User talk:Radon210/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alexfusco5

Would you like this page deleted, as you declined the nomination? Declined nominations like this one are sometimes deleted. Acalamari 00:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes thanks for offering I did not think that they could be deleted Alexfusco⁵ 01:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I deleted it for you. Keilana^talk_(recall) 02:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Keilana. :) Acalamari 02:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, always happy to help. :) Keilana^talk_(recall) 02:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and Happy New Year to both of you Alexfusco⁵ 02:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you too. :) Acalamari 02:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

"vandalism" on Urban legend

It was probably just an honest mistake, but the text added by User:72.80.195.26 is some sort of slander against a living person (look like a friend, classmate, or other non-notable random person), and the other IP user who blanked it out was correct to do so. When you reverted the blanking of this content as vandalism, I reverted your edit as vandalism without giving it too much thought (after all, your action resulted in re-adding of highly inapporpriate content). Giving it a closer look, your edit may have been an honest mistake and a good faith attempt to fight vandalism, but nonetheless I wanted to bring the inappropriateness of the content to your attention TheBilly (talk) 23:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the revert next time to make it easier for me and other users use the edit summary Alexfusco⁵ 23:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism at Islam

Whether or not he is logged in, deleting 3300 bytes of sourced content without justification is vandalism. Can you help? Arrow740 (talk) 23:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I recommend discussing it on the talk page to find consensus and DO NOT revert again to aviod starting an edit war and violating the three revert rule Alexfusco⁵ 00:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for guarding me!

Thanks for reverting my user talk page! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 04:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Frodothehobbit

This user's edit looks valid, to me, it improved the article. I've reverted back to his/her version. Corvus cornix_talk 22:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

It was a tricky revert and I do not have a problem with undoing my edit Alexfusco⁵ 22:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Kewl.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 22:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment on user's removing warnings from their talk pages

Please note guideline on user talk pages — editors are allowed to remove warnings from their talk pages. Also Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments. User:24.11.149 is allowed to remove warnings. Please do not revert his edits again. Thank you. — ERcheck (talk) 18:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of that but the edit summaries are false saying the warnings are personal attacks so I restored the warnings because of the using the edit summary to be disruptive Alexfusco⁵ 18:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that further escalation by reverting the warnings is unproductive. If he continues with disruptive editing, please report it to WP:ANI. — ERcheck (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

It also didn't help that I thought he was blocked ;) Alexfusco⁵ 18:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I am not blocked and haven't been for some time now. Thanks for your interest. You may feeel free to withdraw your falsely filed complaint at requests for page protection. I have enough people alleging things and taking said mean spirited allegations to heart above the actual truth. It makes me feel good, you know...because I'm masochistic? 24.255.11.149 (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I know that now and the request was already withdrawn by me Alexfusco⁵ 18:12, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Good grief! 24.255.11.149 (talk) 18:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

== For the second and last time, I opened Miss Sweden section, so how can it be vandalism when I delete som useless information? Azores

Deleting my stuff

why do you keep deleting what i put on the page 'rave' its annoying ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naked raver (talk • contribs) 17:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

How do I set an image on a Wikipedia Page?

Hello, this is VGAfanatic. First of all, I wanted to thank you for the humble welcome you gave me as well as the picture of those cookies. If they were real, I would have surely thought them delicious. But my point is that the gesture was kind and I am glad you were so nice to me. For the second time, I thank you.

But now, I have an important question to ask you. The image you sent me and others like it: Do you know how I can set them specifically? I have read the web page on how to set it up, but do you know how I have to make the link for the image? If you have a liable answer, would you be kind enough to reply? If the answer is in the help page, would you be willing to tell me where it is?

Christmas Card

Merry Christmas and...

Happy New Year! -- Chetblong^Talk_Sign

Wikipedia:Changing username/Assistance

Hi Alexfusco5. I've removed you from the list of active users providing assistances at WP:USURP and WP:RENAME because you haven't recently made any clerk edits. If this is a mistake, please re-add yourself to the list. Thanks, Mønobi 22:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem with that was on a wikibreak for a while. Thanks for telling me. Alexfusco⁵ 22:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

yo dude GMX the mail service is more important than what was there... go to gmx.com to learn and lets both write about it. we have 2 rank ur options with more imp. this case GMX is a mail servece. k thnkx.Mrahman1991 (talk) 02:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

That does not mean you should remove almost everything from the article Alexfusco⁵ 02:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Concern over One Tree Hill (TV series)

I will admit that the edit summary might have been hard for newcomers to understand, but I hardly see how it constitutes vandalism (or deserves the term 'diabolical'). If I agree to formulate a better one, and include most image boxes which I had previously removed because I was under the impression they were the same ones I earlier noted were candidates for speedy deletion, then can we agree to accept my changes (all of which follow the official wikipedia policy of Notability of fiction) and in turn avoid an edit war?

Indeed I hoped someone would shorten the season summaries you are reverting to, but for a very long time no one did, so I followed to guidelines and did so myself (perhaps following them too meticulously). At any rate, I am certain we can agree that the current 3000-4000 words of summaries are unsuitable. How does this sound to you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandon.macuser (talk • contribs) 03:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not a newcomer and WP:FICTION only applies to fictional characters, places etc. not the series Alexfusco⁵ 03:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

In all honesty, I wasn't suggesting you were a newcomer, I was speaking in a broader sense. Back to the main point, though, Buffy the Vampire Slayer (which is currently a Featured article) has a plot summary which covers seven seasons in 643 words. Tell me what it is about the OTH article in question that warrants ~1000 words PER season. I quote from Wikipedia:Television_episodes, which says "Stick to the Manual of Style—specifically writing about fiction—when writing pages to keep an "out-of-universe" perspective."

Look at the very first sentence of season one, "Tree Hill is a small town in North Carolina"—right there is an in-universe perspective.

