one but you let me know if you'll do something about these pages. Regards, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Socks

I saw your post to Jc37's talk page. A checkuser isn't required to block an obvious sock. I think the relevant line from WP:SOCK is "Blocking or other remedy for an inappropriate alternative account may be determined by consensus or determined at the discretion of an admin." You should just be able to tap any admin. Hope that answers your question. Pairadox (talk) 11:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to WP:AN/I, of course. The cabal should be willing to weigh in on it. At length, probably. ;) Pairadox (talk) 11:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, any editor can file a checkuser case. But checkuser is a special function separate and above adminship. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, only admins with checkuser would be able to run checkuser. Pairadox (talk) 11:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you meant Creepy. I'd take that one straight to AN/I ASAP. S/he's got such a recognizable pattern that it shouldn't be a problem. You might consider a checkuser to sweep up any sleepers, but that isn't his/her style. Pairadox (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And no, not all admins have checkuser. Only a small number, in fact; User:Thatcher is one, and you can glean the names of other from the WP:RFCU pages. Pairadox (talk) 11:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL Got it the first time, just composing my response. What I've seen others do is to create an evidence page, outlining the pattern and the known and suspected socks. Then all that need be done is report the latest outbreak to WP:AN/I for action, or in the case of an admin spotting it and blocking, report to WP:AN/I that a block has been made so another set of eyes can endorse or not. Here's an example I've seen used recently. Pairadox (talk) 12:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's insane. Who's the latest suspect, if you'd like another set of eyes? Pairadox (talk) 12:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, I noticed that one a few days ago when it started with the actor death by year categories. It hasn't been blocked yet? I don't think you'd have a problem getting an admin to see the pattern (although the evidence page is a bit overwhelming). If you go the checkuser route, maybe just listing the last three or four socks would be enough to confirm a match. Checkuser has very narrow parameters, so it's really best for suspect cases. Let admins handle the obvious ones. Pairadox (talk) 12:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Big Orange Banner (BOB) - You're actually one of only two editors that I don't refactor. :D Pairadox (talk) 03:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Comicsproj

A while back there was some discussion on adding back the link to the comics project talk page to the project banner. I hope I've now addressed that, and sorry to take so long. Hiding T 12:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joker

Yeah, I basically try to avoid saying DC Universe or Marvel Universe in an article because it's really insular and is unimportant to the average reader. Best to stick to the concrete facts (dude stars in a comic book by [insert company]). Really, unless the article is Earth-Two or something, I see no reason to mention that a piece of fiction takes place in a given fictional universe in an article. Fictional story is told via relevant medium (film/comics/TV/etc.); simple as that.

As an aside, even though I have no interest in the series, I really hate the term "Buffyverse". WesleyDodds (talk) 09:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Britpop

first of all a edit war tag was justified because he failed to make a point of making it a topic on the disccusison page in the first place which shows bad faith and not even given a reason for the first revert of my change because when i made the change i sited a valid reason,also the change i made was to already unsourced material just to make it mesh and make sence with the article section,so it was not me just makeing something up,and he just ended up removing the paragraph anyway so it makes sence now siteing the part was unsourced anyway--Mikmik2953 (talk) 15:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User uml

I have questions about Category:User uml. Because you're one of only two members in the category, I hoped you might know the answers. (1) To which kind of [UML] does this refer -- [Unified Modeling Language] or [User-mode Linux]? Whichever it is, the category needs a definition. (2) Why are the letters lower case? Doczilla (talk) 05:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ans: Sorry I couldn't answer before, well the category is referred to the Unified Modeling Language, at least is what I expected it to be, I didn't noticed it wasn't defined. Frederico Pratas (talk) 17:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

If an admin spots an obvious sock, can the admin just run checkuser or would that admin have to file a formal checkuser request like anybody else to document the history? Doczilla (talk) 11:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I asked that, having forgotten that not all admins have checkuser. Doczilla (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not positive, but I believe that those who use checkuser have a set of rules and restrictions that they have to follow. Check out WP:RFCU and related pages for more info. (I will honestly claim to not know a lot about CU. As I think you know, I'm typically not much involved in blocking and such, and so am not as "fluent" as others might be. That said, I'm typically glad to help with whatever. Let me know : ) - jc37 09:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar image

The image in the Comics Communication Barnstar needs to be replaced, but I don't feel comfortable editing your user page. I had always intended to replace that image with one that has a star in it -- otherwise, calling it a barnstar is silly -- and I've finally gotten around to it. Editing the image one-handed is easy. New image for barnstar: Image:Comics com star.PNG Doczilla (talk) 09:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to make whatever modification to your gift as you feel necessary : ) - jc37 10:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February

(Looks at my non-existant watch)

Sooo. it's more than half-past January. Any chance of mildly nagging you about... Well, you know : ) - jc37 11:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree he'd be great, but why would you wish that on him? Seems a horrible thing to do to such a nice guy... ;) Pairadox (talk)

lol Doczilla (talk) 11:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit, that I must chagrinedly (what a word) agree with the above : ) - jc37 11:32, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Yeah, well, I see from jc37's page that my warning was too late. What ever happened to Chris Griswold, anyway? Pairadox (talk) 11:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, believe me, Chris has been on my mind. I was checking his talk page just yesterday. Doczilla (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay.

Yeah, okay. Doczilla (talk) 11:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so that yell (made after reading that comment) likely woke the neighbors (if they were sleeping).

So anyway, any preference about nomination? For example, do you know if anyone else is interested in co-nominating you; Or, for that matter, would you like to be nominated, or would you prefer a self-nom? - jc37 11:32, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you were the first who ever brought it up, but you've definitely brought it up the most, whether directly or indirectly, and I think very highly of you. Hiding has mentioned it before. So have some others. If anyone felt inclined to co-nominate, that would be nice, but I sure wouldn't bring it up with them. If they do, they do. If they don't, they don't. As for self-nomination, I know I'm generally not inclined to trust self-nominations. Plus, a self-nomination would really look weird in light of how I think I'd answer the "Why do you want to...?" question. Thanks for thinking well of me and, of course, curse you for it too. Doczilla (talk) 11:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I was either. How about we wait a day or so and see who else watching your talk page might have further information/insight : )

In the meantime, you might wish to start thinking about what your responses to the default RFA questions might be.

Oh, and I was going to add a semi-humourous link to something related to "Curses, foiled again", only to discover that (in my searching efforts, anyway), there is no such Wikipedia page, no Wiktionary page, nor Wikiquote page. What is the world coming to? : ) - jc37 11:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind standing as a co-nom, but I just want to make sure Doc is really really sure. I'd link to my rfa for advice on how to answer the questions, but I suspect it would do more harm than good these days. Hiding T 21:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's two of us, at least. I'll create a page later tonight, unless you have any further concerns. - jc37 03:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Doczilla - it's started though not transcluded to the RFA page (that's up to you, when it's ready). Though I have to admit to having writer's block atm :( - I've sketched out some words, but they don't seem to convey what I'm attempting. Still working on it : ) - jc37 11:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination page

Okey-dokey. I've posted answers. We can transclude it after you finish the nomination. I just hope I can live up to anyone's expectations. Doczilla (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed them for the moment. It looks weird to me for them to sit there for two days. Doczilla (talk) 10:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you noticed, but I was just answering the notices on my talk page, when you posted this. (I was saving you for last, because I was planning to write my co-nom first : )

(As an aside, I'm finding it hard to be concrete about something that feels more abstract. So if the final result seems "blah", my apologies.) - jc37 10:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. Doczilla (talk) 10:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's added. If you have any issues, thoughts, and/or especially suggestions/clarifications about/for it, please let me know : ) - jc37 10:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All righty

Nom and co-nom accepted. Answers reposted. If you want to cast the first vote as nom/co-nom, I'll let you transclude it to the RfA page. Doczilla (talk) 11:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think I'll follow User:Kbdank71's example (noted here) : )

And I think you're supposed to transclude it (unless you have technical difficulties, in which case, someone can "help" you)

Anyway, here goes (watches the proverbial hat, as it is being tossed through the proverbial ring, dancing on with an expectant air one might have of being on the threshhold of a rite of passage of sorts : ) - jc37 11:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope

Nope. The nominator does it -- see Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/nominate#To_nominate_someone_else. This is definitely not a self-nomination. ;) Doczilla (talk) 11:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I guess it doesn't matter who does it. Read the next section:

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/nominate#What_to_do_if_you_are_nominated_by_someone_else.

