User talk:RandomXYZb/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 18

Please note that if you are leaving me a message about an article which I have deleted, please leave me a red link to the article to help me easily locate it and reply to your query.

Ponoka

Could you take a look again at the Ponoka article? I think it improved a lot and is worthy of an own entry. Sorry about my English though, I think it would work out very well for the article to have a native English speaker look through it checking the language. Look it up here: Ponoka. Thanks! Sudirclu (talk) 20:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

FYI

A username block was needed here. Thought you might want to know. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Saphiragold Again

User:Saphiragold is recreating the article in her user space. Should this be taken to AIV or somewhere? -WarthogDemon 21:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Question

I would like to know the exact reasons why my page has been deleted? All the awards the plawright has received are verifiable.

I would appreciate if you could let me know ASAP,

Many thanks,

Saphira

Here's the link: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Iman_Sid&action=edit&redlink=1 -—Preceding unsigned comment added by Saphiragold (talk • contribs)

WP:RFPP Mormon

Sorry, I didnt mean to step on your toes there, I protected it right when you were declining the protection, then I went to explain and I got like 5 straight edit conflicts! Just looking at the article, it got attacked right after it got unprotected a couple weeks ago, so although the main culprit was blocked, I still felt that the article needed protection. Sorry again! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 22:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I just figured with the page's extensive log and the recent activity that it needed it. Cheers! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 22:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Wedding and User:Annasus

What happened? After several warnings he seemed to persist, and then the block was removed. Tb (talk) 22:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Does sound like a genuine mistake--it can be frustrating I suppose to see each change going away the next time you see the page. Maybe she'll be a happy editor from now on. :) Tb (talk) 22:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of TaikoProject

Hi Gb, you recently deleted TaikoProject under A7. But this article was discussed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TAIKOPROJECT and closed as no consensus. It seems to me that A7 is not applicable here since this band received some coverage from idenpendent sources. So I think this article should be restored adn the problems with copyvio can be resolved with a nice copy-edit. Cheers. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 04:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Interact club

An article that you have an interest in, Interact club, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interact club. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 18:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

RE User:Redbird3295

Thanks, I'm surprised no one saw his(or her) user page before.--Pewwer42  Talk  22:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article

Hello,

could you please explain me the reason you deleted my article (Nelios.com)? Please let me know what i have to do in order to activate it again

Thank you in advance

http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Nelios.com&action=edit&redlink=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serifis (talk • contribs) 22:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of

Hi

Please explain why you deleted the page I was in the middle of creating - Lowline(band). I hadn't even finished it and I put a 'hang-on' tag in there, which you ignored.

If it was to do with citation of sources, if you'd waited a couple of minutes I was in the middle of putting these in / working out how to put them in properly. The sources being an NME article on the band and an Interview on Glasswerk music magazine page.

I'd be grateful if you can restore the page and let me carry on.

Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lowlinemanc (talk • contribs) 22:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Padlox

Yes, but the smaller ones are stealthier, and may jump the vandals when they aren't looking. If you'd like, I'll revert it; however, most protected pages that aren't disputed have small padlocks, or at least that's how it looks to me. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 13:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Reclamation Process

Did you read the darned thing? "This record breaks down borders unlike any other hardcore record over the past 5 years. The Rise's creativity puts others to shame."

It's blatant, shameless spam. I've prodded it, but I would urge you to restore the speedy tag and delete it, if you agree with me on this. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Man, I am really glad you protected that page. I was getting sick of dealing with it. I don't usually say something when my requests for protection are granted, but I have never seen anyone vandalize as fast as that guy did. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 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.