I hope you're not actually trying to convince me that nothing should be changed about these summaries. brandon.macuser (talk) 03:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to make your edit again but please find consensus on the talk page first Alexfusco⁵ 12:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Usurping

Hi! Thanks! I will take a good look at that page! /Sv:Vivo 12:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all I hope I answered your question Alexfusco⁵ 20:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

CSDs

I noticed that you CSD'd Stevan Pilipović the minute it was created. Unless the article is pretty obviously rubbish, which a terrible number of newpages are, the creator should be given time to assert notability, wikify, add references etc. You or I might submit fully written articles, but many newbies (and I was once in this category), start, and then build up their article. Dont bite the newbies! Mostlyharmless (talk) 23:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Showed up on recent changes appeared to be non-notable tagged will check timing in future Alexfusco⁵ 23:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Grocer

Just about half an hour ago, I noticed that the article for Grocer had a huge section that was actually, for some reason, about "Chandler". I removed it, and you marked the change as vandalism. It's very understandable--I should've made a note somewhere of why--but it wasn't vandalism, and I wanted to set the record straight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.74.128 (talk) 01:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem sign and edit summary next time. You don't know how much edit summary helps Alexfusco⁵ 01:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

IP Edit

You were immediatly reverted http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Dominicans_Don%27t_Play&diff=183517617&oldid=183517188 here. UnclePaco (talk) 01:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The IP has now submitted a reason that seems to be okay so I won't revert again Alexfusco⁵ 01:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on Janet Frame

I am confused as to why my edits to this page have been seen as constituting vandalism. There has been some warring of late on this entry, but I have worked hard to ensure it contains factual information, free of hyperbole.

Content removal without explanation Alexfusco⁵ 02:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I'll make sure to include edit summaries in the future. IMHO, the user who has truly been vandalizing this site is "Jflt", whose edits are not only riddled with errors both grammatical and factual, but also frequently hyperbolic and inflammatory (as indicated in her edit summaries)

Revert the vandalism Alexfusco⁵ 02:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.

Re:Rollback

Probably. Still working on clearing out the backlog at RPP --  jj137 ^♠ 03:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on my userpage

Just wanted to say thanks for cleaning up the vandalism on my userpage for me last night! Cheers! Redfarmer (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:ACC

Hi Alex,

I reverted your tweak to the template; please take a look and see if my addition to the table at ACC clarifies your options enough, or if we should tweak it more. My main desire is to have an option to say {{ACC|s|Example}} without the "should be created shortly". Feel free to play with it to solve both our problems, if it isn't solved already. --barneca (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem just thought it made more sense Alexfusco⁵ 20:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

CM Punk Edits

First of all, my edits were not even remotely vandalism. I removed non-notable content about Punk's title defenses (which contained awful grammar to boot). But if you want to keep it there, be my guest. But please do not accuse me of something that is unfounded and false, especially considering a little research would show nearly 1500 legitimate edits under my belt.--ECWAGuru (talk) 21:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to prevent confusion in the future please use the edit summary Alexfusco⁵ 21:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Warnings

Hi just a note that you should probably refrain from using {{uw-vandalism4}} as a first warning. See WP:BITE and WP:AGF. Alexfusco⁵ 21:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Normally I don't, but once in a while the vandalism is strong enough to cut straight to that. (Even at that, I have changed my mind and backed down to a level 3 warning on a number of those for the very reasons you've cited.) You're right that it needs to be used carefully. I'll keep it in mind. Doczilla (talk) 22:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem keep up the anti vandal work Alexfusco⁵ 22:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Domme

You might want to double check your reversion and your warning to me on Domme. I was resetting it to the disambiguation page it's supposed to be per MOS:DAB. Thanks! 75.221.90.46 (talk) 22:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note your edit summary was confusing Alexfusco⁵ 22:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I fail to see how an edit summary consisting of a link to the relevant guideline could be confusing. I suppose I could have spelled it out and said something like, "Reformatting the page as per the guidelines at MOS:DAB.", but I really thought most editors would get the point with just the link (they usually do). Regardless, would you mind reverting your reversion to that sloppy mess of a dab page? Also, would you please strike out your warning to me on my talk page? Thank you. 75.221.90.46 (talk) 22:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't clear. Typically guidelines are in the Project namespace and their shortcut starts with "WP" not "MOS" so I thought you were linking to an article Alexfusco⁵ 22:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No apology is necessary, but I do thank you for retracting your warning. To clarify, the MOS prefix refers to pages that are part of the Manual of Style and you will find it in the shortcuts to many of the sub-guidelines of the MoS, e.g. MOS:ABBR, MOS:BIO, MOS:FILM, etc. Again, I thank you for retracting your warning from my talk page, but would you please also revert your reversion to Domme? Thanks. 75.221.90.46 (talk) 22:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

After you posted I checked that out. Usually vandals just don't care so the fact that you posted basically proves your not a vandal Alexfusco⁵ 22:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

List of recurring and minor Coronation Street characters Edit

I slipped up and forgot to state what I did, I removed Dan Mason from the page as the fictional character has plenty of airtime. You reverted the edit, so he is back on, I dare not remove it again incase I'm banned. I wasn't vandalising. I also added Dan Mason into the Corrie template. What should I do next? Raintheone (talk) 02:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to do it again as long as there is a good reason in the edit summary you will not be blocked Alexfusco⁵ 02:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Reverts query

Hi! I was trying to revert the vandalism on Chiranjeevi page but, I could not get the right procedure to revert to a previous version. How is that I should be doing this? All I could think of doing was to go back to the older version and save it with comments. Thanks and regards, Mspraveen (talk) 16:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

See WP:REVERT for info and if you have a good history you can request rollback Alexfusco⁵ 16:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on Andrew Lloyd Webber

I'm confused why my edit has been reverted and I have been warned about vandalism... I reverted an incorrect reversion by User:ClueBot (it has been reported as a false-positive), which was concerned about a previous user who had corrected a lyric to contain the word "fucking" - a simple Google search shows that this is, in fact, the case ([1]). I merely reverted ClueBot's removal of "fucking"... after all, Wikipedia does not censor. My edit summary, I think, explained that. I'm not going to revert the article again, but I though I ought explain why my edit was justified. - Dafyd (talk) 18:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Reverted due to undoing a revision by ClueBot without a source. Please put your source in the article when you revert again Alexfusco⁵ 18:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation??

My requested username is already taken?? Nobody has this nick in English Wikipedia, and I have it in Spanish Wikipedia. (see this) --Warkoholic ²⁰⁰⁷ 19:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Darkimmortal

You put the {{sockpuppeteer}} notice on his userpage. Since I just unblocked him with acqueiscence of the blocking admin (we felt an indefblock was disproportionate to the offense), what's the case? Daniel Case (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

An IP user requested unblocking of this user you can see the SSP case I filed Alexfusco⁵ 21:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

User:DoucheDog09

Bad name, indeed, but it looks like the guy was actually removing vandalism, not putting it in. Would you mind striking your warnings? GlassCobra 06:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

 Done Whatever new name he gets make sure you tell him I'm Sorry and to use the edit summary Alexfusco⁵ 13:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:ACC - Old Requests Removal

Hi,

Just a note please only remove request than are older than 48hrs old.

This shouldn't be done because some of the users submitted a request yesterday, so that is not 48hrs long.