Anyway, it's done. (Wow, that sounded final.) - jc37 11:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but whose hat?

Re: (And with a quiet whoosh the hat passes the threshhold of the ring's circumference : ))

The part about the hat made me think of Oddjob hurling his hat in Goldfinger and beheading a statue with it. Doczilla (talk) 11:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rofl.

(With a nod to a famous quip by Johnny Carson to Ed Ames...)

"And I didn't even know you were Jewish" : ) - jc37 11:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

content dispute?

I don't understand your comment here what content dispute? What article? It's a userpage. --Fredrick day (talk) 02:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Frederick. I have added an additional remark at the MfD to try to address your question. If you wondered something like that, someone else can too, so I figured it's better to answer over there. Yours, Doczilla (talk) 03:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Fredrick. Aminz has now removed the section, so the policy violation has been addressed. As such, you might consider the suggestion I made on the MfD page that it now be closed and the user page kept. Jay*Jay (talk) 04:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doczilla, i noticed your explanation on the MfD relating to Aminz' user page, and your post on Fredrick day's talk page. I have responded there and would be interested in any response you might choose to make. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 05:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doczilla, I see your point that the section was content on the user page, but then how is such content supposed to be addressed? It's a user page, so simply editing it seems unreasonable. Aminz declined to discuss it on his talk page. The content was clearly violating WP:SOAP - and I hope you would agree (given that you are a psychology academic) that it made claims that are simply not supported by the relevant literature - like that violent imagery (in movies, say) leads to more societal violence, or that watch porn leads to an increased likelihood to rape. So, where should Fredrick have gone to have this content removed? The MfD certainly had the desired outcome, but may not have had Aminz not acted honourably and removed the content himself. What is the appropriate forum in this circumstance? Jay*Jay (talk) 04:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly, editing it is an option -- per Wikipedia:USERPAGE#Inappropriate_content. According to that guideline (repeat: guideline, not policy), you don't even have to go through all the steps I'm about to suggest. If your own attempts at dialogue aren't working, I would also suggest conferring with a respected editor or admin, maybe brainstorming about other ways to broach the subject and maybe enlighten the user in question. When you've exhausted reasonable efforts at dialogue, you actually can edit someone else's user page. (I'd still recommend asking an admin to mention to the user that this can be done, giving the user a chance to do the right thing on his/her own before intruding on that userpage.) If you really do edit someone else's userpage, citing Wikipedia:USERPAGE#Inappropriate_content in your edit summary would be wise so it's not seen as vandalism.

RfC was another option. Doczilla (talk) 05:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashleigh Brilliant

Why did you mark the section about his name as trivia? I received the quote directly from him, since according to him it's one of the questions he's most frequently asked ("Is that your real name?"). Therefore I think it's relevant to the biographical article. Likewise, his self-imposed word limit has direct relevance to how he composes his Pot Shots. (Mentioning the one violation of his own rule might be a bit trivial, though.) I think the section should simply be retitled to something other than "Trivia". — Loadmaster (talk) 17:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't name the section "Trivia." I posted the trivia tag on an already existing trivia section. Look at the difference.[10]. It said "Trivia" before I touched it. Doczilla (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I think I can reword and retitle that section to be less "trivial". — Loadmaster (talk) 22:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it. You asked a perfectly civil question, just trying to understand some edits. Doczilla (talk) 23:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

new person in the costume is covered elsewhere

Where?--Dr who1975 (talk) 19:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, here it is. It's this sentence: "Still other characters remain permanently dead, but are replaced by characters who assume their personas (such as Wally West taking over for Barry Allen as the Flash), so the death does not cause a genuine break in character continuity." Doczilla (talk) 19:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok... I was looking ofr the word "costume" still, the sentence is alittle too specific... I may try to adjust it a little. I need to think on it.--Dr who1975 (talk) 19:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

98.216.52.64

I think you skipped a warning level on them but they did get to level 3 anyway, thought I would mention it.--Pewwer42 Talk 01:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but when the person inserts words like that, the level 1 warning that assumes the best isn't really appropriate. It's a tough call sometimes. Doczilla (talk) 01:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

I stumbled on it. Good luck! Pedro : Chat 10:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment relating to MfD

Hi Doczilla, i noticed your explanation on the MfD relating to Aminz' user page, and your post on Fredrick day's talk page. I have responded there and would be interested in any response you might choose to make. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 05:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Governors counting

because one way makes Huckabee right, the other makes him wrong. The way that makes him wrong counts all governors, the way that makes him right doesn't count any governor not elected to office. ThuranX (talk) 00:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah.. The editor who insisted on adjusting reality to fit Huckabee, Rtr10, is, i believe, yet another member of 'HucksArmy', an online forum who've repeatedly attempted to 'fix' the article (to Huckabee's benefit, of course.) ThuranX (talk) 01:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this non sense that Mr.Daniel Pipes is Jewish? What are talking about?

He is a Jewish, so why not it should be mention alongwith his name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.0.33.47 (talk) 06:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because that's not how we write lead sentences. Denzel Washington's opening sentence should not say he's an African-American actor. Hulk Hogan's should not say he's a Caucasian wrestler. The information appears elsewhere the article. Thanks for asking. Doczilla (talk) 06:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Then why there is a "Islamic Terrorist" in the article of Terrorist Osama Bin Laden. Mr. Daniel Pipes is intellectual terrorist. Isn't?116.0.33.47 (talk) 06:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The proof is: Osama bin Muhammad bin 'Awad bin Laden (Arabic: أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن‎; born 10 March 1957),[1] most often mentioned as Osama bin Laden or Usama bin Laden, is a militant Islamist and is believed to be the founder of the Jihadist organization called Al-Qaeda.116.0.33.47 (talk) 06:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If he a Jew then why not it should be mention where as Osama bin ladin mentioned about his religion. Why not this for Mr. Daniel Pipes. Please answer, otherwise, i will go and will change that again. This is a false policy. There should be only one policy.116.0.33.47 (talk) 06:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because that's a defining characteristic for which bin Laden is widely recognized. Calling someone an intellectual terrorist violates WP:NPOV and several other policies. Doczilla (talk) 06:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Pipes is widely recognized as a intellectual terrorist. Just search on net. Please tell me also the meaning of 'widely recognize'116.0.33.47 (talk) 06:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anon 3RR block

You're welcome, and I appreciate your patience. I was following up on warnings I had given in the last hour or so and when I saw how many times the user had actually reverted the article, it was time for the electric fence to work. Regards, --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 06:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

.:

RFA thanks

:.

Thanks for supporting me! My RfA passed with a final tally of 5 neutrals, 1 oppose and 148 supports, a turnout I couldn't have dreamed of. I'm going to do everything I can to help out the community, help with sysop tasks, and of course, contribute to the encyclopedia. If you ever need a hand with something, feel free to give a shout! Cheers!

Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 17:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Weather report.