Yeah, I've thought about requesting protection, but I figure it is better to let people unleash their wrath on my userpage than to make them find themselves unable to retaliate, and because of their festering anger turn themselves into another Hitler. Real, selfish reason: I hope someone will come up with something original, like this J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Arabic page

Hi, although you turned down my request for speedy deletion. I request you re-consider. Someone has translated it into english and it is indeed nonsense See talk page here. Thanks TheProf | 2007 21:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, no problem! Have a nice evening :-) TheProf | 2007 21:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for awarding me my first barnstar! I intend to continue my fight against the vandals and hopefully receive many more. TheProf | 2007 21:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, can i move that barnstar onto my user page? TheProf | 2007 21:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, i think i will keep it big for now though. It looks quite nice under my Counter Vandalism Unit message! Again, thank you TheProf | 2007 21:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Island of enchantment

You can't just delete pages with the {{hangon}} tag on them as you did with Island of enchantment. Don't do that again. First check the discussion pages and read. If there is no debation reason yet you have to message the user and give them time to reply before doing anything. ~RayLast ^«Talk!» 21:36, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess the {{hangon}} tag is really useful when you delete the page literally 2 seconds after the tag was placed. Did you check the time and date? No, apparently not. I immediately started working on the discussion page after I placed the tag. Next time, I suggest you wait at least 10 minutes or so since the tag is placed. ~RayLast ^«Talk!» 21:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Gallagher

Thanks for keeping and eye on that page, here is what he said to me--Pewwer42  Talk  23:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Eksman

i was wondering why u deleted the eksman page ? thanks in advance —Preceding unsigned comment added by Will expert (talk • contribs)

Harsh Warning

I've removed the warning and placed a more friendly message on Will expert's talk page. The main problem with Twinkle is that the warning message assumes alot. This can come off as harsh if the user had infact made an honest mistake. Thank you TheProf | 2007 18:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Some cookies for you!

I guess he wasn't just an inexperienced editor after all! I believe the term is 'genuine vandal'. Anyway as an additional thanks for yesterdays barnstar and because you've had a trying day! Heres some cookies to make you feel better. Have a great week and weekend, hope to speak to you again soon! TheProf | 2007 23:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi, I would like to know why the page that I added for Bernard O. Gruenke Sr. was deleted. He is the inventor of Leptat glass, and is believed to be the first person in America to create a slab glass (faceted or Dallede verre) window as mentioned on the stained glass page, named a fellow with the Stained Glass Association of America and awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award. A passionate advocate of the arts, he has had his hand in restoring many of the Cathedrals and Basilicas in America and has restored thousands of churches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom noll (talk • contribs) 20:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Beloved (band) Deletion

I feel that the article Beloved (band) was improperly deleted. The artist in question meets the notability guidelines set by WP:MUSIC Criteria for musicians and ensembles. They have been the subject of non-trivial published works, toured nationally, released two albums on an important indie label, and contained members who later went joined otherwise notable bands. While the article could have used some expansion, I do not believe there was significant cause for deletion. Theonethird (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I still disagree with your assessment of the article, but I would imagine that we have some differing levels of familiarity with the band and record labels in question. I'd be glad to do what I can to improve the article, although I'm not familiar with the process of having the article moved to my userspace. Theonethird (talk) 21:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I did some work on the article to give it more detail and external sources. Because the band broke up a few years ago there isn't really any current information available, such as interviews and recent activity. Also, have you ever tried searching for Beloved on Google? Whether combined with names, record labels, album titles, or anything else, it's hard to dig up something that doesn't just have the word "beloved" in a randomly placed sentence. I tried to do the best job that I could under these circumstances, though. What do you think? Theonethird (talk) 19:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

User Calton

I understand that Calton has been harassing you, along with a number of other users. I would like to file a joint complaint with the arbitration committee against him, as he is clearly abusing other users and repeatedly violating the rule against personal attacks. Please join me in this important effort to help clean up wikipedia. Lirath Q. Pynnor (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Hawaiian Trail and Mountain Club

Amazing. Did you contact WikiProject Hawaii, or anyone for that matter, when you deleted this article? —Viriditas | Talk 11:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Courtesy notice is all I ask. Most A7 (group) deletions lack WikiProject tags, so notifying the small minority that do wouldn't be that much of an effort on your part. Ideally, all speedies would be logged by project, but rarely do developers actually create things with the end user in mind. Instead we get crap nobody uses. —Viriditas | Talk 11:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

request

Rio de oro (talk) 18:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC): Dude read this Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/Mmbabies. You made the wrong mistake into not requesting protection dude.