Thanks!

The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions) (Review Me!)} 14:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem I misread the date from the edit window Alexfusco⁵ 15:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Egg on my face

Thanks for that :) seresin ^{wasn't he just...?} 02:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem everyone makes mistakes :) Alexfusco⁵ 02:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

What on Earth are you talking about?

I'm sorry you disagree with my edit, but your threats of punitive action based on your personal interpretation of what is or is not "vandalism" is entirely unnecessary, nonconstructive, and presumptuous. Most people react negatively to out of the blue threats of the kind you have left on my talk page. Proxy User (talk) 04:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Be more careful

Please be more careful when reverting edits. You mistakenly reinserted this information as a vandalism reversion, when in fact the IP before you was removing the vandalism. The resulting vandalism has lead to an OTRS complaint to the foundation. I've removed the information, but please be more careful next time. SpartanPhalanx (talk) 16:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

That was a while ago. I have been taking more time to review edits Alexfusco⁵ 21:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 3	14 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: A new weekly feature
Special: 2007 in Review	Wikimania 2009 bidding ends, jury named
Controversial non-administrator rollback process added	Supposed advance draft of Jobs keynote surfaces on talk page
WikiWorld comic: "The Nocebo Effect"	News and notes: Fundraiser ends, $500,000 donation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Fundamentals of editing
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

:-)

Thanks for the welcome, the cookies, and the Editing Tips link! Extenebris (talk) 12:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to say thanks for welcoming me to wikipedia a month ago. I really appreciate it. I kept the page up and moved it to: User:Grrrlriot/Welcome Thanks again! Have a nice day. Hope to see you around more! --Grrrlriot (talk) 22:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Robert James Ritchie

• See: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Qwerty of Man - towards the end of this huge list. --Jack Merridew 08:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. The user seemed a little too expirienced. Alexfusco⁵ 12:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

He is still going as a hoard of anons right now; he's trying to get this category to zero (it's invoked by a lot of clean-up tagging). --Jack Merridew 12:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

He still has a lot of work left. Alexfusco⁵ 12:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

He's fast, however there are many folks undoing the mischief and a lot of pages are being semi'd. Thanks for your help. FYI, the case is not finished and will be updated with further results as User:Alison get them. --Jack Merridew 12:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Junusovaa

I hope you don't mind, but I replaced your vandalism warnings to this user with another removal of AFD Notice warning. I'm not sure if you've checked the Salzburg Forum page history, but the user is the only author (save for us busy bodies who will insist on reinserting the AFD notice :-), and what (s)he is doing is valid edits. This user is a newbie, and giving final vandalism warnings to valid edits is, I feel, a bit harsh.

I also reverted your edit on the article, but did re-insert the AFD notice. I also made it clear to the user in the edit summary (I hope) that the AFD should not be removed.

StephenBuxton (talk) 12:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Your right I missed the history Alexfusco⁵ 21:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this userpage vandalism-warning

I don't think the question from the IP on Majorlys talk page is vandalism. It seems legit. I have noticed someone else has reverted it back in for Majorly to answer. Perhaps you should remove the warning issued to the IP? Greswik (talk) 22:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

 Done Thanks didn't notice. I probably clicked revert & warn instead of next Alexfusco⁵ 22:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 4	21 January 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part II	New parser preprocessor to be introduced
Commons Picture of the Year contest in final round	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Freely-licensed music, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

gm thingy vandal

User:GM-IS-PERFECTION lol what is he on? Made me laugh.:) Merkinsmum 00:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

LOL Alexfusco⁵ 00:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

WBZW

The edits that I made were:

1. Removing a dead discussion from over a year ago about a previous format flip at the radio station, which has since flipped formats once again. I feel that it's unnecessary for that discussion to remain on the page.

2. Removing a discussion about the Fair Use Rationale of a previous logo for the radio station that had not been addressed since November 2007. Again, I feel that it's unnecessary for that discussion to remain on the page.

Edit #1, I believe, should be allowed to remain. Edit #2, I'm open to it being reverted.

I'm also open to further discussion on this issue, if you'd like! But for the time being, I will undo your edit to the article's talk page, as I believe that my edits were constructive. Thanks!--InDeBiz1 (talk) 02:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Damn I thought I fixed that Sorry the next and rollback button are next to each other I clicked the wrong one Sorry Alexfusco⁵ 02:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem! I keep a rather close eye on that article because there is a particular user that keeps adding irrelevant information to it.--InDeBiz1 (talk) 02:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

American Central University

I agree wholeheartedly with your action here, but I don't think reverting an IP user's complete replacement of the existing page with an unverifiable plug for the institution in question is a "minor" change, as you marked it. Vicki Rosenzweig (talk) 02:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

See WP:MINOR Alexfusco⁵ 02:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

LOLCODE

Be careful. You reverted these two edits, but they were actually on the up-and-up. I think I understand why you did this as the diffs appear to be gibberish or immature, but oddly this is the nature of this "joke" programming language. (Give it a look-see on the language spec page) Cheers! (Nuggetboy) (talk) (contribs) 20:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I never would have got that if you didn't tell me. Alexfusco⁵ 20:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Silver Star

The Silver Star edits were to remove unsourced information because it is A. Unsourced and B. Blatantly incorrect.

I do not see issues with removing sections which are so blatantly unencyclopedic.

I rechecked the edit and do not see a problem anymore please feel free to try again. I only reverted because it was previoulsy reverted as vandalism by another user. Alexfusco⁵ 22:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

question

Hi Alexfucso5. Could you check this edit again, please? At first I reverted the IP, too. But it doesen't look like vandalism. Best wishes from —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I rechecked after slower investigation it appears legitamit Alexfusco⁵ 22:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

yeah, thanks. Regards, —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

A Problem

Alexfusco5, first off, let me apologize for not making my reasoning clear in removing the project template for the Island of Time article (slipped my mind). When I clicked the article button to assess it (as it was unassessed), I was directed to a Prince of Persia page with a different discussion page. Therefore, I concluded that the article didn't exist, but a talk page was up for some reason. If there's an actual link to an actual page, can you send it to me on my talk page, or if there's not, then why is the talk page there in the first place? Thanks. Redphoenix526 (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for sending me the template. I'm not familiar with that template, but this should fix it.Redphoenix526 (talk) 00:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Cook out (restaurant)

Please stop posting vandalism templates on my talk page. The edits I made are not vandalism. I realize that the wholesale removal of a large chunk of an article (un-encyclopedic lists in this case) by an anon editor raises red flags, but please take the time to read my edit summaries and the discussion page before reverting my edits again. Thank you. 76.251.85.160 (talk) 02:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Re-checked and edit is okay sorry for the error Alexfusco⁵ 02:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Mailinator

Alexfusco - information regarding garbled messages and removed headers is not correct. Any email may be viewed in text-view that shows emails precisely as they were received - completely without alteration. No headers are removed and given that they aren't modified, they cannot of course be garbled.