It seems to be snowing inside tonight - good luck with the broom... :) --Fredrick day (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fooled Barnstar

		The Fooled Barnstar
		I award Doczilla the Fooled Barnstar because I, ComputerGuy890100, fooled you with my latest trick! - — ComputerGuy89 0 100 23:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OMD

I picked up the first arc of "Brand New Day" because I'm a fan of Dan Slott. Still, the sheer crapitude of "One More Day" and everythign Joe Quesada has said to defend it has sullied the reading experience for me, and I have decided to not continue with the new thrice-monthly Amazing Spider-Man. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An indirect way to leave a message

I went through something very similar recently with regard to the Mormons. You have my sympathies. Doczilla (talk) 10:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. (For future reference, though, I prefer the use of the surname Dox (Vril, Querl, etc.,) to the single letter that also is a nickname for human liquid waste.) Pairadox (talk) 10:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Questions

Hi, Doczilla. I just wanted to let you know that I have added a couple of questions to your RfA page. To make sure my intent is clear, I want to state explicitly that I am not in any way trying to provoke controversy or to imply improper action by anyone. However, my (albeit brief) experiences of WP deletion - both participating and lurking - suggest to me that this area is one where judgement relating both to policy and to dealing with other users is important - hence my desire to ask questions. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 11:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doczilla, I have considered your comments on my talk page, and have invited Aminz to join the conversation by posting on his talk page here. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 05:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doczilla, I have reconstructed the first question following a response being made by Aminz. I have also asked a follow-up to your response to the second question. I recognise that such querstions are optional, and that your RfA is certain to pass, but I'd still be interested in your responses. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 12:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Practice

It looks okay until my cursor crosses it, but then part of the text moves behind the statue photo. Maybe if you right-justify the text, it won't do that? Wryspy (talk) 20:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC) Okay, it specifically wonks out as soon as the cursor moves over a photo or linked text. Until then, it's fine. Maybe it's because I'm using monobook and you're not? Wryspy (talk) 20:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, doesn't work. Try it like a three-column table within the table. [11] [12][13] [14] Wryspy (talk) 20:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reactive attachment disorder

You don't know me from Adam but I've just put this article in for FAC and now discover, from SandyGeorgia, that I am supposed to find reviewers. As I am only lightly acquainted with one psychologist I am cold calling - having been unduly impressed by the word "Professor". I'd be most grateful if you would take the time to review this article. [15]. Fainites ^barley 23:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, ta. Fainites ^barley 23:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

slash and burn at Daredevil (film)

Hey, I gave this article a MAJOR cut down, because it was, (and still is) one of the worst written Marvel Films. Want to help rebuild it? I think we can do so easily. ThuranX (talk) 05:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geneva Red Wings

Hi there! I noticed you voted delete on this article but a Google news search shows that they are fairly notable [16] unless I'm missing something this search is referring to the same team. Just thought I'd let you know anyways cheerio, Polly (Parrot) 19:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you very much for the barnstar! It's very gratifying to see one's work noticed by others. I hope that once the storyline has "settled" so to speak we can write a better plot summary and get the article up to FA status. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 20:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. Doczilla (talk) 01:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: distractions

Not really sure... the only reason I notice was that the Zero Hour cover was tagged for a FUR. And btw... 52. ;) - J Greb (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depends... What are you looking at? - J Greb (talk) 03:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thankyou

I appreciate the Comics Star. It's been said by many people in my social circle that I know more about Barbara Gordon than any human being ever should! Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 13:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta

I see that you are a prolific contributor to Wikipedia and I wonder how someone has that much time on his hands (given that most people sleep 8 hours a day). I am guessing that you devote the other 16 hours to Wikipedia.

Recently, you commented on an ongoing discussion between Tenebrae and myself regarding my father's (Vincent Colletta) Wikipedia page. You seemed to say, basically, "give it a rest" as did Tenebrae.

I am in the unique position of defending my dad, as I'm sure you would be doing if your father's Wikipedia page contained quotes that were exceedingly defamatory (Evanier, Wein). For the record, I also consider them to be unneccesary within the context of a biography.

I am going to go out on a limb and venture a guess that you did not view the entire list of 87 creators that were created by Tenebrae before commenting. I will suggest that you do so but, if you don't feel that it is required reading, I will summarize what I found.

My original assessment of the percentage of creators that had nothing but positive quotes in their bios was going to be around 90% but as I continued to read the bios I have changed that to 99%. Of the few bios that contained derogatory quotes (Abel, Alascia, DuBay, Fraccio, Powell and Rico), only one of them, a quote by Allen Bellman about Don Rico, was as vile as the Evanier and Wein quotes about Vinnie. Similarly, Bellman's entry was a "he said" type of quote akin to Evaniers which I feel is inappropriate for an encyclopedic subject.

My last post to Tenebrae was to ask whether a quote that I found about my father, that was not from a blog or talklist, would be considered. My post to you, however, asks that you thoroughly research a subject before commenting on it. If you research this one, you will find that the negative quotes on the Vincent Colletta Wikipedia page, and their level of contempt, are completely out of proportion to the rest of the creators biographies done by Tenebrae. I am also sending this discussion to him for his consideration and re-consideration of how unbalanced my father's biography is in comparison with those of his peers.

Franklin222 (talk) 15:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 15:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recall

I appreciated your reply concerning admin recall; my own objection runs along similar lines. In my view administrators are ultimately "responsible" to the community in the ministerial sense of the term. Part of being an administrator is knowing the limits of appropriate conduct and knowing when it's time to resign. I refuse anything like a recall category but, as you say, that doesn't imply that I'm unaccountable. By the same token, previous problems with the recall category indicate that administrators who categorize as such aren't any more accountable than anyone else. Chalk it up to the lack of an actual de-adminship system beyond the Arbitration Committee and public humiliation. Mackensen (talk) 21:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a sockpuppet?

I have just voiced opposition in your RFA due to this comment you made: [17]. I'm hoping it is a misunderstanding and that I can withdraw my opposition, but I would appreciate explanation as soon as possible. Phil Sandifer (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply on Phil's talkpage. I have also struck my oppose. Black Kite 00:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's all cool - I encourage you to look at the evidence more carefully in the future, but I don't think there's a big deal to be made here. Good luck with the RFA. :) Phil Sandifer (talk) 01:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Fair enough - I have e-mail turned on, so you can go ahead and e-mail me. Phil Sandifer (talk) 02:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - Odd. Must have accidentally unclicked that somewhere. It's re-enabled. Phil Sandifer (talk) 06:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amalgam FYI

If you've come to ask about the Amalgam edits, read the reasons[18], read the past discussions at the top of the page at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics/Character_alternate_version_guidelines, and please weigh in on the discussions down lower on that page. Your thoughts on figuring out the best way to handle them could help a lot.

The table

It works fine now. Wryspy (talk) 18:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comics

We definitely need to push comics editors more towards becoming skilled at writing and research. The guidelines and attention to the more mechanical-yet-essential items like category cleanup and image tagging are great, but the areas of research and just plain decent writing has been the most lacking in the project. I think there also needs to be some mass merging of characters into character lists (something like "List of Batman supporting characters", "List of Avengers members", and the like) or outright deletion, along the lines of what you guys have been doing with the Amalgam characters. After all, not every comics character is Superman, who's one of the most-studied fictional characters ever, or Charlie Brown or Batman, who are pervasive in their own right. I mean, I doubt there anything that the mainstream media, academia, or even the comics press has much if anything to say about Rocket Racer, Captain Cold, or Avengers Mansion. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA stuff

Good luck in the cabal! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But the font/span tags inside the wlink. Otherwise, only the bold/italics work. Here you go:

Doczilla _RAWR!

(RAWR is bold because it links to this page)

Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, you even kept the RAWR. I wub you. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hmm...do you have IRC/Gtalk/MSN/anything? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Insert silent LOL here). IRC, Google Talk, Windows Live Messenger, AOL Instant Messenger. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably Windows Messenger, if you have a Microsoft PC. I promise you your comp won't blow up if you run the program, although I guarantee nothing if you chat to me ;) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be it if it's an @hotmail.com or similar. Now you go Contacts -> Add contact (or something like that) and punch in g1ggy@hotmail.com. And I should add you soon enough. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, got you added, sent you a message, but you're not saying anything. Check at the bottom of the screen for some flashing tabs...I might appear there. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/307294 may help you (scroll down to the "Troubleshooting Issues with .NET Passport" section). That takes ages though, an easier way could just be to register a Hotmail. www.hotmail.com dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, it was a fun conversation anyway! :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject stuff

Over the last few days I've made a bigger dent in streamlining our project pages. (It's an ongoing project for me.)

