This is an archive of past discussions about User:Phaedriel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello, I found that you had linked to my page, and followed it. The issue with the medal, was related to my update of the Bennelong Medal on the Bennelong Society page. I had updated it and then the section was promptly removed, I reverted to get the section back. Rather than enter a pointless edit war I created a separate page for the Bennelong Medal and then added a merge tag, with the hope that someone would then merge the pages, returning them to the former state without any enemies being formed. The citations were rock solid for the Bennelong Medal, citing the awarding body itself. I appear to upset Mr Merridew somewhere along the way (probably by suggesting he fully read articles before suggesting they need citations already included in the body of the article - You can see the relevant comment at [1]). I can sadly not see in which way ,my user name has any relevance to the issue being my initials and my favourite number. I hope this clears up my part in all this. Cheers - - A.J.1.5.2.TALK14:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
The user has been blocked in the past, but while this sort of behaviour is irritating, it doesn't (seem to) rise to the level of a ban --- though I think another sock pruning might soon be in order, IMHO. Pete.Hurd17:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
My guess is that without a user conduct RFC etc, that there would be no ban. I'm an empiricist, however, and am always ready to be proven wrong ;) Pete.Hurd21:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to all of you, dear Jack, Pete, and Eusebus for notifying me of this worrying behavior, and the extensive compilation of evidence you've brought to my attention. As I'm just getting involved in this issue, I'll take immediate preemptive action. I'm very reluctant to issue blocks based on WP:NPA alone; yet I see a long pattern of disruptive behavior here, even tho the intention to actually contribute to content is there. Speaking in terms of "enemies" is a very troubling statement in itself, and the proof commented on by Pete seals it for me. Therefore, I'm issuing a short block as a warning for future behavior, as well as a clear reminder to this user that he's under close scrutiny from now on. Due to the fact that there's a strong suspicion of sockpuppetry involved, should he continue to breach any of these policies, I'll proceed to take further (and more serious) actions of any needed kind, and bring this matter to AN/I. If any of you notice more disruption in the form of personal attacks, edit warring, any signs of sockpuppetry, etc, please notify me immediately. Have a beautiful day, all of you, Phaedriel - 21:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC) Addendum, frankly, and after even further review, I get more and more baffled at the amounts of sockpuppetry here, tho I must say this is merely my perception per WP:DUCK. For this reason, I'm indef blocking all accounts but the main one, which will be blocked for 24 hours due to sockpuppetry, edit warring and personal attacks. Again, let me know in case this continues. Love, Phaedriel - 21:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
No problema, dear Pete. Btw, I just noticed an anonymous posting at my friend Daniel's talk page, requesting a block for Eusebeus for "edit warring", at an article R:128.40.76.3 has edited in the last hours. While I certainly do not endorse any form of dispute over contents, this go far beyond a mere edit dispute. You should also be aware of the creation by R:128.40.76.3 of a page under his userspace with more questionable statements on Jack Merridew and Esuebeus. It saddens me to take administrative actions against someone who has actually rather substantial contributions to our project; but alas, disruption and personal attacks are not minor issues. Lots of xxx, Phaedriel - 21:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am User:R:128.40.76.3 and I understand your reasoning for my block (as it was deserved), as i guess I was frustrated somewhat over the events of the last couple of days. I just want to clear the air about the sockpuppetry. I have only one sock account and that is User:Iconoclast4ever, however as you commented with the WP:DUCK (its just in this case a duck is not a duck) the other accounts are closley related being from colleagues who share a common office with me. As people do in common offices, we discuss matters relating to a variety of subjects, wikipedia being one of them. User:A.J.1.5.2. (formerly User:Curious Gregor is a genuine account, and this editor will have to create a new account if you issue an indef block, so please reconsider the indef block on this account. User:Tim.Boyle was a former collegue who was impersonating his laboratory supervisor (who is not an editor of wikipedia), this user had a sock called User:Mad kemist, which was blocked after commenting on articles at AfD created by User:A.J.1.5.2., I have no idea if this former collegue is still editing. There it is, the truth. I take responsibility for my disruptive editing and will not do it anymore once my block expires. Regards R:128.40.76.3.