What???? Alexfusco⁵ 12:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk pages

Per this edit, users are allowed to remove comments from their own talk page; that generally shows they've read them/understood them.   jj137 (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of that and usually wouldn't do so. My bad on that one will be more careful in the future Alexfusco⁵ 12:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

California State Route 78

The edit was constructive. I was just combining the list of major intersections and the exit list. PhATxPnOY916 (talk) 02:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: huggle

Request: For tagging of articles, add list of tags with description that can be selected Alexfusco⁵ 03:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you give me a list of tags you would like to see? – Gurch 08:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on it give me a second. Alexfusco⁵ 15:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		In recognition of your excellent and very quick anti-vandalism efforts, I award you this barnstar! Keep up the great work. :-) Lradrama 15:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I would have never been this fast if it wasn't fr huggle Alexfusco⁵ 15:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: huggle

Hi first, I would like to tell you that the tag list was from friendly and I put the list on the request page. I was wondering how often new versions of huggle come out. Alexfusco⁵ 15:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

When they actually work – Gurch 16:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense Alexfusco⁵ 16:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

How does that count as vandalism? I saw the same pattern at Category:Interest user templates and am replicating it. 76.16.188.239 (talk) 16:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

But transcluding the main category allows for the standardization of category rules, look at Category:User templates and Category:Support user templates and note the differences. 76.16.188.239 (talk) 17:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

But in this case aren't they? 76.16.188.239 (talk) 19:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

After investigation it would appear so Alexfusco⁵ 19:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Toothy alteration

Alex, you may want to know that i changed your 'Toothy killed Flippy' in the Toothy article for Happy Tree Friends, i pointed out that Toothy did not kill Flippy, because, as a zombie, Flippy was already dead, so that does not count as a kill. But if you want to take this issue up with me, then talk to me at my talk page.
Pyro Python (talk) 21:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I know nothing about that article I only reverted vandalism off the article Alexfusco⁵ 02:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Consist Information

The consist information for the Capitol limited was removed because it was both incorrect and unsourced. Amtrak consists vary widely based on seasonal assignments, car availability, and day to day requirements. I dont see why you continue to remove these reversions as you seemed to agree with the removal of this after I First explained the reasons to do so. 157.252.162.226 (talk) 02:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thought IP was dynamic please use the edit summarry to prevent future issues Alexfusco⁵ 02:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

John McIntyre

I just re-edited the article about John McIntyre because I work with him and he just told me that he is not the John McIntyre who is associated with "Real Clear Politics."

My IP comes from Chicago Tribune because The Baltimore Sun where John works is owned by Chicago Tribune.

Need a reference. Won't revert again per WP:AGF

What would be a correct reference for removing incorrect information? Where would I put it? I'm obviusly new at this.

Alexfusco⁵ 02:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

See WP:CITE and WP:V that would help out or try the article talk page. Alexfusco⁵ 03:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anywhere in these references how I'm supposed to cite removing false information.

WP:CITE says, "Biographies of living persons should be sourced with particular care, for legal and ethical reasons. All contentious material about living persons must cite a reliable source. Do not wait for another editor to request a source. If you find unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about a living person — whether in an article or on a talk page — remove it immediately! Do not leave it in the article and ask for a source. Do not move it to the talk page. This applies whether the material is in a biography or any other article."

WP:V says, "There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.192.21.43 (talk) 03:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

You misunderstood me, I meant you need to check the sources for the included info that you are removing to see if those references meets those policies. If they don't remove it immediately as a BLP violation if not remove it but try to start a discussion on the talk page if there are references. Its my fault for not being clear Alexfusco⁵ 03:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Someone else just went in and undid my "vandalism." Great. The problem is that the name is the same but the person is not. There's no way the reference is going to say "this isn't the same John McIntyre you're thinking of." How can I prove a negative? And how can I stop you editors from piling on and undoing my "vandalism" over and over? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.192.21.43 (talk) 03:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I will deal with the reverting in one moment please use the talk page to discuss your edit. I also urge you to create an account Alexfusco⁵ 03:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Alexfusco5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.192.21.43 (talk) 03:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I included their sales and their significance in their intro, how on earth is that vandalizing their page?

Every respected band has that, I'm sorry but i'm not ruining the page. It's actually laughable that you'd think it is. Now don't accuse me of vandalizing the page due to that ever again. Radiohumor (talk) 03:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

peer review

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 06:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I will review the article in a few minutes Alexfusco⁵ 18:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

You issued a warning for this. Is this correct? If so, why? If not, please remove the warning. the_undertow ^talk 09:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Misclick removing warning and apologizing immediately. Thank you for telling me. Alexfusco⁵ 18:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Huggle

Thanks! I'm trying it again now. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 19:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Now Gurch released 0.6.2 to fix the problem Alexfusco⁵ 19:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup, found it. Thanks. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 19:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Morph (comics) and Changeling (comics) edits

Please tell me why my edits are being labeled vandalism. If you would refer to the discussion page you would see that there never was a consensus over the merging of the two articles. I was in the middle of making edits, not vandalizing the article, when all of my edits were undone. All of my edits were in keeping with Wikipedia guidelines. Please refer to the discussion on the article's page before labeling someone as a vandal. robertcoogan 06:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

My fault it was a misclick (the revert and next buttons are next to each other) Please continue contributing Alexfusco⁵ 21:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You have been keeping me pretty busy at WP:AIV the last few days. Keep up the good work. Trusilver 02:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar and quick blocking of the vandals. Alexfusco⁵ 02:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleting my stuff???

Hello, i am writing regarding the article plage, 'dr ishrat ul ebad khan'. This information seems not to be correct and therefore i would like to edit this page. whenever i am editing this page, it seems to be reverted. Can you please advise me of requirements they need to match before editing. Or can you please kindly delete this page as it's totally not incorrect information and this case has been settled out and the government has asked for apologies as well. you can kindly send me a message in farazabc. Thankyou for your time regarding this issue.

If you want it deleted se WP:DELETE and after that if you want it deleted see the instructions on WP:AFD and propose deletion. However you may nned to register to create an AFD Alexfusco⁵ 02:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Glan-y-Mor_Comprehensive_School

I am trying to increase the neutrality of this page and you keep reversing my changes. If you can suggest ways in which I can make this page look less like an advertisement then please do. Otherwise stop reversing my changes.