If you have a moment, check out the changes, and let me know what you think. (I mostly was concerned about structure and grouping of existing text, so note that there is a definite need for copy-editing throughout : )

Also, help with the merge/move/split backlogs would be appreciated as well (Though I suppose that can wait a few days... : ) - jc37 10:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know the timing is weird, but I'm about to become utterly useless around here for a couple of weeks. I'm collecting data at a convention a week from now. After thanking people for participating in the RfA regardless of whether some bizarre turn of events happens in the next few hours to flipflop the whole thing, I'll have to spend my time getting ready for the convention. After the convention, I'll be spending my time sorting the data. Doczilla RAWR! 10:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, such is the life of a wiki edoitor. Enjoy the convention : ) - jc37 10:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

At the rate the votes have come in, barring the bizarre but always possible flipflop, it looks like I'll wind up just a hair short of making the 100+ club. I know (well, infer actually) that one person is probably going to vote at the last minute per a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship. Now that I'm back to having almost no oppose votes, that would make at least 93 supports known so far. Still, they could all come to their senses and retract every single one of them today. Doczilla _RAWR! 10:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool : ) - And I (of course) support the general tenor of the thread. I was considering "voting" if it got to be near 100, just to "help", but I guess it's too late now : ) - jc37 21:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, after looking over your "plans" for thank yous, (and just to be slightly obnoxious), I wonder if my "Strong support" is the first "vote", or should be considered the last vote, or none of the above.. hmmm (grin) - jc37 21:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And do you peek inside the presents under the tree before Santa comes? Tsk tsk. Doczilla _RAWR! 04:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: dunce cap

I wasn't quite wanting another one. But I couldn't believe it when I found myself there again so I had to sign my name . Chetblong^{T C} 05:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that means you're not honest!

--Chetblong^{T C} 05:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are now an administrator

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjBscribe 12:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I offered a co-nom ages ago, I knew you could do it!! :) Well done. Rudget . 13:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for that, your co-nom would have been a welcome addition, of course : ) - jc37 21:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!

Way to go! (first congrats, woot woot.)ThuranX (talk) 12:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! (second congrats, woot) --Kbdank71 15:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Con-gwa-chu-washuns (and pokes Kbdank for beating me here...) - jc37 21:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats - J Greb (talk) 22:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 06:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]

As if there was any doubt. Now he can destroy Tokyo and cleanup afterwards (although heaven only knows where he finds a mop and bucket that size)!! Pairadox (talk) 07:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations and glad to of been of help--Pewwer42 Talk 07:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! Good times... best of luck! Jmlk 1 7 10:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I actually thought your thank you's were really clever and I would have kept it! I just dislike the 'Thank you basepagename using AWB roboeditor-1.0' type thank-you's, is all. ;) Congratulations and all the best with it. ~ Riana ⁂ 10:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is the most personalised RfA thanks I have ever had, you are welcome! _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{it seems the winds have stopped...} 10:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done! now the fun starts...Modernist (talk) 12:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the RFA thanks and congrats! Spencer^T♦^C 18:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! You will make a fine admin. нмŵוτн τ 17:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats. Love the thanks message. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 05:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, and thanks for the excellent designed message! --Oxymoron⁸³ 19:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, thanks, and all that jazz!

I had no idea you were even up for admin! Congratulations; I've worked with you for the longest time, and you're one of those smart, savvy, expert editors for whom, as I've told you once or twice before :-) I have such great collegial respect. Over 90 votes, I see ... and you deserve every one.

And that's for more than your editing and policy skills. It's for your sense of community, which you've reiterated to this humble fellow by way of the Barnstar you kindly left on my page. I hate to think of myself as a wild card, but I do seem to wind up in numerous, as you say, interesting situations. As I've just mentioned to Daniel Eng‎, I've been a litter dispirited after the User:JasonAQuest exchange, but his comments here really helped.

I'd say the Barnstar was icing on the cake, but it was even more than that. It's good to not feel alone in my efforts. And what can I say? I will try to be less wild, if no less of a card...! --Tenebrae (talk) 00:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, and I just thought it was safe to be a wikipedian! Congrats!Balloonman (talk) 07:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This User:Doczilla/RfAThanks is by far the coolest thankspam ever. Just be happy you didn't have 383 images to find or maybe 567!. MBisanz ^talk 08:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your first admin decision

Godcthulha (talk · contribs) is showing even more evidence of being a Creepy sock. Now that you have the power... (I think I just heard He-Man in the background) Pairadox (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of ever so many... lol, enjoy the new tools my friend. Always here if you need anything! :) Jmlk 1 7 10:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

- ***** Congratulations ***** -

Be happy!! (talk) 09:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind note on my talk page. Best, --Be happy!! (talk) 10:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof

Thanks for the note on VandalProof. Yes, you are wise to advise caution in the use of the program. The first (and only time) I used it, my revert took effect a split second after another editor had reverted the vandalism and I ended up reverting the revert (ie. reinstating the vandalism). Whilst I quickly undid this, the situation did indeed unnerve me as I had never had the same problem with Twinkle (which seems to stop simultaneous reverts). I have since started using Twinkle again. Which anti-Vandal program would you recommend? Congratulations s on the admin appointment too by the way. Kind regards--Calabraxthis^(talk) 10:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should I be scared?

Hi, Doczilla. Congratulations on your appointment. I dropped by just before your RfA was due to close (I thought), intending to read your answers and cease being neutral. Apparently I got my time changes wrong, because it was already closed, and thus I remain in Switzerland - alone and aloof, and with plenty of chocolate and good skiing. On second thoughts, that might not be so bad...
Anyway, I would have supported if I had been online at the right moment. I almost did so in response to your question on my talk page, as the fact that you stopped to consider the potential issue for both Aminz and me speaks of a level of good sense that is sometimes lacking around this place. I think you are choosing to work in an area of some delicacy, but I trust your judgement will hold you in good stead. I'd be happy to continue talking about some of the issues I have raised, now outside the RfA environment, if you would like - I'll leave it to you, just drop by my talk page. :)
By the way, you are probably wondering the headline I have chosen. It is meant in jest, and refers to one of the comments I received from a postgrad student when she found out I held an academic appointment: "Oh my god, I'm going to have to be afraid of you from now on!"
One final thought, if you are looking for something nice and non-controversial to work on, there is a user CfD on Rouge Admins that needs to be closed, and since you haven't commented... :) Jay*Jay (talk) 11:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS: This must have taken a lot of time! Jay*Jay (talk) 11:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats.

Ugh, more "zillas" roaming around the encyclopedia. :P Feel free to ask me any questions if you need help. · AndonicO ^Hail! 12:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done! now the fun starts...Modernist (talk) 12:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, good news. Pedro : Chat 13:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats - way too much time on your hands with the personalised thank-you messages! Best of luck, I'm sure you'll be fantastic. Wexcan Talk 13:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 13:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy the mop and bucket. Dloh cierekim Deleted? 14:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! You will make a fine admin. нмŵוτн τ 17:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! It's about time. Also, I see you've picked up my RfA thank template. ;) And finally, nice to see someone else listens to BOC around here. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 20:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, happy to have contributed in some minor way. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 20:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

You're Welcome. Now if this "job" becomes too stressful, you can always get a combine and go race the Amish. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 14:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

It was actually kind of both. When I !voted, I hadn't realized that your RFA was closed, but when I realized that it was closed I chose to keep my vote on the page, because I could not not support such a great candidate. Congrats on the adminship! --Chetblong^{T C} 18:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About your RfA

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 17:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dojira! Dojira! bibliomaniac 1 5 18:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was definitely the best admin thank you of the new year so far! Thanks a lot Doc! VanTucky 21:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that the Main Page hasn't been deleted even once in the past 24 hours ... what gives? :P Let me second VanTucky's comment and wish the best to the green monster with academic inclinations. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Best of luck with your new, shiny buttons, feel free to give me a poke if you need anything. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 00:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little belated but..