Re:AIV

All of that IP's previous edits are vandalism. I believe that this IP needs to be blocked. --Jnelson09 (talk) 21:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for Prtection

I requested protection for a page 3 hours ago and no ones touched it, will you look at it...It's about Reliant Stadium.. Reply here.-CiNnAmonCrUchy 21:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Done - semi-protected for one week. It probably got lost amongst the other ones - if it happens in future you could try moving it back to the top of the list, as those are generally the outstandign requests. _GB^T/C 21:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.--CiNnAmonCrUchy 21:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

Why did you erase pancheros mexican grill...Its a national chain

Burrito123 (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

actually..just saw the reason: that it didn't state the importance of it..If you could put it back I would be glad to put that information into the article. Burrito123 (talk) 01:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you put this page back up..I will make the necessary changes Burrito123 (talk) 17:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Are the changes satisfactory...I added why they are known and cited. Burrito123 (talk) 23:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey GB my friend

If you look at the history on my talk page, it appears to have no history except the last message by you. V strange, no? How are you, anway? West one girl (talk) 20:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Actually yes, it does constitute vandalism...and it is a catch 22...and yes you're welcome for leaving your counter alone...Thanks-Letter 7/Caleb (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

wait...you know what? here you go!

		The Barnstar of Peace
		For being peaceful, and extremely observant! :D Thanks-Letter 7/Caleb (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Kraft

No professional appearances in a professional sport means not notable. He's 4th choice goalkeeper. Until he plays, he's nn. --Dweller (talk) 23:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I think so. IIRC, I was very tired at the time and hate using my tools if I'm not 100% sure. --Dweller (talk) 13:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Gosh, I must've been tired. If I'd checked the history properly, I'd have seen there was an open AfD on him at the time, and an IP had removed the notification box. Yikes. --Dweller (talk) 13:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Counter

Sorry Gb, it's an anomaly that promotes friendly vandalism...Thanks-Letter 7/Caleb (talk) 13:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

Hello, Gb! Forgive me if you are already correcting this, but I think Talk:Central Texas Pocket Gopher was deleted by accident – the redirect page Talk:Llano Pocket Gopher should have been deleted instead. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 21:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, thank you, everything is done now. :) Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox protection

About WP: Sandbox protection nomination Ah, that makes sense now. I should have looekd at what the sandbox was before i nominated it, i just saw the comment and figured if protection wil lhelp, why not do it? Sorry for the trouble - will cease the nominations - thanks. 72.197.0.32 (talk) 13:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

WP: Sandbox / Edits at bottom

Sure thing about the edits at the bottom, sorry. I have added a note to the top of the protection nomination page to disregard the previous request. Thanks for al lthe help, hope I didn't mix things up too badly : / 72.197.0.32 (talk) 13:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot dude.

I really appreciate that. I think week is more than fine, I have a big feeling that the vandal will have given up by the time the protection expires. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Please do protect User talk:TheBlazikenMaster and User:TheBlazikenMaster/Sandbox. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I always respond to vandalism, it's no fun to revert it without responding to it sometimes. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

You said some hours ago that there is something we have in common.

So what is it? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 00:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid the spam filter got it. And I can't find your message in that huge group of true spam. You should try to reach me on YouTube, my name there is BlazikenMaster. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment removal / All ok now / Barnstar!

Noticed removal of comment. Glad to know that all is good again. Thank you for strightening this all out and explaining how things work, in the past it seems my edits have been met with only reverts / blocks. Much appreciate the help understanding Wikipedia. Presuming I am allowed to do so w/o an account, would like to give you this:

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Reason: For helping me learn Wikipedia! Thanks! ^_^ 72.197.0.32 (talk) 13:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

- ^_^

72.197.0.32 (talk) 13:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:UAA

Hi there,

Sorry for 2 bad username reports!