My mistake I should have checked better Alexfusco⁵ 23:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank You :) Can I now remove the advert tag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Llanelli P (talk • contribs) 23:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Please remove it yourself. I have to go Alexfusco⁵ 23:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Insanity

I think my edit is constructive, it simply is not psychological. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antoniog12345 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay no problem Alexfusco⁵ 01:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 5	28 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Special: 2007 in Review, Part III	Signpost interview: John Broughton
New parser preprocessor introduced	Best of WikiWorld: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Estonian Wikipedia, Picture of the Year, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Reporting and dealing with vandals	WikiProject Report: Molecular and Cellular Biology
Wikipedia Dispatches: Banner year for Featured articles	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Methods

Hi... you seem quite experienced reverting vandalism... what are your methods? -- Mentifisto 22:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I use huggle. I do not ussually use but am approved to use Vandalproof and AWB. Twinkle is also very helpful. You may also want to visit WP:RFR and request rollback rights Alexfusco⁵ 22:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually I already had rollback and I know it's much more useful than any javascript could have been but you revert many edits so I thought that you might be using regexes or such... is huggle that useful? -- Mentifisto 22:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is very useful Alexfusco⁵ 22:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try it then. Thanks. -- Mentifisto 22:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Can you please stop with the automatic reverting (or whatever you're doing)? By doing this you aren't helping, you're vandalising yourself. --Peephole (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Please d not accuse me of vandalism I was simply reverting the vandalism Alexfusco⁵ 22:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you'd best read up on vandalism, so you don't make the same mistake again. --Peephole (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Show me a diff where it was not vandalism or test edits, it may have been a misclick or a mistake but without diffs there is no way for me to see what you are referring to Alexfusco⁵ 22:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Edits to Genetics were not vandalism

The edit I made removed a paragraph copied and pasted into the article from http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/medicine/assist.shtml. It was inserted out of context and does NOT belong within the Mendelian Genetics section (if it belongs anywhere, it would be the Medical Genetics section, but I do not see that this pasted paragraph contributes useful information to the article). Even more importantly IT IS A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION. If you'd bothered to check up on my comment for this edit you would have seen this!

You reverted all my other edits too, I see. They were constructive edits and each had an associated explanation in the edit summary.

I've logged in now, but I shouldn't have had to do this. I have reverted your revert of my edits. If you actually have an issue with information that should be in the article (which was primarily written by me) then maybe we can discuss it on the talk page. Madeleine ✉ ✍ 22:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I missed the edit summary is my fault. Sorry about that Alexfusco⁵ 22:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Bobby Flay Vandalism

You reverted an edit I made adding the image of Bobby Flay's cookbook cover, calling it Vandalism. Book covers are acceptable additions to Wikipedia and supporting reasons were givem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PVSBond (talk • contribs) 23:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I never reverted you another user reverted to the last version by me Alexfusco⁵ 00:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz is now an Administrator

My RfA was successful, and closed with 44 Supports, 6 Opposes, and 1 Neutral. For your support, you have my thanks - I fully intend to live up to the lofty yet not-a-big-deal responsibility you have granted me. For those who opposed my candidacy, I value your input and advice, and hope that I may prove worthy of your trust. Special thanks to both Rudget and bibliomaniac15 for their expert coaching and guidance. I look forward to serving the project, my fellow editors, the pursuit of higher knowledge, et cetera, et cetera. Again, you have my thanks. UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 01:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Casimir effect

Thank you for your help reverting vandals. I have semi-protected this article for 1 week, due to high level of recent vandalism. Bearian (talk)

No problem Thanks for the prtection Alexfusco⁵ 02:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You know you can block users, right?

You know you can block users, right? ;-) Was this HUGGLE acting up? --Maxim_(talk) 02:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Apparently the user that blanked it created the page. So the other instances were deleted. BTW If I could block I would check to make sure I didn't make a stupid mistake like that. Thanks for that. Alexfusco⁵ 02:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Earth Risk

I never edited anything today 76.112.23.57 (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

What? I've never warned you today Alexfusco⁵ 22:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Gangster redirect

Where is the discussion about redirecting gangster to gang? I only see a brief mention on it on the gangster talk page in which one person decided to take it upon himself to redirect it. Where is this discussion you speak of? LonelyMarble (talk) 22:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ahh okay, I understand now. That's sort of lame that just because of that tag now, anyone that tries to not have the redirect is immediately shot down. I even got a message on my talk page about it from the other guy saying my edit was not constructive. It was simply one user who took it upon himself to redirect and now everyone thinks that it was discussed at length and is policy. It's a little irksome, but I'm not mad at you or anything. LonelyMarble (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 7	11 February 2008	About the Signpost

Petition seeks to remove images of Muhammad	Foundation's FY2007 audit released
Vatican claims out-of-context Wikipedia quote was used to attack Pope	Best of WikiWorld: "W"
News and notes: Working group, Wik-iPhone, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Basic dispute resolution	Dispatches: Great saves at Featured article review
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

png Scout images

Thank you for doing these for us, that's great! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 12:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome. I'll do some more later today. I'm trying to clear that category of bad JPEG images.

Alex, converting to png is fine, but many of the ones you just did are fuzzy and unsuitable for use. Pls check that before a bunch of massing tagging of jpgs is done. Clear jpgs are better than fuzzy pngs. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Converting JPEGs to PNGs

Hello, Alex. I've noticed that you've been busy recently replacing some JPEG images with PNG versions (such as replacing Image:...ButI'mYourTeacherCover001.jpg with Image:...ButI'mYourTeacherCover001.png and several scouting images). While I appreciate the effort you've put into this, I feel that these replacements have generally not been improvements. The replacement PNG images seem to have been created by magnifying the JPEG image, perhaps applying a blur filter, and saving the resulting image as a PNG. Not only does this result in an image which cannot possibly be of a higher quality than the original JPEG, but it also increases the file size of the image dramatically. The JPEG algorithm introduces compression artifacts into the image, which improves the effectiveness of JPEG compression; but these same compression artifacts greatly decrease the effectiveness of PNG compression. Hence, if a JPEG is converted to a PNG, the resulting file size will almost always be much larger.

If you would like to improve the images in Category:Images with inappropriate JPEG compression, which is an important job that unfortunately is currently being neglected, I would encourage you to find replacement images that were originally saved as PNGs, GIFs, or even BMPs (converting GIFs and BMPs to PNGs before uploading) rather than converting the existing JPEG images into PNGs. Converting JPEGs into PNGs really doesn't improve matters, because the JPEG compression artifacts will still be in the image, and because the resulting file size will probably be much larger.