Congrats dude on the promotion - you deserve it no doubt. With that level head you have on your shoulders, you'll make an outstanding administrator. Keep up the great work, man. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 07:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second that. I've been on a mini-wikibreak and haven't been able to do much :). Anyway, congrats. Cheers! Burner0718 ^JibbaJabba! 20:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Enigma ^msg! 20:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take good care of that mop, cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Well, congrats on your RFA! BTW, the show and hide buttons did work on my talk page. But the link was fine to. Again, congrats! And oh yeah - I've never recieved a more personalized RFA thanks. Thanks! - Milk's Favorite Cookie 21:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After all that trouble testing it, the thing still slides text over partly under the statue picture whenever my cursor crosses linked text. Ah, well. Maybe my monobook really is doing it. Thank God it doesn't look that way for everybody. So, um, congrats, ya know. Wryspy (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That must have been it. I turned off my monobook settings, and now everything looks right. BTW, you might want to archive the late votes because the closing admin has now removed them. Wryspy (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, and congrats! Jayjg ^(talk) 02:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

congrats

I'm happy you became an administrator :)Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 08:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

congrats 2

I had no idea you were so illustrious. The FAC on RAD has restarted here if you would still care to review it. [19]Fainites ^barley 12:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. All that celebrating and resisting the temptation to abuse your new powers! Do you happen to know of any other psychs on Wiki, particlularly with an interest in child develpment, who might be able to review it? Fainites ^barley 17:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wot a good idea. Why didn't I think of that. Fainites ^barley 17:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats 3

Good job finding my hidden page :) Powerslave (talk|cont.) 19:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Green

No worries - I still prefer an occult explanation! Johnbod (talk) 10:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it was de leprechauns that done it. In the pay of the Bavarian Illuminati. Sleep better. ;) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got a question for ya

Working the article Avengers: The Initiative, I am trying to figure out how to hide some of the more list-y things, to tighten up the appearance of the article, specifically the sections entitled 'Characters Involved' and 'List of Teams by State'. However, some of that wiki-magic is stuff I don't know how to do. Is there a template for show/hide? Any other advice on how to tighten up the article would be helpful. I am kinda opposed to the list, but there is considerable resistance to that idea. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OhanaUnited's RFA

.:

Thank you!

:.

Thank you for participating in my 2nd RfA and supporting me! My RfA passed unanimously at 79 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral. I would like to take this opportunity to thank AndonicO and Rudget for nominating me. I also want to thank LaraLove for persuading me to keep going after I failed my first RfA.

To be really honest, I am surprised that my RfA passed without any oppose or neutral. Being an administrator means more responsibilities, especially when I'm now an administrator on both English Wikipedia as well as WikiSpecies. I promise everyone that I will use the tools effectively to serve the community. If you need help on anything, don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page and I will get back to you as soon as possible. Last but not least, remember the motto for Ohana: "When it comes to family, nobody gets left behind."

Once again, thanks for placing your trust in me to help the community. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have mop—will clean.

恭喜恭喜恭喜你呀　恭喜恭喜恭喜你, Hiding T 19:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lt. Max Eckhardt

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lt. Max Eckhardt, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Lt. Max Eckhardt. Terraxos (talk) 01:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Greening

Dunno what the problem ios with the greening. No problem about it as far as I'm concerned, though hopefully it hasn't cvaused anyu problems for anyone else. Keep stomping those vandals! :) Grutness...wha? 10:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks Doc. Journey of a 1,000 miles starts with the first step and all that. I appreciate the gesture.

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 10:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extra set of eyes needed... I think

Doc,

You mind taking a look at something?

It's re Template:Green Lantern, this thread [20], and this request for a follow up.

Not to step on Jc as the admin the initially protected the page, but I'm likely to put my foot in my mouth if I respond with what I'm seeing to Clow's last post...

Thanks,

- J Greb (talk) 12:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not feeling "stepped on" at all : )

I typically welcome "many eyes".

Also check out my recent comments at J Greb's talk page. - jc37 20:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As long as nobody minds waiting a few days (see tag at top). Doczilla _RAWR! 04:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is no longer protected, and the link to the list has been added. Though, of course, further (positive) comment is always welcome : ) - jc37 03:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Green Lantern creators

To resolve some of the edit conflicts, a new page List of Green Lantern creators was created. I was wondering if you could look over the page, as I saw the strong work you did for List of Batman creators. No response necessary, just merely an invitation. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 23:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Though it "looks good", I'll agree that it could use the dz touch : ) - jc37 03:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hehehe

So I think my latest idea is the best yet, check out my user page--Pewwer42 Talk 06:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rollback request

Can I get rollback? Wryspy (talk) 16:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not handing out any rollback soon. Right after getting a driver's license isn't the time to issue other people their learner's permits. Doczilla _RAWR! 00:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfB

Hey (chuckle) Interested?

Joking aside, They're talking about it at WT:RfA. And your name obviously came to mind. If only you'd become an admin sooner (grin) - jc37 05:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfBs and cons

Interesting discussion over there. But yeah, obviously it's too soon for anything like that. And considering that immediately after I made admin, my Wikipedia participation dropped waaaaaay down, some people would likely suggest that making B would drive me away altogether. Doczilla _RAWR! 06:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd laugh, except that I just spent a fair amount of time just now discovering how many people whom I respect are on indefinite Wikibreak. I still miss User:David Kernow, for example...

Feel free to check out my recent history to see just a few that still are around : ) - jc37 06:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

		The PCHS-NJROTC Abuse Report and Antivandal Barnstar
		For reverting vandalism to Port Charlotte High School!

GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is he back?

does this look like our old friend CC again? I think so. ThuranX (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should post it to the AN/I thread I linked you to. I won't be on WP much longer, I'm headed for a community ban, and I don't really mind it one bit. Anythign I post is likely tobe ignored. If you post it though, it might get looked at. ThuranX (talk) 23:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nom

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/J Greb

Just in case you (or anyone else watching this page) were interested. Also dropping a note with User:Hiding, though he seems on a slight Wikibreak. - jc37 23:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I would tell you...

I recently started the 42^nd Cabal and got the ideas for the accepting and denying an applicant from your RFA thanks box, you can find the boxes here and here, hope you don't mine, if you do I guess I'll figure something else out.--Pewwer42 Talk 06:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yha, I noticed that to, but I was nice and didn't switch it. You can join the 42^nd Cabal if you want but you would have to answer the questions like everyone else:P--Pewwer42 Talk 05:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

true, and he forgot to sign which the number of times I did that lead me to make this

This user is followed by SineBot

but I'm a nice guy, so I'll let him in.--Pewwer42 Talk 05:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pewwer42/cabal accept and

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		because your answers have been the funniest so far Pewwer42 Talk 06:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you know, if people don't start answering them all with 42, I may have to just add the barnstar to the acceptance message.--Pewwer42 Talk 06:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help subdue your envy. As to the dropbox, my first attempt did indeed turn everything below it green, but I think its completely fixed now. And the sine bot box, I don't see what your talking about, could you be more specific as to how its interacting? thanks--Pewwer42 Talk 06:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Batman

Hiya, Doc; hope you're well. An edit war has brewing at Batman over the last few days. Three registered editors, including myself and User:Emperor, are facing an insistent colleague who now is ignoring consensus, has made an unfounded accusation (on my talk page), and refusess a compromise offered by two editors — all over a tangential, WP:SOAP opinion with a claim of that opinin being widespread but offering no evidence. It all looks like it's about to reach a bad point. Thanks for any help. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for your support. - J Greb (talk) 22:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get...