--The Helpful One ^(Review) 21:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Castillo de San Marcos

Thanks for letting me know and yes, I do agree with your decision. Apparently that guy has gotten a little bored and hopefully he's moving on. The reason I listed it was because he had created two accounts to vandalize that page and I thought he would do more. So yeah, if he does do that, I'll just renom it. Thanks again for letting me know and keep up the good work over there. I've notived you at RFPP quite a bit and I appreciate you helping to keep the page from being backlogged. Regards. Thingg^⊕⊗ 21:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

page protection

Thanks i'll keep that in mind next time! Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 22:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

haha yeh i've noticed :P. Thanks for the tips! Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 22:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

User:78.94.119.154

I just scanned over the edit history, and it appears that over 50% or more (not including the last one) were spam/questionable links, section blanking and questionable BLP concerns (David Archuleta, Corey Clark, Paula Abdul). I added an addendum on the talk page, asking the ISP user to refer to BLP and CITE while the time elapses (just c. 24 hours now). If you still think it's extreme, please feel to undo or reduce the remaining time. Thanks! SkierRMH (talk) 00:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Creating an Account

I have considered creating an account but have avoided doing so due to that same skepticism. In the past editing attempts that have been well intentioned (but possibly ill concieved I admit, as with this one), have been met with blocks. I have a bit of an advantage in that I have a dynamic IP meaning if things go sour I can "wipe the slate" after a few days when my IP changes. This may even come thorugh on a different IP today. If i create an account I will be locked ino my identity and am afraid I will be chased off of WP, and if i make new accts all the time it might be viewed as sockpuppetry. While I would like to become a registered user I am not sure how to do so and still be able to become someone new if someone else gets mad or blocks my edits : / Definitely open to any tips or ideas tho, and I may do it yet. BTW You're welcome for the barnstar, it is quite well deserved ^_^ 72.197.0.32 (talk) 11:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Panchero's

Never heard back from you are changes satisfactory?

Burrito123 (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

"No edits have been vandalism"

Other than this one? As stated, this user has edited the page several times, and the vandalism is often not immediately caught. The Evil Spartan (talk) 17:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Chuck Marean

Thanks, I think the protection is appropriate at this point. Lottery numbers will be 5 23 87 88 94 1004 1057(*) Gwernol 17:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

(*) No implied or actual warranty of accuracy, sanity or syntactic congruence is provided with the TruPrediction [tm].

Changes Made

Sorry to put this in a seperate spot again, but I meant I never heard back from you since the changes were made(Concerning Panchero's mexican grill). Are those satisfactory? Can we add the page again? If not what additional changes need to be made?

Burrito123 (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

New Changes

Again, sorry for a new headline, but don't want you to get confused because this is the second change to Panchero's Mexican Grill. I added info from sports illustrated and QSR magazine. Is this good to get it back up. I will also add more later, but have been so busy. Burrito123 (talk) 21:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

User blocking

Thanks for your help with blocking a stubborn editor Hcfama due to username policy violations. Cheers and take care.

Booglamay (talk) 21:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The cheque's in the mail... Booglamay (talk) 21:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Protection of Barack Obama

Hey, just FYI, I changed the protection on Barack Obama to indef because once the protection expires so does the move protect. We will just have to un-protect by hand. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 22:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, just saw this. Did you mean to have to move protection expire? My bad...sorry, feel free to change it back. Tiptoety ^talk 22:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Lol, :) Tiptoety ^talk 22:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Okey-doky! Tiptoety ^talk 22:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gb

Hi Gb,

I'm so sorry for that. I'm a new user so I'm still learning. About Paciência Article, please, do not delet, I will write more.... I'm used to Wikipedia pt and Wikipedia en is a bit different.

Best Regards,

Ivan Crespus2006 (talk) 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Help!