Please let me know if you have questions or need any help. —Bkell (talk) 23:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry for expanding them. For some reason the software I use does that. I will stop with that because the artifacts are not being removed. Alexfusco⁵ 17:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Thanks for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully with 40 supports, 13 opposes, and 4 neutrals. For those of you who supported my RFA, I greatly appreciate it. For those who did not, I'm also thankful for your constructive criticism. If you need some advice or have some pointers for me, you know where to reach me! A special thank you to Majorly for all his time and effort he has placed in my nomination. Once again, thank you all for your helpful comments. Now off to new admin school! Cheers, Icestorm815 • Talk 01:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Gail Sheehy article

The Gail Sheehy article is an unrelenting series of attacks, with no balancing discussion. It is not appropriate as a Wikipeida article. It should either be deleted or balanced with a serious effort at biography.

Zweibieren (talk) 18:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

See WP:DELETE, WP:CSD, and WP:AFD for how to propose deletion Alexfusco⁵ 18:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Marines

That was spam copyright violation from a British recruiting website. Please don't use newbie templates to "warn" me.--Goon Noot (talk) 01:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Shiny!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your wonderful contributions to helping keep wikipedia safe and sound (Not to mention beating me to a revert a whole lot of times). I User:Tiptoety hereby award you this Barnstar :p Tiptoety talk 01:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the barnstar Alexfusco⁵ 01:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome :p Tiptoety ^talk 02:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Also Good luck on RFA I would have never guessed you were not an admin if I hadn't read my userpage Alexfusco⁵ 02:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 8	18 February 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Michael Snow, Domas Mituzas appointed to Board of Trustees	WikiWorld: "Thinking about the immortality of the crab"
News and notes: Administrator desysopped, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Getting an article to featured article status	Dispatches: FA promotion despite adversity
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 9	25 February 2008	About the Signpost

Signpost interview: Michael Snow	Controversial RfA results in resysopping of ^demon
Sockpuppeting administrator desysopped, community banned	Two major print encyclopedias cease production
WikiWorld: "Hyperthymesia"	News and notes: Wikimania Call for Participation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Family Guy
Dispatches: A snapshot of featured article categories	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't vandalising

I was trying to speak to him —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.210.70 (talk) 21:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

How?

Who are the templates who you use to report vandalizing to the vandals like This is the latest advertising (or something else). --MisterWiki da ya think i'm sexy and ya want to speak me?, come on sugar let, come here! I am like a Prayer, do you really want to hurt me, because i am together forever with any body, i'm not a dancing queen but (play that funky music, now), if you want my body, and you think i'm sexy, come on sugar let me know, also I imagine there's no heaven, you may say i'm a dreamer, please give me one more night whenever you need somebody, MisterWiki never gonna give you up, let you down, run around and desert you, but hit me baby one more time, oh, yes, what a wonderful world, but she wants to dance with me right now, I say to she, i will not dance when i fall in love, i say hey Jude!, but she dont speak, now someone are saying nas ne dagoniat, she feels im too sexy, now i'm living on my own, because i want to break free but i see a building saying YMCA and i enter, in the building i think what i am owner of a lonely heart, i exit from the building and go to the disco, playing the safety dance and sexy movement. I will survive to everything i do saying and now i'm sleeping now that you're gone. - 02:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

They are not templates (although they could be created with little effort) they are hard coded into huggle.If you would like I can create them in my sandbox Alexfusco⁵ 02:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

02:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Changes to Southern Leyte Landslide?

Wondering why my changes to the Southern Leyte Landslide were reverted. Both changes were made because of good reasons.

Change #1: Edited the official death toll of the event to a modern record by the Red Cross. This supersedes a report made a week after the event by a source which does not allow the general public to view its reports.

Change #2: A section entitled "Comments" states to the contrary of most of the article without any citations. It is opinion unless verifiable.

I am not a registered user but a University student who is writing a paper on the event. I am trying to make changes as I come across them to help update the article. I do not see how the edits are not constructive. Opinion was removed and a more up to date figure was used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.226.151 (talk) 02:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout that. Please use the edit summary next time Alexfusco⁵ 12:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

^^I did use the edit summary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.226.151 (talk) 17:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Then its my fault. I misread your IP and missed your edit summary my mistake. Sorry again. Alexfusco⁵ 21:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Powersurge

An article that you have been involved in editing, Powersurge, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powersurge. Thank you. Welt^anschaunng 08:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: RFA?

Thanks for the nomination offer! Unfortunately, I do have a nominator already, and I plan to run around March 15 (ish). However, you can always co-nominate or just vote "Support" if you want. Tell me what you think. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 20:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL! I have 5 (including you) and OhanaUnited who said she wanted to nominate me, but hasn't replied after that yet. Other than that, thanks for your nomination! Have one of my own:

- Milk's Favorite Cookie has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

AFL

Hi Alex - you reverted my edit to American Football League with the comment that "it appears to be unconstructive". I believe you were hasty with this - that edit was the result of an ongoing conversation [[2]]. We had agreed to split the section off into four separate articles, and a previous editor left these instructions in the article: Please keep this section until all four articles are created; then remove. Which I did. So thank you for your diligence, but I believe your reversion was unwarranted. I won't change it back myself as I don't want the perception of an edit war, but one of the article's other editors might. Just wanted you to know. SixFourThree (talk) 21:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)SixFourThree

"unconstructive" at Talk:MainPage

Hi, the recent edit you made to Talk:Main Page has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Alexfusco⁵ 23:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

How is that "unconstructive"? --199.71.174.100 (talk) 23:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

It 'appeared' to be unconstructive because it edited another users comments. Alexfusco⁵ 23:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... Where? I didn't edit anybody's comment. I just posted my response at the bottom and updated the section heading. May I un-revert, please? --199.71.174.100 (talk) 23:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I meant it appeared to because it edited the section header for a comment that you did not originally post. It is my mistake and feel free to make the edit again Alexfusco⁵ 23:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

OK. No problem. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 23:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry!

I just thought it would be funny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TechGuyDude9X (talk • contribs) 17:25, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

RFA?

Have you considered going up for RfA? You seem like an excellent candidate. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 17:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll think about it Alexfusco⁵ 17:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. If you don't think you're ready, perhaps admin coaching would be helpful. You're quite clueful, and bug lots of admins to do work that would be much easier if you did it yourself. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 17:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I would like to think about it for a while before I make a decision that I might regret. Alexfusco⁵ 17:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I'm only going to sign up for admin coaching. Maybe I'll consider one in a few months Alexfusco⁵ 20:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Need some help?