how a multi-story tall atomic-fire-breathing PhD can be so quiet from time to time. How was the convention in San Diego? I think that's the last I heard from you before today... Pairadox (talk) 05:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent activities

Um, hi, big guy. :) We've been hearing a few comments lately, generally from people who, for whatever reason, don't seem to be particular sane right now, about some of the things you may have been up to lately. Please see User talk:Bishzilla#I'm going to regret this, but .... Given my somewhat successful history of dealing with big people with occasionally (only occasionally, hey, it happens to all of us sometime, right?) bad tempers, I was ~~blackmailed into~~ ~~told to~~ asked to speak to the two of you about it. For whatever reason, the most coherent survivor seems to be mentioning Bishy's name more often than yours, so you're probably somewhat in the clear on this. But, if it does get to the point of a recall request on that dear, gracious, kind, not even remotely homicidal admin, I just wanted you to know in advance. Bye now. :) John Carter (talk) 17:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail coming. John Carter (talk) 18:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar images

Regarding your edit to my barnstar images[21]: (1) Do you really think you should be editing other people's user pages? If you felt I'd been wrong to use that image, wouldn't a note on my talk page have been more appropriate? Give people a chance to do the right thing before you force it on them. (2) I did find your page. I just didn't bother mentioning it to you. (3) Regardless of which, I made no direct claim about having found your secret page. You don't own that image. That's a cool star image which I was using to represent all the hidden pages I've found because the images in most of them are fairly lackluster and I only wanted to use one of them in that dropbox. For a while, I included the award from the first hidden page I found, but I've found far too many of them to crowd the page with any of them. Doczilla _STOMP! 04:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if I have offended you, but, in a way, I do own that image, because I created it. Realistically, how hard is it for some people to sign my hidden page? You may replace it now, but please don't take it without some form of notification, either via my hidden page or my talk page. Again, I am sorry if I have offended you. –The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 04:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the licensing statement on the image's page. Once you release it for public domain use for any purpose, creation does not mean ownership any more. Doczilla _STOMP! 04:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the rationale. –The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 04:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You already released it into public domain. Once it's public domain, it's public domain. Doczilla _STOMP! 05:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh

glad you liked that one. really, I wish people could separate fantasy and reality. Sales figures save characters, EOS. ThuranX (talk) 06:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering

Still out there collating data? - jc37 19:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That and getting ready for Comic-Con. I just finished my faculty travel budget proposal for Comic-Con two minutes before glancing here and discovering your note. (I'm pretty sure I've mentioned a previous budget proposal, but this does involve more than one.) Doczilla _STOMP! 05:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok, it had just been awhile, and thought I'd ask. there're several things/projects/ideas on the "back burner" awaiting your return. But no worries, and no hurry; I know how that RL stuff can be : ) - jc37 15:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joker talk

thanks for the back-up there. that guy was a bit irrationally irate there. ThuranX (talk) 12:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

creepy's back

look at Special:Contributions/SteveNix. It's him again. for more, look at this: Marvel Comics characters in film, and this diff. I'll RFCU it. ThuranX (talk) 03:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josef Rubinstein

Hi. Since you tagged the article for COI, and the tag refers to a discussion on that article's Talk Page, could you begin one? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 05:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the point of encouraging discussion if you have nothing to say on the matter yourself? If you don't have anything to say, who's to say anyone else does? Should such a tag be left there indefinitely even if no one has anything to discuss? Nightscream (talk) 01:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia in classroom

I was interested in your comment here, as my tendency is to say the opposite: that if students write in mainspace from the start, then it is more likely that they learn early on about Wikipedia requirements. I'd be glad to hear your thoughts, especially as I'm trying to put mine together (slowly) here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And obviously, I recognize that the fact you already have a history with Wikipedia makes a big difference, so you can guide what they do in user space. But doesn't the same go if they are writing in main space, where, moreover, they will be interacting with other Wikipedia editors. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NB I reverted your moving my comment to ANI, because I was hoping to establish a discussion with you about this, rather than to have my question swallowed up in the general debate there. Thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you from Horologium

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed unanimously with the support of 100 editors. Your kindness is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Wizardman, Black Falcon and jc37 for nominating me. — Horologium

Wizard

I believe my edits were good. You should get JSA All-Stars. That's where I got it from. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 14:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Problem with Portman pic

Hello, Doczilla. You have new messages at CoolKid1993's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Template

Hey Doc, I was wondering what User:Doczilla/Template:Uw-vandalism4x is for? Looks like its in the wrong space. MBisanz ^talk 16:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, works for me, I was sorting our large number of warning and blocking templates, and TfDing a bunch of the old ones and it popped out at me. But since it has a purpose, I'll just leave it. MBisanz ^talk 08:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The late …

I just have to compliment you on your deletion of 'the late' from Billy Bunter and your highly apposite edit summary. -- (One day to be but not quite yet) the late Jmc (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WBOSITG's RfA

Hello Doczilla, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your participation in my RfA which was passed with a final tally of 114/10/4. I'm both shocked and honoured to gain so much support from users whom I admire and trust, and I hope I can avoid breaking that backing by being the best administrator I possibly can. I will take on board the opposition's comments and I hope to improve over the coming months and years. Once again, thank you! weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 20:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi Doczilla, I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 23:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capital C

There is no "C" in Marvel...... Do you mean Marvel Comics? Rau's Speak Page 10:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandman

I've started a discussion here. Can you participate? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sabretooth and Dog Logan

If possible, could you offer your opinions on the original research discussion on Sabretooth and the IFD for Image:dog tooth.jpg? Thanks.--CyberGhostface (talk) 03:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello

(pounce) Just saying hi and catching up. how have you been? I've spent a ridiculous amount of time improving Janet Jackson and other artist related articles. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol. "its here get used to it" hehe. I love you Zilla! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:11, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That entire nomination was ridiculous. Queer studies is basically sociology for those who are non-heterosexual. Although terms such as "faggot" "tranny" and "dyke" have an overtly derogative meaning, "queer" itslef has almost always has an ambiguous meaning within the lgbt community. hence "we're here we're queer get used to it." The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Age of Consent

would you mind taking a look at this discussion and seeing if you agree or disagree? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TV stations in Oregon

Thanks for populating Category:Television stations in Bend, Oregon and deleting Category:Television stations in Bend. I have created the matching category plus created and populated both Category:Television stations in Medford, Oregon and Category:Television stations in Eugene, Oregon. Could you go ahead and delete Category:Television stations in Medford and Category:Television stations in Eugene to complete the process? Thanks! - Dravecky (talk) 01:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of your concerns but this CfD is closed—by you as a matter of fact. The still-open discussion is about the radio stations category, not the television stations category. It's an understandable confusion. - Dravecky (talk) 02:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. It's all sorted now. Thanks! - Dravecky (talk) 03:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Radio stations in Medford

Hi. I'm a little confused by your close of the CFD for Category:Radio stations in Medford. I only see the one nomination on the CFD page. Could you please clarify? Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 02:43, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. Cheers, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 02:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic stereotypes in comics

Do you fancy taking a pass at this article? I get the point of it, but I'm wondering at what point it becomes synthesised original research? Hiding T 19:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Is it summer already? Hiding T 20:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Batman

I think the nicknames merit mention somewhere, don't you? Perhaps we could rework the character's intro in WP:CMC/X and see what can go from there. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found this discussion, but it didn't talk much about the nicknames. Was there a more relevant topic at WT:COMICS or something? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Some of my students"

Dude — you teach? You're a grownup, like me? Cool! --Tenebrae (talk) 23:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Nice

I am trying to be nice. It's working so far:)! Tech43 (talk) 05:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confused by AIV

I guess I may have a misunderstanding about how vandalism is usually handled. With regard to your response here, are you saying that when an IP returns from a 24 hour block and returns to the exact same vandalism that he was engaged in, a new round of warnings have to be given before any further admin action can take place? --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 07:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism report

Is the somewhere that explains all the twinkle tools? If I had known where the arv button lead to, I probably wouldn't have reported it at WP:AIV (I don't think its quite that serious). Anyways, thanks in advance. J kasd 19:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the recent vandalism revert on my talk page! – ukexpat (talk) 20:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Batmobile

Hey Doc,

I saw your reversion to my changes to Batman and thought I'd give some reasoning behind it; I had been reading through the article, got to the Equipment section and wanted to look at the Batmobile page. Since there wasn't a link there I had to ctrl-f the whole page to find one. To save other people doing this and to make navigation easier I think there should be a link in the Equipment section; as it explicitly talks about his vehicles. As such I don't consider the link I added to be redundant. If it's ok I'm going to reinstate the link in the main body of the text. Whether the earlier link (in "New-Look") still remains is up to you.