I was just checking the blocked IP list and I noticed you're particularly busy right now. Need a bit of help, though. I am throughly convinced that User:Kjay6008 is a sock of a banned vandal known as the "Cartoon Network Vandal." I left word on the vandalism alert page last night, his edits have been reverted and, like the Cartoon Vandal, will not communicate with other users. Didn't even try to defend himself. He knew he was caught. It looks as if the account is still open. His MO is to generally abandon sock accounts once caught, which he's appeared to do here. Still, I'd feel better knowing this guy was shut down. Thanks much for the help! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Coming right up. There's something on the long-term abuse page. I'll be right back. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Got it. Wrong name, though. My bad. He isn't the Cartoon Network vandal but rather User:Lyle123 who was banned for a huge amount of Disney-related hoaxes. Here's the page: Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse#Lyle123. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• I'm really convinced now that I've seen the list of suspected socks. The naming convention is very similar to others. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Good point, but mine isn't a random number.  :) Looks as if Tregoweth left the project, which is a shame. If Kjay6008 is who I think he is, he won't be back under that account. I'll keep an eye on him. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Ya nut.  :) Thanks for the compliment. FWIW, I work afternoon drive on a radio station at 106.1 FM. Now ya know. In the meantime, I shall strive to maintain the integrity of our common obsession. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 21:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

talk:Talal Khoury

simple reason.. the guy is writing his own autobiography... the article is unimportant and unacceptable in an encyclopediaElie plus (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

S i'm quite new here. i tried to find a suitable deletion tag to no avail... thanks for the tip that's kind f you.Elie plus (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

thanks again :)Elie plus (talk) 20:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for page lock

Where would I go to put in a page lock request? My talk page is continuously hit with a spurious SOCK tag, despite there being no such active claims against me. Please either investigate the relative incidents I have pointed out to you on my discussion page, or lock my page so this will finally stop. Thank you. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 20:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand this request is probably out of your way, but could you put in a request user check for User:Kung Fu Man? I'm sure if I do it from my account, he will only cite it as an act of bad faith. The relative SOCK claim I linked you to doesn't seem to be getting any administrative attention, so perhaps a check user request would be the fastest route to determining wether or not he is linked to any of the account / IPs listed in the SOCK claim. I would really appreciate some help getting this mess cleaned up. I've already wasted a lot of time with the AIV and AN/I reports, and would really prefer to leave this in someone else's hands who has more experience in these matters. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 21:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Racist edit summaries

I have no problem with that, it didn't occur to me at first that would be a way round it. But if it works... --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Chumash people

I have contacted an admin who is likely to be more cooperative and interested in the progress of the encyclopedia. So perhaps the work can continue. And, no, I will not use the templates as they are obstructive and authoritative. WBardwin (talk) 22:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not the wording of the templates, it is the control the format --the form-- represents. It controls each and every transaction, with no allowance for individual circumstance, editor inexperience, or a lack of good written instructions . It also places all responsibility for inquiry/complaint on the editor with no corresponding obligation on the administrator to research the problem and solve it. So, they generally boosts the administrator's sense of power and control without helping the encyclopedia (as does several other recent "policies" - i.e. your alphabet soup - established by a vocal minority). In my opinion, templates, authoritative notice boards, the AbCom structure, and several other "recent" innovations, have decreased the community spirit and increased the level of tension at Wikipedia during my fairly long tenure. I find them all annoying, even disgusting, and feel they actually impede building the encyclopedia. As for tone -- well there are a few helpful administrators and then there are the majority. I don't know where you fall, but you declined to help in this instance, even if it was minor. Instead you chose to lecture me for having an opinion. I know, I know, only administrators can have opinions these days, or they get censured by Abcom! WBardwin (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Never too far on the internet.

