Jump to content

User talk:Isotope23/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bl

[edit]

Back on Meta again - cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - I'll not remove it and will try and make others do not - cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Royphnol?

[edit]

Royphnol? Last time I checked, it was Windex! --Gp75motorsports (talk) 01:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glass cleaner/brainwashing serum? I think that only works in My Big Fat Greek Wedding.--Isotope23 talk 13:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
File:Windex Original.jpg
I knew something was wrong the instant I found this. Well, that's one Windex customer down the drain...

Yup, the sock is also a vandal.

[edit]

And he talks in Giovenese (making up words now). I think that definitely warrants a block. 24 hours without account creation for a month, maybe? --Gp75motorsports (talk) 15:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except that it isn't a sock... it's a separate individual. He edits from a range of IP's, so simply blocking one IP won't do any good. Just revert his edits if you notice them and you can post the IP here. If it gets too out of control I can explore other options.--Isotope23 talk 15:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The current IP he's editing from 151.67.87.93. But as you said, I'll have to keep an eye on him. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And on LEO's side, he's vandalized the Istrian exodus article four times in one day. maybe this warrants a warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gp75motorsports (talk • contribs) 15:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

I decided not to thankspam 44 people, since most of them have participated in a bunch of RfA's recently and the thank-you's have been cluttering the wiki. However, since you aren't necessarily a regular at RfA, and you were particularly kind in your comments: thanks. I appreciate the confidence you've expressed, and I'm getting to grips with figuring out what I'm doing. Even after less than two days, my perspective from the admin side is already a bit different than it was from the editor's side. Acroterion (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep it's a whole new ballgame... get used to never being right :)
If you ever need help with anything, feel free to ask! --Isotope23 talk 23:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gp75motorsports - "AccInsure"

[edit]

Could you have a look at this latest wikiproject that the above user has created:

As you have dealt with some of the previous projects that this user has started perhaps you would be in a better position to deal with it that me. -- Гedʃtǁcɭ 19:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The argument over Ivana Milcevic

[edit]

Willing to forget this disgraceful incident? I am...--Gp75motorsports (talk) 02:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's so forgotten that it took me a while to figure out what you were talking about.--Isotope23 talk 03:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Friends, even? --Gp75motorsports (talk) 03:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on, I got an idea!

[edit]

If LEO responds to this comment, I'll know it's Giove. Genius! --Gp75motorsports (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But since Goive seemingly hates anyone that talks to him, you'll probably have to watch your back. I can't; I'm currently trying to help User:Acroterion arbitrate Goodshoped and StopTaoSpam. It may be over in a little bit, but I'm on the pins-and-needles stage for Goodshoped's case right now, but as I said before, I'll do what I can to cool Giove off.--Gp75motorsports (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Believe to me Gp, you are loosing your time. And I hate nobody, silly boy. Do not forget that you are the one that attacked me, and not the opposite. I've not insulted you, but you have insulted me. --Giovanni Giove (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've called a truce on Giove's page. It is time I took a breather from this case, I've got more important stuff to work on. I'm just happy that this thing is finally over. Thanks, I owe you one. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 15:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.--Isotope23 talk 15:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

[edit]

User Gp75motorsports is a vandal because removes my version in Istrian exodus without comment in discussion and accuses me of sockpuppet. Regards, LEO 28 nov 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 (talk) 15:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Thanks for the help with She Who Photographs (talk · contribs). I appreciate it. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem... though I'm not so sure I agree with the 1 week block 10 hours after the editor was warned and stopped editing.--Isotope23 talk 21:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that and it was a little unusual, but the editor does have a history of just reverting without discussion. I'm not particularly inclined to ask for a reversal of the block. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'll just let it sort itself out.--Isotope23 talk 21:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Response to post on Gp75motorsports's page

[edit]

Isotope, I really wasn't accusing you of taking anyone's side (sorry if it sounded like thet). I am aware that you strive to be neutral, i.e. that you don't really care much about this dispute (this is not an accusation either, I can understand that). Its just that User:Giovanni Giove seems to think you are his "defender" for some reason, I was just irritated by that attitude, that's all.
As for User:Gp75motorsports, he's not chained to the issue and is presumably capable of making his own decisions. I must once agian say I apall the "stay-away-from-that" attitude adopted by some Admins, please allow that this matter needs resolving and that efforts must be made in that direction by someone. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 21:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that I don't care; it's that I recognize that I do not have the requisite knowledge necessary to adequately make competent decisions about what sources are reliable and NPOV in regards to this topic. I can deal with behavioral issues involved, but content issues I'm more likely to muck up than not... and at the core this is absolutely a content dispute. I agree the that matter needs resolving, but right now the best solution would be to find a neutral party with some knowledge on the topic that can effectively mediate the content dispute. Beyond that, I'm not anyone's "defender", but I will readily admit that I'm trying to watch out for User:Gp75motorsports a bit here. He is absolutely free to make his own decisions as to where he wants to involve himself but the current discussion with Giove was not accomplishing anything, other than to ratchet up rhetoric. That isn't at all what this situation needs right now.--Isotope23 talk 23:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA?