Salve, Alexfusco! I see you just reverted one of my edits (to Halloweentown (film)), then immediately reverted both it and the "unconstructive edit" comment to my talk page. I gather, then, that you simply misapplied the reversion in this case. Was there a problem with another edit of mine? Or perhaps an edit of another user that you could use a second set of eyes on? I'd be happy to help in any way I can. -- JeffBillman (talk) 02:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I reverted my revert almost immediately after making it because I didn't know you were tagging it as a copyvio tag because I was going too fast Alexfusco⁵ 02:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. No worries, then. Happy editing! -- JeffBillman (talk) 02:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching request status

You have expressed interest in undergoing the Admin coaching program. However, after reviewing your edit history and consulting with a Checkuser Clerk, an issue has appeared that would IMO create an insuperable difficulty to passing an RfA. Therefore, at this time, your application for Admin Coaching has been declined. If you believe I have acted in error, please appeal this decision to User:Alison, asking her to contact me on-wiki and confirm that I have acted in error. If you would like to talk more about this, please feel free to leave me a note at my talk page. MBisanz talk 04:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

recent edits watch

your beating me to almost every vandalism revert, what are you using?--Pewwer42  Talk  17:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I use huggle Alexfusco⁵ 17:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

hmmm, so do I, must be my connection--Pewwer42  Talk  23:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Help Me 2

{{helpme}}

I am trying to move an article page (Coen Brothers to Coen brothers) ... that is, from upper-case "B" to lower-case "b" in the word "brothers". However, when I tried to do so, this move is disallowed ... because the title "Coen brothers" is already "in use". However, its "use" is merely as a redirect to "Coen Brothers". It's quite sticky and messy and over my head. The net effect, now, is: the title "Coen brothers" is redirecting to "Coen Brothers" ... and it should be vice versa. How can I get someone (administrator or otherwise) to effectuate this move? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC))

See WP:RM to have an administrator move the page. Please seek consensus on the talk page first. Alexfusco⁵ 22:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for directing me to the right page for this. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC))

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 10	3 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wales' relationship, breakup with journalist Rachel Marsden raises questions about possible improprieties	Eleven users apply for bureaucratship
Signpost interview: Domas Mituzas	Role of hidden categories under discussion
Book review: Wikipedia: The Missing Manual	Military history WikiProject elections conclude, nine elected
Best of WikiWorld: "Extreme ironing"	News and notes: Encyclopedia of Life, Wikipedian dies, milestones
Dispatches: April Fools mainpage featured article	WikiProject Report: Football
Tutorial: How to use an ImageMap	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

File:David,larry.JPG		My RFA
		Thank you muchly for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successfully closed on 76%, finishing at 73 supports, 23 opposes and 1 neutral. The supports were wonderful, and I will keep in mind the points made in the useful opposes and try to suppress the Larry David in me! Now I'm off to issue some cool down blocks, just to get my money's worth! Kidding btw. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 11:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Your warning of Shannonez

I've removed your warning from Shannonez's talk page, because it was mistaken. Shannonez was reverting vandalism. -- Zsero (talk) 22:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry warned the wrong user Alexfusco⁵ 22:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, just to let you know, I have reverted the vandalism here on your talk page, which you can of course inspect in the History. Thanks. -Tadakuni (talk) 17:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: RFA

Well, after a discussion JJ and I decided to delay it a little more. I will contact you when I run. Sorry :( - Milk's Favorite Cookie 00:43, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 13th and 17th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 11	13 March 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Accusations of financial impropriety receive more coverage	Best of WikiWorld: "Five-second rule"
News and notes: New bureaucrat, Wikimania bids narrowed, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Vintage image restoration	WikiProject Report: Professional wrestling
Tutorial: Summary of policies	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 12	17 March 2008	About the Signpost

Best of WikiWorld: "The Rutles"	News and notes: Single-user login, election commission, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at peer review
WikiProject Report: Tropical cyclones	Tutorial: Editing Monobook, installing scripts
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

• FROM YOUR FRIEND:

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the birthday message Alexfusco⁵ 23:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

	Happy Birthday	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing Radon210/Archive 6 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

— ComputerGuy890100^{Talk to me}_{What I've done to help Wikipedia} 02:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

	Happy Birthday	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing Radon210 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

--Nadir D Steinmetz 11:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the birthday card. Happy editing! Alexfusco⁵ 14:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Lol. Thanks for the co-nom. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 01:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

ultrasonic welding

I noticed that you edited ultrasonic welding a while ago. I'm trying to improve and add to the article and would appreciate help, especially with pictures.

Thanks, Marylee23 (talk) 05:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 13	24 March 2008	About the Signpost

Single User Login enabled for administrators	Best of WikiWorld: "Clabbers"
News and notes: $3,000,000 grant, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Banner shells tame talk page clutter	WikiProject Report: Video games
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 14	31 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2009 to be held in Buenos Aires	Sister Projects Interview: Wikisource
WikiWorld: "Hammerspace"	News and notes: 10M articles, $500k donation, milestones
Dispatches: Featured content overview	WikiProject Report: Australia
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Alex! Thanks for your help! I have a question. What is the next step?. Thank you so much --Humberto, Mex. (talk) 21:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Just wait seven days and if the target account does not object, you will be renamed to Humberto Alexfusco⁵ 22:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, :). Bye --Humberto, Mex. (talk) 23:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

About your advice

I can't! I'm not a registered user for that Wikipedia, and the page is being protected! That prevented anonymous users from editing that page!Kitty53 (talk) 19:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Renaming my account

Hi Alex, please look at [3]. When will this username be renamed? --87.78.178.1 (talk) 20:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for helping

Thank you for your help. Most generous of you. -- Grant.Alpaugh 23:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

sting

Alex, you marked my entry for rapid deletion while I was testing a long chain of entries from an un-link in "formic acid". I hope that my additions meet the standards. If not, feel free to add on. Ccalvin (talk) 02:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't making deconstructive edits

...nor did I want to delete Signing Time! Foundation. It won't get anything past "Lucy's Inspiration" and I cleared it to try to fix it. It still didn't work. All the text is in the edit box, it just won't show up in the actual article for reading.Purplewowies (talk) 02:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I just reverted it because you replaced the page's content with something else. Sorry for the misunderstanding and please use the edit summary in the future. Alexfusco⁵ 01:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, I usually remember that; I've been forgetting about that lately. Hopefully I'll remember and keep remembering in the near future. ;) Purplewowies (talk) 02:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 15	7 April 2008	About the Signpost