If you go to [1] weekdays from 3 to 8 PM Pacific, which I think is currently UTC -7 since we just switched back to Daylight Savings, you can tune me in online. Even if you have a high speed connection, you can use the dial-up site. That way, you won't have to download a player. Hope you like contemporary country music!  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: George Stamatis

As I suggested in the AfD, I think this needs to be salted to prevent yet another recreation. Would you not agree? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

When I clicked on it, and attempted to create the page, I get a page that says "unauthorized" with a further notice saying only administrators can edit it. So, yeah, I'd say it worked. --RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 19:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Ponoka (band)

I was wondering why Ponoka (band) was so speedily deleted? I justified my reasons for writing the article on the talk page and I honestly believe this band is worth an entry at Wikipedia. It's music was well received in Dutch music press and they are not just a starting/amateur band. Besides, but that's just my feeling, I feel like I wasn't even allowed to explain the notifiability of this band. Could your decision be reconsidered? You can find the article at click. Thanks in advance! Sudirclu (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. If the IP promises to refrain from doing this, no action need be taken. Shame it will probably have to take the involvement of other admins to get this. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

"Shame it will probably have to take the involvement of other admins to get this." - productive and polite as ever. 82.35.210.119 (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that was perhaps a bit of a snipe. Time for a cup of tea, I think. 82.35.210.119 (talk) 20:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

You can keep your eye on Inchkeith if you like. I'm sure that would be helpful. Contrary to the IP's assertions, it's not actually been in dispute until the IP reminded me of it today. How's your medieval Scottish history? ;) User:Billreid and User:Angusmclellan are the other two active users with significant scholarly knowledge of this topic on wikipedia; if you wish to seek third parties not recommended by me, you can browse users on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medieval_Scotland. I can tell you now the material the IP is insisting on is spurious, but in the interests of fair play and discussion, you'll have to find that out for yourself. We'll see how it goes. The IP hasn't yet commented on the talk page any time recently, so it's yet to be established whether that or myself is really the IP's big deal. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Deacon and comments to my userpage

Heya! Thanks for joining in. Whilst I agree in principle, they're misfortunately accurate comments, and fairly proportionate to some of the comments (and edit summaries) the editor on the other side has come up with! This far into this disagreement, and having been reverted literally dozens of times without so much as a glimmer of an attempt to start a dialogue on the other side, I think my approach to this is far more reasonable than might be expected. I'd encourage you to dig a little into some of the behaviour of individuals involved, and assess the situation accordingly. In any case, whatever your opinion, thanks for attempting to make things better through words, rather than by exercising brute force. :) 82.35.210.119 (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Mediation

Oh, it's a ludicrously small issue. Really, all it comes down to is, Should referenced material from a historical source be expunged because editors believe the source is invalid. Sounds too much like original research to me - if the source is genuinely routinely bogus, or in a given instance seems to be contradictory (which could well be the case), the material deserves to be removed - but it has to be done properly, and should have some more proper academic basis than an editor thinking it "trash". If the editor in question has subject-matter expertise and feels like writing up some research we can use to invalidate this source - or, indeed, even mentioning it inline in the article with an explanation as to the wrongness of the source, that'd probably put the issue to bed entirely. Really, it's utterly ridiculous this appears to have gone on as long as it has, with so many editors being involved, when all that seems to have been required is a two or three comment polite discussion. If you feel you can make it better, please, by all means, do. :) 82.35.210.119 (talk) 20:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe I've just done that :D Wrt snipe, I more meant in this sense... thanks again for the helpful responses. :) 82.35.210.119 (talk) 20:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

need help

Hi, i was wondering if you could help deterring recurrent vandalism to this page, Sitrida Geagea, this guy is unstoppable, popping up every time with different ip addresses.. o course i reverted what he's done, but u can clearly see the pattern. thank you Elie plus (talk) 21:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

i've already requested page protection.. no reply :( thank you mate :)

Your vandalism revert on My user page.

Hey, thank's for reverting this vandalism on my user page. I know it's been a long time, but I only discovered it today. It is also curious that my User page is on my watchlist, so your edit should have appeared, but it didn't. Anyway, thank you very much. Victao lopes (talk) 01:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and Question just in case

Dear GB,

having just seen your ruling concerning my case, I would like to express my appreciation of your friendly and understanding approach. I fully accept and agree that whatever the circumstances, my action did constitute a breach of policy, and I have no intention of reoffending. However, given the fact that I now have a sockpuppetry case in my past - as well as apparently indelible, although quite incorrect, accusations of "nonsense" etc. attached to my writings - I would very much like to perform a clean start under a new name. Since my writing style is somewhat characteristic, and since at least some of my writings would concern articles/subjects I touched on before, I would hope to be able to make such a clean start without being suspected of sockpuppetry once more. Would this be possible?