[edit]

Would you like to be nominated for adminship? --Gp75motorsports (talk) 00:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Er... I am an admin... have been since February 2007. Thanks for the offer though.--Isotope23 talk 00:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Then you should put the mop-and-bucket pic on your userpage. Anyway, you're welcome. Also, I've come up with a game that can be played by Wikipedians, to be held in my userspace. Is it legal to do this without a humor tag? Or would I need one? --Gp75motorsports (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's there with my other 4 userboxes, halfway down the page...--Isotope23 talk 01:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yeah, I see it. And here's a link to the game. Where do I post a link to it so it won't get deleted? --Gp75motorsports (talk) 01:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but it is going to get deleted... most likely per WP:NOT.--Isotope23 talk 02:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This user has an inappropriately whimsical sense of humor and is likely to bring the encyclopedia into disrepute. What? Too late? Well, dammit. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, you should have been around when my RFA was active... It got one oppose from an IP for being a self nom and an oppose from someone else (the now unfortunately departed "Dark Lord of Inclusion") because of a botched link that made it appear I did something differently than I actually did... which was later withdrawn. I know you wouldn't have been so easily hoodwinked by my unctuousness FQ.--Isotope23 talk 13:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scott5114's RFA

[edit]

Thank you for taking the time to participate in my recent RFA nomination. I have withdrawn the nom early at 17/13/3. I am presently going to undergo admin coaching in preparation for a second candidacy somewhere down the line. I hope to see your potential support in the future. Regards, —Scott5114↗ 07:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you are not discouraged by the result. You show a lot of promise... just brush up a bit more on the [ever-changing] policies around here and you should do fine next time around!--Isotope23 talk 13:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Essay

[edit]

G'day Iso,

I left a comment on FQ's talk page, expecting you to see it as well. I've composed what I hope is a useful (and funny) intro guide for noobs. If it gets positive feedback, I will look into seeking broader input and perhaps moving it to the Village Pump. It's here if you'd like to comment. WLU (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it... I've just not had a chance to read it quite yet.--Isotope23 talk 14:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What? It's only 35 thousand characters. I'm disappointed.
It'll be there for a while, so there's no rush. WLU (talk) 15:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LEO

[edit]

Who is this "LEO" fellow who keeps popping up on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement? Is he banned? Has he ever used any accounts? Picaroon (t) 16:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, he is an IP editor that has been involved in the Dalmatia related article disputes. He edits from a dynamic IP in the same range, but never IP signs... he just signs "LEO". I have no idea why he never just got an account... if he reads this I would sincerely urge him to do so if he plans on continuing to edit here. Several of his IPs have been blocked for varying amounts of time, but I don't think he was ever formally "banned" and given the dynamic nature, he just continues to edit. As someone familiar with this situation, I think all signs point to LEO != Giovanni, though they are editing from the same POV. There really is no reason for a checkuser and I've advised User:Gp75motorsports to step away from the situation to avoid ratcheting it up any more than it already is... and DIREKTOR would do well to stop goading him on. LEO has not been a calming influence on this dispute in the past, but this, when translated, would make it appear that he is promoting dialog on the content, which is exactly what the parties involved need to be doing if they want to move forward.--Isotope23 talk 16:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should just ban the entire 151 range for a day. It's a lot of users, I know, but it'll hopefully make him get it. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 20:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am a periodic collaborator then I don't log in. I think so: I advice all administrators regarding persistent personal attack by Gp75motorsports and DIREKTOR against me and user:Giovanni Giove pertinent inexistence sockpuppets. This action is a flamer action by DIREKTOR. Regards. LEO, 30 November 2007

They are NOT personal attacks. I make every effort I can to get you two to listen to me so I can give you a fair trial. You plague MY talk page with assaulting comments and in turn I try to think of a logical way to give a fair trial with no evidence on the guilty party(ies)'s side. Unless you WANT to be blocked, I advise you present me with evidence. You make no sense sometimes. --Gp75motorsports 17:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I never said the guy is a 100% sock, and I did not try to "goad him on", I just thought it would be good to check him out, he (re)started editing almost immediately when Giovanni Giove started to get repeated blocks, and there are other reasons I will not repeat once more... If he's not a sock, he's not a sock, but it was possible according to the findings. in either case, like Isotope says, LEO has not been a calming influence on this dispute in the past, however, he may now have started to review his methods so if he wants an apology, he has it. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 18:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ahem

[edit]

Yeah I already blacklisted them. But they just avoid the spam filter by leaving out the "http://". I find myself constantly removing spam from a blocked sockpuppet and now I'm being trolled. I made a report at Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/IP_check#Europebound2007. Spellcast (talk) 17:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... well at least it isn't an easy click through. Semi-protecting those articles is a very good call...--Isotope23 talk 17:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yea I just hope the checkuser works out in the end. I'll still keep those articles watchlisted. Spellcast (talk) 18:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice...