Please give me a shout via talk if you feel that's incorrect. Cheers,

OBM | ^{blah blah blah} 08:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "Only warning" for anon user 76.195.180.84

The "only warning" accompanied a notice that the user was a suspected sockpuppet of Dingbat2007, who is a persistent and prolific vandal and has been community banned. Under normal circumstances, I would have begun with a level-1 warning, but this IP address came from the same provider as all of Dingbat's other mischief, and followed the exact same M.O., such as changing years by one in indiscriminate places, concentrating on Amarillo, Texas and Yuma, Arizona TV stations, and adding bogus subchannel affiliations with NBC Weather Plus. My actions, and those of the user who reported him to AIV, were appropriate in this circumstance. dhett ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: the vandal has returned to his vandalism, just as expected. Since you removed this person's report from AIV, I ask you now to please follow through on the request, considering the following episodes of vandalism, after the 4im warning was given:
dhett ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well now, that was quite the lecture - thank you. And thank you for assuming that I'm trying to thumb my nose at anyone, which, BTW, was wrong, but that's the risk you run with an assumption. I have a good-faith reason for what I'm doing, but since I'm not certain you wish to hear it, I won't trouble you any longer. dhett ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:76.195.180.84; "Please explain"

User talk:76.195.180.84 is one of nearly 100 suspected socks of User:Dingbat2007 -- as noted at [22]. Each user has the same M.O. and posting pattern. He has been reported a myriad of times, with nothing done short of banning full-fledged usernames on sight, and banning individual IPs for a short period when he surfaces with those. As I understand it, since he has an established history as a sock, he can be banned on sight; and a simple notification on the AIV page serves as notification -- especially since the IP in question fits both the posting method of operation and the IP range used by the proven sock. This is how I have been told to operate in the past with this regard. If this is not correct, please let me know, and please included your comments within Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations, as this is how the members of said group have operated with regard to this particular sock. If more formal conversation needs to take place, let me know, and I can forward this to WP:ANI. Thanks. --Mhking (talk) 15:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Re your message: Thank you for the whacking stick. =) It is an honor to receive one. As for your question about the Golden Quackstar, it was given to me by Húsönd. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wolf Hunter

I don't see how any one has a right to delete some ones work from here. Wikipedia is a Encyclopedia for people to gain knowledge about things in life, pop culture and things from around the world. The Wolf Hunter film it's self is a film that has lots of fans and supporters as does the character. I think just because its not as well known as Freddy or Jason does not mean it should not be on here. I have already seen that some one else has edited the article as well. I think that if this does go off its a shame and what kind of Encyclopedia for the people rob people from learning about films and characters from a independent film.

--bloodline video 06:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

82.13.191.82

Hi. You removed my AIV report for this IP address citing that it was a school address without recent vandalism. I don't think it is a school address since it vandalised at 1am this morning, and the WHOIS details for the IP address would contain details of the school if it was one. Also, there was vandalism both today and yesterday so I don't understand why it wasn't blocked. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 08:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on my talk page :). ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 08:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Category:Supervillains first appearing in novels

A tag has been placed on Category:Supervillains first appearing in novels, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Category:Supervillains first appearing in novels|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Buc (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zachbraffhater

Hi I originally declined blocking immediately as well and instead supplemented with a 4im. However, at the last minute I just noticed the username was an attack on an article he vandalized...which is usually grounds enough for an indef. So I went ahead and blocked. Just wanted to let you know.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Just blocked

Hi,

The user you have just blocked is continuing to vandalize their talk page, maybe it should be protected? --Bit Lordy (talk) 10:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This one--Bit Lordy (talk) 10:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user Could be a potential Sockpuppet of This one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bit Lordy (talk • contribs) 10:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

{{helpme}} Hi Doczilla are you a administrator?If you are could I have some help please? Catswilltakeovertheworld1day (talk) 10:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Doczilla is an administrator. However, please add the {{helpme}} tag to your own user talk page for help. The Helpful One ^(Review) 10:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry? What do you mean? Please explain.

What do you mean??? Huh?--Catswilltakeovertheworld1day (talk) 11:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks / further input on username requested

Hey d.z., I just wanted to thank you for your participation in my recent RFA, and also invite you to make further comments about my username here: User talk:Xenocidic/RFA#Potential for username to be divisive as I'm trying to see what ultimately should be done (feel free to comment on the other issues as well!). also, I've left some templated thank spam below. cheers, xenocidic (talk) 04:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

templated rfa thank-spam

Thank you for your support

I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during my recent request for adminship, which passed 72 13 2 . Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through admin coaching).

To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).

To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)

Sincerely,

~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:WP:AIV

Hello, Doczilla. You have new messages at Tinucherian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DC's Trinities

Just a note, but in early February we went through an effort to add a dab - Trinity (DC Comics) - for the four articles because of the creation of the article for the still-yet-to-be-published weekly.

Parts of the process were

Realizing that "DC Comics" no longer needed to be in the article titles.
That the villain could be called "(comics)" as the weekly would be "(comic book)". "(character)", IIRC, was a possibility, but not a mandated one by the naming conventions.
That the title of the story arc was "Trinity" As it appeared on the issues of Green Lantern, Darkstars, and L.E.G.I.O.N.. The article title and lead were structure in accordance with similar situations, DC's Countdowns

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive 31#Damage being done with CB.

- J Greb (talk) 11:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WJH1992

Hey Doczilla. I followed your advice and started on a page detailing evidence of WJH1992 edits. I've put some details about it on my talk page. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 12:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The 300

It was my pleasure to help out ol' Giggy! Cheers! Drizzt Ja mo 00:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

As always, you're generous in your good wishes and praise. I guess modesty precluded me from adding the recent barnstars and such to my page; on the other hand, I can see, once I think about it, that it better respects the givers to add them.

I've been away for a week or so. Family medical stuff, weighing on me. I'm sure you know how it is. But I've got a free short while and I miss the place, so let's see if I can live up to the janitorial accolade! :-) With my best regards to you, m'buddy, -- Tenebrae (talk) 18:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:198.78.163.63

would you mind watching this user. they are making pov edits to Batgirl and Barbara Gordon. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 18:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GLAAD 2008

File:Comic-GlaadAwards copy.jpg

Odd Days by Aubrey Miranda featuring main character Ace and supporting character Skyler at the 2008 GLAAD Media Awards

As President of Mt. San Antonio College LAMBDA Student Association, I was lucky enough to receive free tickets to the 2008 GLAAD Media Awards. Our VP, Comic artist Aubrey Miranda was also in attendance. Here's what would have happened had I decided to take the plunge. Hope you find it amusing. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Story

It's my user page; why can't I have what I want on it? Yours isn't exactly educational... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jquandar (talk • contribs) 23:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've been mentioned

By me, actually. See User talk:SteveBaker. Seems he's somewhat empathetic to a past experience of yours : ) - jc37 18:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Users Unfairly Banned

User Tanja Fleischer was banned for so called disruptive editing. All she did was add a section about Autism and rape to the talk page, talk page only, of the Autism article. It was serious and not intended to be offensive or vandalism at all, but she along with her either friends or family were banned by another user. Her friends or family had done nothing at all and she had done nothing wrong. I was hoping you would unblock her and her family or friends, they are listed on each other's user pages. She only edited the talk page and had good intentions in mind.--Jquandar, I'm not logged it right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.5.168.66 (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Jquandar (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC) I'm logged in now, I wrote the message about the unfair ban, but forgot to log in at the time.[reply]

Please contact me or at least the unfairly banned users when you unban them.--Jquandar (talk) 20:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autism sockpuppets

The blocked accounts were clearly sockpuppets of Jquandar, an Encyclopedia Dramatica user who has tried to popularize her or his story about autism and rape. This user has tried in the past to insert references to his non-notable story into Wikipedia. All three accounts that I blocked were created at the same time, linked to each other, and shared names of characters from the story. Showing up on a talk page and trying to start a Mary-Sue type discussion about controversial claims like this is, to me, obvious trolling. When someone else pointed this out on the talk page, TanjaFleischer pretended it was just a coincidence, which is as clear an indication of bad faith as one could ask for.