Kind regards,

StuartStewart (talk) 22:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear GB,

thank you for your reply and friendly encouragement :-) . I fully understand your point, but I would still opt for the clean start; however, in order not to confuse anyone I have discussed the matter with Celtus and will be taking further precautions to illustrate the fact that I am not puppeteering.

Thanks for your guidance and all the best,

StuartStewart (talk) 23:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for your kind information regarding AIV. Would you mind checking the edit I made there. It is regarding someone who hadn't vandalised since being issued a last warning. As a non-admin was I right in just remarking the fact or should I have removed him? --Camaeron (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks! Its actually good fun (esp. when nobody beats you to it).

I'm soo looking forward to becoming an admin sometime..then I can work there more "hands on"! = ) --Camaeron (t/c) 13:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Erwin Morland

I've blocked another quacking sock of this user, as they added identical vandalism to the Dan Glickman article. (Compare to this diff from one of the blocked socks). Do I just add the user's name (William K. Reed (talk · contribs)), or start a new case, or just leave it be? Thanks, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 17:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Um?

Excuse me? I really don't see how that's vandalism. If you could further explain it to me, I'd be very thankful. Cheers! AnitaLover (talk) 21:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Crossca

Well, if you think it's "a bit harsh" to ban a user for uploading images of semi-naked, possibly underage girls, I guess that's your call. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Those images could very well be of girls under 18, which would make them illegal in the US, where WP is based. I base that on having viewed them. I wasn't implying anything. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

As I said in my original reply, if you think the images were acceptable, that's your call. The user appears to have been blocked and the images deleted, so there's not much to be gained from continuing this discussion, except to suggest that WP's policy of not censoring works out in practice to be indistinguishable from a policy of censoring due to collaborative editing. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

My recent blocks

Re Crossca (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log); Um... no... I hadn't seen the further comments by you and Luna Satin. I also noticed that there was no "final/last" warning, and that the editor had only two contributions in their history. I then looked in the deleted contributions history - and found the images that were the subject of the report are the same as those previously deleted (and Crossca was again the uploader). In my view Crossca is not interested in contributing to the encyclopedia, only in uploading piccies of titties. I applied an indef, on the basis of recreating deleted material, so that if Crossca is interested in contributing they only have to make that statement in their unblock request and be unblocked.

Re AnitaLover (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log); I might admit to twitchy finger here, but my reasoning is thus - a few edits and then straight to a users page with nonsense templates. Said editor requests that they not put up userpage for GA (or was it FA?) but the editor naively says the page is good enough - the editor then follows the editor to AIV and removes the report (no protests, or "oh, sorry, I didn't realise...", just straight removal.) First day on the encyclopedia and major trolling within a few edits... Again, an indef only lasts for as long as an admin isn't convinced by the unblock reason - and I am mostly always agreeable to an admin overturning a block of mine, its the way things work round here.

Anyhow, thanks for voicing your concerns to me - and I hope my reasoning proves helpful. If you wish to overturn or vary the blocks I actioned then please by all means do so. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem - with AnitaLover it was the removal of the report at AIV that pushed me to block. The first day I ever edited I removed one word in an article and then waited in dread for The Authorities to contact me... This editor has no such inhibitions, and if it comes of practice then their earlier edits to the other editors talkpage are not the product of innocence!