Thanks for taking care of that Phaedriel. More socks have appeared at the page in question, but Jack and I are likely more than up to the task. I suspect some COI involvement, given the degree of passion unleashed. Anyway, sorry to drag you out of wikibreak! Eusebeus23:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Sharon. I appreciate your taking the time to look into this. I see that posts to this page are effective and will resort to it should a similar circumstance arise in the future; I'll do so a step or two earlier, should I find myself on this road again. I appreciate your advice on this and will leave this whole issue and the involved articles for others to attend to from this point on. Terima kasih, Jack Merridew11:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I beseech you for help with a image
I just began the process of writing the article Sweet Weaponry and cover art image is behaving oddly, it has some sort of automatic caption that shouldn't be there and I am at a loss as to how to remove it. So I was wondering if you might help a poor user out :)
Tennekis17:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
You hold the record for "Largest number of supporters in a request for adminship," with a grand total of 271 in support. LOZ: OOT20:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
So, er, now that I defeated Chuck Norris, do you think I can reclaim your talk page? Only Jmlk17 is getting mighty lonely inside me :P GiggyTalk | Review06:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Crocodile Dundee?
I saw that! Oh-who-ho! Anyway, welcome to Australia, we've got fun and games. Also a casual attitude towards work and a relatively sunny disposition thanks to our temperate climate. See you in the surf! Dfrg.msc08:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
A Present
Hello Phaedriel, I just wanted to let you know that I admire your cool head and kindness towards everyone. I made this pretty little userbox for you; if you don't like it, you don't have to use it. Have a beautiful day! :)
{{User:Neranei/userboxes/beautiful}}
produces User:Neranei/userboxes/beautiful
Brightest blessings, NeraneiT/C17:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Before you go back on your Wiki-Break, could you please have a word with User:Bee Cliff River Slob. He has been told that he continued edits to several radio pages are in violation of WP:COATRACK, among other Wikipedia rules, by admin User:EliminatorJR and myself, but continues to add them. He now is using a sockpuppet to make his edits and I have had to issue vandalism warnings.
I don't want to have to do this, so I was wondering if you could have a word with him. I would greatly appericate it.
Phaedriel, you are the best. You have just made my day awesome! I hope that your day is awesome as well, and your exhaustion gets better. (Chocolate helps. :)) Thank you for your kind words, you made me blush! Thank you! Brightest blessings, NeraneiT/C13:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Phaedriel, could you please block me for 10 minutes again? I just want to see how {{UsernameBlocked}} would look like when a user attempts to edit. Please look at my contribs before blocking, to make sure I'm online. When blocking, please use the following summary:
{{usernameBlocked}}: user wants to see how it looks like
Done! (Took long because I had to watch the amazingly gorgeous launch of the Space Shuttle! YAY!) Warning: Grab your hot cup of tea prior to retrieval!
Thank you both, guys! :) You deserve a proper reply, so most likely you'll hear back from me by the weekend... please don't squeeze my neck for making you wait - I have somewhere around 30 emails waiting for an answer! :) Love you both, A-team ;) Phaedriel - 00:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
~*~Ariel wishes she had that many people sending her emails! She only gets silly emails about... um, nm...~*~ Ariel♥Gold01:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Greetings
I just wanted to say that I've seen evidence of you all over and you seem to be such a fun person, and I see I'm clearly in the majority view. Thanks for making me smile at your cheeriness :)— TimotabTimothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)03:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Admin anniversary
Well done a good year of admin work....I'm actually four days late and I am surprised that nobody else has noticed the anniversary of your record breaking RfA....Very surprising. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh my goodness, really? Congratulations! Now as of this time you have... 3315 deletions, 39 undeletions, 271 blocks, 18 unblocks, 154 protections and 25 unprotections (I'm not crazy, I got it from here :p) Not shabby for a year's work! Here's hoping there are many more to come :) ~ Riana ⁂03:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, thank you all! :) (actually, it's not really that bad, considering my long absence, isn't it, guys? ;) I promise at least twice as many before the end of the year! Wait... that's only only 5 months away! I'd better get to work... Lots of xoxox! Phaedriel - 04:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey - happy admin anniversary! Wow - one year using the tools absolutely excellently. One year since you broke that record with flying colours... -- Anonymous DissidentTalk05:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Wow—a year? That simultaneously feels like yesterday and a lifetime ago :) I hope I'm not too burned out by the time mine comes along :P Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Wow. Congratulations on your anniversary! Here's some chocolate as a present, and to help you get back on your feet! And, no matter your religion, may you be blessed.