April Fools' pranks result in temporary blocks for six admins	WikiWorld: "Apples and oranges"
News and notes: 100 x 5,000, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Reviewers achieving excellence	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 15:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Are you an admin? Basketball110 _{pick away...} 23:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not an admin and I do not plan on running at this time. I will probably run sometime next month. Alexfusco⁵ 23:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed? The please review the advice you gave at User talk:86.29.129.106. Users who are blocked, whether for a day, a week, or indefinitely, are not permitted to make new accounts to edit during that time, even if the technical block on their IP is of a shorter duration. Thatcher 23:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

In this situation, you found a user who admits to being indefinitely blocked, but is asking when they can edit again. That's a very ominous sign. Checking the user's talk page, User talk:Bsrboy, shows that nobody should be encouraging him to make new accounts. You should always do that sort of check before giving advice to blocked users, especially if you plan to run for admin. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

If they are communtity banned they can never edit again. In my advice I only said that as long as they are not banned they could edit constructively after the block ends. I said clearly that they had to wait until after the block ended before they could edit (as an anon or logged in) again. I did not intend to encourage creation of accounts. I just answered the question according to the blocking and banning policies. I am sorry if it seemed like I was encouraging the editor to create more sockpuppets Alexfusco⁵ 00:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 16	14 April 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Interview with the team behind one of the 2,000th featured articles	Image placeholders debated
WikiWorld: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: Board meeting, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Featured article milestone
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning

Don't add that unsourced attack to Brewton-Parker College again or you will be blocked. bishzilla _ROARR!! 16:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC).

My mistake, the edit appeared to be vandalism because of the mass removal Alexfusco⁵ 16:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Intestines- didn't roll back far enough

Hi, I had to roll back Intestine to a revision ten days prior, "00:54, 11 April 2008 66.30.26.142 (Talk) (7,322 bytes) (→References)", because your roll-back left vandalism on there. Did you check the page after rolling back? --Kbbbb (talk) 01:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't check the page because I didn't know there was such extreme vandalism over the course of 10 days Alexfusco⁵ 02:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 17	21 April 2008	About the Signpost

BLP deletion rules discussed amidst controversial AFD	Threat made against high school on Wikipedia, student arrested
Global login, blocking features developed	WikiWorld: "Disruptive technology"
News and notes: Wikimania security, German print Wikipedia, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes	WikiProject Report: The Simpsons
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

{{Taiwan nuke plant map}}

If your edits to {{location map marker}} were trying to fix this, that wasn't the problem: it was a stray </noinclude> in {{location map Taiwan}}. Algebraist 15:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, how did I miss that. Thanks Algebraist :) Alexfusco⁵ 15:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Probably because it was really hard to find! (It took me half an hour of messing around with everything in sight) Algebraist 15:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 18	2 May 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikimedia Board to expand, restructure	Arbitrator leaves Wikipedia
Bot approvals group, checkuser nominations briefly held on RfA	WikiWorld: "World domination"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Did You Know ...	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 19	9 May 2008	About the Signpost

Sister Projects Interview: Wikiversity	WikiWorld: "They Might Be Giants"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured content from schools and universities	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to say hai

Tinucherian 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 or a possibly new friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Have a great day ! -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 10:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 20	12 May 2008	About the Signpost

Explicit sexual content draws fire	Sighted revisions introduced on the German Wikipedia
Foundation receives copyright claim from church	Board to update privacy policy, adopts data retention policy
Update on Citizendium	Board candidacies open through May 22
Two wiki events held in San Francisco Bay Area	New feature enables users to bypass IP blocks
WikiWorld: "Tony Clifton"	News and notes: Autoconfirmed level, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at Featured lists
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, Risker (talk) 16:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem and good luck with the mop :) Alexfusco⁵ 19:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

Radon210/Archive 6, just a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully with 112 supports, 2 opposes, and 1 neutral. If there's something I've realized during my RFA process this last week, it's that adminship is primarily about trust. I will strive to honour that trust in my future interactions with the community. Many thanks! Gatoclass (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

		RfA: Many thanks
		Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

hi

i have a question that i dont think my question to the talk page was a vandal. after all, it is a talk page and u can post questions on it. so please tell me ur response. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.212.154 (talk) 16:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Incorect Warning placed on User talk:24.83.212.154

Hi! I noticed you placed a vandalism warning on User talk:24.83.212.154. I have removed this warning because i do not feel that the user was vandalizing the wikipedia. Some users simply do not know what the article talk pages are for. In their misconception, they post questions about the subject, rather than questions or ideas on how to improve the article. I have added the correct warning to the users talk page, Template:uw-chat1. Please remember to assume good faith! I also notice you use huggle, i do the same. Huggle is a very excellent tool for vandalism; however, its very rigid in the warnings that it has for users. Often times, i have to switch to Firefox and use Twinkle to issue a warning because Huggle doesnt have the appropriate one. I hope my feedback was helpful to your edits! ✬Dillard421✬ ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand and unfortunately thought it was in the article. Sorry for the confusion :) Alexfusco⁵ 17:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem! :) I have done the exact same thing with automated tools, you get so into editing that you dont take the time to notice small details. Just slow down. :) When i did it, another user yelled at me! hehe I dont want that to happen to you! :) ✬Dillard421✬ ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey!

Hey Alex! SwirlBoy39 15:53, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

? Alexfusco⁵ 15:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to sign... SwirlBoy39 15:53, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Help page patrol

Hi Alexfusco5. As you're listed listed on Wikipedia:Help Page Patrol, I thought you might be interested in a discussion regarding the use of the {{resolved}} template. Editors have argued that it slows the loading time down through the use of graphics in particular, and also it is sometimes incorrectly placed, leaving some editors with an incomplete or incorrect response. Please express your thoughts at Wikipedia talk:Help desk#Recent constant use of the resolved template. Thanks, and keep up the good work. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 21	19 May 2008	About the Signpost

Pro-Israeli group's lobbying gets press, arbitration case	Board elections: Voting information, new candidates
Sister Projects Interview: Wikibooks	WikiWorld: "Hodag"
News and notes: Russian passes Swedish, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Good article milestone	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 22	26 May 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections: Candidate questions	Single User Login opt-in for all users
Community-related news sources grow	WikiWorld: "Tomcat and Bobcat"
News and notes: Wikimedia DE lawsuit, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured sounds	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 23	2 June 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections open	WikiWorld: "Facial Hair"
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)