[edit]

Like your new userpage, good work guys! --DIREKTOR (TALK) 19:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, I can't quite see the difference, I'm afraid. Thanks for your kindness anyway... AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 20:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore what he says. It's noticeably easier to navigare now that it's reformatted. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gp. Is "Ignore what he says" in line with any Wiki standards? I hope not ... :-)
I couldn't see any difference on my screen between the two, but I'll say again, thank you both for your interest and help.
AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"If" qualities

[edit]

I'm creating a template but I need some help on the "If". --Gp75motorsports (talk) 20:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

[edit]

Feel free to close [2]. Rarelibra obviously wants to drag on these bad feelings forever... It is a bit bizarre actually. His entire idea of the topic ban is just surreal. Anyway, I'm going to try and help end this dispute by simply ignoring him, and won't be commenting anymore on that page. regards, and good luck. :-) Icsunonove (talk) 22:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm...

[edit]

Little bit of a dilemma. Someone left this message on my userpage. I want to tell whoever this is that it wasn't a personal attack, but there's no signature nor anyhing in the history log. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 00:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, never mind. It was Alasdair. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 00:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

[edit]

We have had an issue come up the last two days on the Karyn Kupcinet page with suddenly new editors making ungrounded changes of the article's content, after a rather long and laborious effort to bring the article up to some sort of WP acceptability. I am asking you, since it seems as if the newest (and anonymous) editor may have mentioned you in a personal attack on the article's talk page. Would you mind checking these two pages and weigh in on what is going on and being said? Thank you. Wildhartlivie 23:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can take a look, but I'll be honest up front... I have no real knowledge about the subject of the article and even less interest, so I can't really weigh in on the content. It's odd that IP mentioned me because I've never edited that article... though I've had a few run ins with someone else mentioned there... so maybe it isn't so odd after all.--Isotope23 talk 00:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Things are much clearer now that I see what was really going on. Thanks the same. Wildhartlivie 18:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For all of your help!

[edit]
The Special Barnstar
Your patience, good humour, excellent suggestions and advice all combine to make the perfect storm of a helpful admin! I don't think I've ever had a conversation with you where I didn't learn something new and useful. You should be the boss of wikipedia. WLU (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, though the horrors of my wiki-regime would most certainly result is a Coup d'état... probably led by El C.--Isotope23 talk 21:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ICP

[edit]

Um...im not sure i understand your reasoning for [[3]]. Why was it necessary?the juggreserection (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never Mind. I see it now. wonder why it does that? it didnt used to...the juggreserection (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oh, you redirected it. okay, well i guess its no big deal.the juggreserection (talk) 21:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Rmhandzel

[edit]

Ran across this user and they (it is more than one person) are using the talk page as a social network. I warned them with {{uw-socialnetwork}} but I thought I should bring this to the attention of an admin if things get any worse. Hope all is well.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 06:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, weird was the first word that came to my mind. Just to let you know, they have made an edit after my warning, and if you read the first couple sentences it implies that they have done this before. He/she mentions "before someone gets rid of this account too." Just thought I would let you know. This still baffles me, I mean come on, use Myspace or Facebook, at least your convos will be secret and not open to the world. Well have a good day.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 18:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not all that weird really. One of the people involved probably works on a cruise ship or some other isolated location with a proxy that blocks social networking sites. Thus they use Wikipedia to get around that. I've seen this several times before. I blocked it as a role account and deleted the contributions. I'd guess they will just create another account and continue unless someone wanted to bother with a checkuser to block the underlying IP from editing/account creation.--Isotope23 talk 14:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I guess so, but I figured a yahoo email would be a lot easier and a lot more private, but anyways thanks for the work! Hope all is going well.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 18:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True. I've given up trying to understand people. It makes my head hurt  :).--Isotope23 talk 19:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ha that deserves a big ditto, especially when we are talking about people on Wikipedia :-)
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 19:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting...