In short, these were all obvious socks of Jquandar, they were editing in bad faith. That Jquandar just happens to show up here and pretend to be unconnected is, in my mind, further compounding the bad faith, and if it were up to me, I'd block him for that, too. But I'll let you make that call.

Hope this helps, and no need to apologize just for asking for a sanity check. I'm always happy to oblige. Nandesuka (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you have the time

Hey, I'm not sure if you've got the time, judging by the top of your page, but, well, ThuranX is starting to get uncivil with me. On the talk page for the Dark Knight film, I responded to User: Bignole but put my comment before ThuranX because mine was a one-shot comment not intended for it to be responded to. Now, he moves it below his, and basically says I was rude. What I then did is move it back and indent it in farther, so that his comment is clearly responding to Bignole and NOT to me. Yet, he seems to think that's how it looks, and he reverted it. The reason I'm coming to you is this: I fear I'm dangerously close to 3RR, something that I don't want to do I assure you, but the problem is this guy doesn't seem to respond well to, well, civility. On my talk page, he assumes I want to start a fight with him, to which he says "Bring it on" and in his edit summary to the talk page, where he moved my comment again, he calls my action "vandalism." He is calling me a vandal and I am taking that as a personal attack, one which, in my opinion, is unwarranted. I'm not saying you should step in now, but if you could possibly keep an eye on the situation, as I would feel better knowing there is an admin watching the entire situation. I don't plan on reverting if he does move my comment again but at the same time I cannot let him aggravate me like this. So, yeah, whatever you can do in your spare time would be much appreciated. Anakinjmt (talk) 05:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the issue has been resolved with ThuranX removing his own comment. I posted on his talk page recommending he attempt to keep a cool head. Hopefully this is behind the both of us. Anyways...um...hope that strip is going well! Anakinjmt (talk) 12:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of interest

We may have a new section come out of this: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Henry_Pym

Your opinion would be appreciated.

Asgardian (talk) 03:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:Video game superheroes

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Video game superheroes, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Video game superheroes has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Video game superheroes, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 19:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need some more eyes...

I've got a new editor going hell bent on the Hulk stuff, but he's refusing to use the talk pages.

At this point he's doing:

Some minor POV pushing;
Cross media notation - using TV names for comics and vice versa;
Stuffing non-notable characters into navboxes; and
Misusing the "supporting character" parameter on the infoboxes.

Right now I'm at the 3RR point on the Hulk template, I've warned him about disruptive editing on his talk, and he's still blithely rolling along.

The editor is User:Williamstrother

Thanks

- J Greb (talk) 20:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Legion Of Super Heroes character, Tharok

During my time before I made an account I added the similarities between Cyberiad and Tharok interms of design and you made this edit: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Tharok&diff=172434983&oldid=172434912

If I may ask, how is it speculation. Aside from the different colors, they are exactly identical? I could see it being speculation if the design similarities were minimum. Antiyonder (talk) 10:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so would stating him to be similar in every detail except for his coloring, be acceptable? Antiyonder (talk) 01:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then, how about looking exactly alike aside from the coloring. Besides, the comment did come with a link showing a picture of both Cyberiad and Tharok which would negate any speculations. Antiyonder (talk) 23:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Your Fame

Doczilla, I must ask how it is that you are able to design such beautiful pages. Mine look just plain white, and I have 5000 readers less than you. Please tell me how you do it. I am dying to know. Please respond once you get the chance,

Jokendah Jokendah (talk) 22:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dczilla, it's me again.

For starters, I would like to explain that my compuer crashed, but I had already seen one of your pages before. That's how I knew it was good. Sorry about any misunderstandings. You don't need to e-mail me back unless you just want to.

Jokendah

Jokendah (talk) 15:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember?

Where that discussion on "how the lead sentence for a comic article should read" was? I remember a few of us hammered out a quite a good discussion and I would like to show it to another user.

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 09:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section length, Book titles, et al.

Hi. Can you read this section and then offer your opinion on the points raised, specifically the issue of titles in the FCB, length and detail of given sections, what constitutes “fannishness”, etc.? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:09, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Could you move those comments down to the section at the bottom of Asgardian's Talk Page? That's the section where the discussion is taking place over those issues, and I wouldn't want to move another person's post on yet another's Talk Page. People reading the current discussion might miss where you placed it. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But the comments you've already made refer directly to that conversation. All I'm asking you to do is make sure that the others there don't miss what you said. Have you read that section? If not, will you make your thoughts known there after you read it? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:05, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I'm not asking you to comment on Asgardian or his history. I'm only asking you to comment on the points that I already raised in that section. What's unclear about it? At issue is:

The degree of detail that should be given to sections, lower down in the article, devoted to other versions of a comic book character, such as those appearing in other media, or in alternate histories, like in What If?. Asgardian's position is that two sentences tops is all that's needed, and that anything else is unencyclopedic, not up to encyclopedic standards poorly written, fannish, etc. My position is that this is a question of individual aesthetics/opinion/taste, that there is no specific set length set by encyclopedic standards, and that editors must talk it over together, and perhaps compromise, to reach a consensus.
Refusing to speak with others when they attempt to speak with you over a given point of conflict, ignoring them, and continuing to revert articles when a discussion, or an attempt at discussion is taking place, is a violation of Wikipedia's policies that prescribe the opposite.
The reference to book titles in the Fictional Character Biography. Asgardian says that this is not in-universe, and that therefore, they do not belong there, but only in the Publication History, and in the citation tags. My position is to point out that Wikipedia policy governing the writing of fiction requires us to write about it in an out-universe fashion, not an in-universe one, and linked to the page in question where it says that. There is nothing wrong with mentioning titles, and indeed, I think it makes less sense not too, because it doesn't read well when no references are made to where and when a given event took place.
Words like "cruft", "clumsy", "badly written" and false accusations of "vandalism" should not be used in Edit Summaries to describe material that is being reverted or copyedited, as these are clearly pejorative. Specifically, "cruft" is defined by Wikipedia with a specific set of criteria (being unwikified, unreferenced, poorly written, etc.), and is said to be potentially uncivil. My feeling is that if material does not meet those criteria, then yes, it is uncivil, and one can use more constructive Edit Summaries. As for vandalism, Wikipedia has guidelines as to what vandalism is and is not, and bad writing, as I've attempted to explain to Asgardian on more than one occasion, is not vandalism, and should not be referred to as such. I linked to the instances in which he and I had these exchanges in the section in question. Nightscream (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asgardian

I posted a fuller explanation, with linked diffs, on his talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 12:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comics in education

FYI, I have started to expand Comics in education and will continue to do so. (I know you thought it had merit to start with but since you were involved in the discussion I am bring you upto date. --Cameron Scott (talk) 21:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Whitetiger014 small.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Whitetiger014 small.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]