Irish Blessing May the road rise to meet you May the wind blow at your back May the sum shine warm upon your face May the rain fall soft upon your fields And until we meet again Until we meet again May God hold you in the palm of his hand
Speaking of Irish blessings, here's my personal one. "May your home be always too small to hold all of your friends." :) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 18:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you all so very, very much for remembering, and your incredibly kind words, friends! :) Love you all beyond words, Phaedriel - 20:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, I am a day behind, but Happy Adminiversary!! Many, many Congrats are in order:) This time I brought you a piece of cake, instead of stealing it :o) NeutralHomerT:C20:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Elonka Day
Heh. Well, I can't really say that I feel worthy of such an honor, but I shall do my best to accept it graciously, in the spirit with which it is intended. Thank you. :) --Elonka15:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, I really appreciate that, made my day! (in a literal sense?) =D - Cheers, 00:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Smile!
WarthogDemon 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. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Jet (talk) 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. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Sorry to bother you again on your wikibreak, but it seems that the dispute over the redirection of Chris Conley still has not been resolved. It seems that while I was blocked Eusebeus has redirected the article. Comments were left in regards to the redirect on the page Saves the Day and another editor has reverted the article, which Eusebeus has redirected again, citing sockpuppetry and COI (but failing to leave any kind of comment on the relevant discussion pages). As I was blocked from editing, I fail to understand how this could be the case, and a quick WHOIS search shows that the editing IP's come from manchester UK, and somewhere in Australia. So it appears that an edit war is still continuing. Rather than participate further in this and get blocked again, I thought was best to leave you a note here.
FYI, the main reason why I redirected the article in the first place is because Chris Conley is also a successful touring solo artist (a quick google search can confirm this), and hence notable enough to warrent his own article. I also find it interesting that a number of other editors have contributed to the article after I undid the original redirect on July 28 [7]. Thanks, and sorry again for dragging you outof your wikibreak. R:128.40.76.309:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Phaedriel, you don't need to bother with this - Jack and I can resolve it through the talk page. Grrr. Bloody fans! If you care enough you could do a checkuser on these "other editors" that are referenced above since I think some meat /sock farming is going on. As long as they contain their disruption to this musician's page, however, it is unimportant. Eusebeus12:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Wait a second, I am trying to sort out a dispute in a civilised manner and in the process being accused (unfoundly) of meat/sockpuppety when Eusebeus is posting blantant meatpuppety by trying to bring Jack Merridew into the argument to support his opinion here [8]. I fail to see how editing by others is a disruption to this page and think the general community opinion is that the article should be reverted so it remains. The administrator Daniel has already acknowledged that the article asserts notability to the extent that it cannot be speedy deleted. Although I do agree somewhat with Eusebeus, that the referencing of some of the information is not there, so maybe a sources tag needs to be applied? R:128.40.76.320:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Keeping in mind Sceptre's accurate and correct statement, I suggest everyone involved in this dispute that you post a brief summary at the article's talk page of your position, thoughts and suggestion, so we can analyze it there properly and act accordingly. I'm a little short of time to delve deeply into this now (I'm truly sorry), but this weekend I'll be around most of the time and, hopefully, we'll be able to solve it in a mutually acceptable way. Please, don't engage in a dispute at that talk page; a summary to review is all that's needed at this point. Best regards, Phaedriel - 20:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I will try to work through the issues here. As a longtime editor, I think I can probably resolve the dispute so I am hesitant to ask you to waste your time with this unimportant stuff (almost certainly involving COI issues). I'll take it to AfD - something I was hoping to avoid, but as it stands, given the failure to assert WP:MUSIC, probably the best option. Thanks Phaedriel! Eusebeus22:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I have reworked the article and hopefully brought it up to speed. From my interpretation of WP:MUSIC I think it passes and have listed a few points through a link on the talk page. If other editors involved here still question the notability, please let me know how I can improve the article, or take the article to AfD, however I think that if it goes to AfD it will result in a keep. Regards R:128.40.76.317:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Smile!
xeryus (talk) 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.
Done saw this popup on my watch list I've fixed the problem Gnangarra 17:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