[edit]

Still waiting for another case I can help in! You got anything, let me know. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 21:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Quarshie

[edit]

Hello there. This article Elizabeth Quarshie was written by a new user to wikipedia and I have just welcomed them. I am trying to ask them to quote their sources, and give them some direction in this regard. She is a civil servant of the provincial government of Saskatchewan which should be notable. The article has been re-written from essay to encyclopedia format - how much time is given to contact the new user and show them the ropes? SriMesh | talk 00:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this article seems to be more rounder than Joseph Brennan (civil servant), Bruce Mann (civil servant) and about the same outlining work episodes / resume as George Murray (civil servant) or Charles Harris (civil servant), Paul Gray (civil servant) I can re-format, the listing of her accomplishments into prose, and am still requesting sourcing from the new user...Ojoemmanuel Can you give guidance as to what you are looking for. Sorry for not completing the reference section with the final section formatting needed for the citations. SriMesh | talk 01:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If I were on an AFD tear... I'd probably nominate those articles as well. Generally speaking, civil servants just are not very notable..--Isotope23 talk 17:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Illuminati

[edit]

In Talk:illuminati under "3 Factual Dispute" the very first article is posted by a person writing a research paper for their doctoral dissertation. That person stated some interesting items. Unfortunately their identity is unposted. They addressed somebody by name so I suspect they are know internally. I would be interested in contacting this individual about their research if possible. I may have some information to provide if they are amenable.

I have bothered to register as a user on Wikipedia and I hope I can be Emailed by my posting. --Jhhayesii (talk) 16:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't know that person.--Isotope23 talk 20:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath

[edit]

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Whiteandnerdy111 (talk) 19:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

[edit]

Thanks for the heads up and thanks for the good faith. I've been uncomfortable with the word "vote" (I know it isn't a vote) but wasn't sure of an alternative. Also several different users have refactored that page several times. The original division into opinion page and talk page was done by another user(who I assumed had more experience than I) and prior to that yet another user reorganized things into an opinion and comment section (which was something I'd never seen - and seems to have created problems with inconsistencies between the opinion summary and edit summary). Thanks for looking into this. I'm sorry its such a mess to go through. Egfrank (talk) 17:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification - I moved a small section from Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion/Glossary.... to Wikipedia_talk:Articles for Deletion/Glossary.... The move from there to Talk:Glossary of Christian, Jewish, and Messianic terms was done by User:Enhanceddownloadbird. Which move did you mean? Egfrank (talk) 17:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I didn't think you were picking on me - but for future reference I would like to know what is the right way to handle an AfD that spirals out of control. It was pretty obvious from the first that the initial participants weren't quite sure of the difference between a talk page and an AfD and were starting to create subsections instead of commenting to each other quotes (you can see my perhaps incorrect attempts to keep comments and responses together early in the edit history). Egfrank (talk) 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for closing the AfD - there may come a time when someone wants to renominate it, but I seriously wondered how votes could mean anything when the article was changing a mile a minute. It wasn't an entire loss - we got some really great feedback and the level of sourcing has improved dramatically. I think all the editors involved have a better understanding of the limits of WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and the need for cites. In any case, thanks Egfrank (talk) 17:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Really, really bad haiku from a new admin

[edit]

Setting new lows in thank-you spam:

Isotope, I'm glad to see you're still stable -- I reckon I'm still decaying.

In any event, decaying or not, I look forward to my new role as an admin and I appreciate your support in my RfA.
--A. B. (talk) 23:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome aboard the Crazy Train... :) --Isotope23 talk 13:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Please don't tilt the windmills

[edit]

Since you're the only editor, shouldn't this be userfied and categorised into Category:user essays? I dorftrottel I talk I 08:36, December 12, 2007

I didn't even realize that existed. I left it in the space because it isn't "my" essay per se, I am fine with anyone else editing it. That said, I've no problem with userfying it. I'm not going to bother with the category though.--Isotope23 talk 13:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{{essay}} was extended by Radiant! (who had proposed the User essay cat at VP) to sort pages according to namespace into either Category:Wikipedia essays (for ns:4) or Category:User essays (for ns:2). I dorftrottel I talk I 13:35, December 12, 2007
Ah. I've gone ahead and userfied it. People can edit it there as well as they could in the Wikipedia space. Thanks.--Isotope23 talk 13:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Glossary_of_Christian,_Jewish,_and_Messianic_terms

[edit]

No consensus? Really? Seemed pretty in favour of deletion to me, in terms of both numbers and arguments. Neıl ☎ 09:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to send it to deletion review if you wish. All my closes seem to end up there anyway.--Isotope23 talk 13:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, it can stew for a few months - if it doesn't improve someone will re-nominate it eventually. Neıl ☎ 10:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's kind of what I figured.--Isotope23 talk 13:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Isotope23/Archive_16&oldid=1085618570"