Tintagel? Okay, but not a patch on the North Coast between St. Ives and St. Just - but then I am biased! Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

216.211.43.249 block

Just a heads up... Judging from dumped gunk, new user NotAHoaks (talk · contribs) appears to be 216.211.43.249 (talk · contribs), whom you blocked a few hours ago. New account also appears to be an attempt to circumvent the semi at the David Hayter article. -- Fullstop (talk) 11:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Maya Angelou protection

G, thanks for protecting this article for a month. However--I'd like to know why it was only for a month, when (as stated on the protection page) I requested that it be permanent. You said that the article was "borderline". Could you explain why you think so? This article has had a long history of vandalism by anonymous IPs, often quite disgusting and offensive. I recently had to revert it back several versions due to a vandalism that was missed. Many editors keep an eye out on the article, but it seems to require constant monitoring, which was relieved the last time it was temporarily protected. Could you please reconsider placing a permanent semi-protection? Again, thanks for the protection, since it will at least get us past Angelou's 80th birthday on 4/4, when it will be more vulnerable to vandalism.--Figureskatingfan (talk) 00:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, this time for listening! (Which really means, "Thank you for doing what I wanted you to do.") <g> I think the three-months protection will help a great deal. If, at the end of the time, vandalism continues, I'll resubmit my request. Happy Easter! --Figureskatingfan (talk) 16:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Deleting User Talk Pages

Sorry for getting back to you so late. But, it says here [2] and here [3] that I may have my user talk page deleted upon request. I spend too much time on Wikipedia, and I wish to delete my account in order to take the temptation to edit away. Thank you. Hay4

AfD nomination of Telly Awards

An article that you have been involved in editing, Telly Awards, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telly Awards. Thank you. Enric Naval (talk) 17:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Sitrida Geagea

Hi there, could you please restore the semi protection to the Sitrida Geagea article? Some bot removed it and the page is being vandalized again and again. Fadib83 (talk) 22:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

thanks for semi

thanks for semiprotecting tanoli. The level of vandalism was starting to get ridiculous again, that guy has a lot of time on his hands. I expect that in 5 days a whole farm of throw-away accounts starts making the exact same silly edits, so prepare a key combo for suspected-sock + indef-block --Enric Naval (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

thanks for your message

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. _GB^T/C 16:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sort it out on the talk page. Page protection is not for content disputes. _GB^T/C 16:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

However 3rr clearly states an exeption to the rule: reverts to remove clearly libelous material, or unsourced or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons (see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons); the revertions are by IP and are poorly sourced for a controversial material. User does not respond. Please advice. Wikidās ॐ 16:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I can not see any confirmation to your statement: He's put his views forward on the talk page. At least not yet. Please confirm what you mean. Wikidās ॐ 17:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for previous message. I have left the text on the Talk page for confirmation by the other editor as to her acceptance. She writes: Mentioning his prescription drug addiction, his long time secret love for this woman, that he was the officiating priest at her wedding, the fact that he plastered her name all over the internet, the fact that he had erectile dysfunction during the affair, THAT would be sensationalist.

Please confirm that this has to be deleted, as by the other editors own expression it is sensationalist and is unsourced. Please confirm. Wikidās ॐ 18:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Nsaiabhishek

I wasn't sure, but doesn't his actions constitute vandalism? Thanks! Mspraveen (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Cheers! Mspraveen (talk) 13:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

your post on my talk page

Your reason why. Do you like supporting illegal activity of x rated images that the doctor postedRio de oro (talk) 16:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Good work

It was good the you protected the Mario Kart I tried to tell users not to use fan sites b/c people add bull on it well any way keep up the good work.--Lbrun12415 17:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Indefblock

how can you indefblock someone who's onlty edited 3 times ever? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• Turfgg (talk · contribs) -- only 3 edits ever, never given a final warning, or a real chance to respond and "straighten up and fly right". - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• • Okay, thanks. Since I'm new to adminship, I need to know the logic of other admins. Thanks for your reply. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

request MKW

If you don't mind can you please fix the http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Mario_Kart#Playable_characters to this one

Racer	Super Mario Kart	Mario Kart 64	Mario Kart Super Circuit	Mario Kart: Double Dash	Mario Kart DS	Mario Kart Wii	Series
Baby Luigi	N	N	N	Y	N	Y	Yoshi
Baby Mario	N	N	N	Y	N	Y	Yoshi
Baby Peach	N	N	N	N	N	Y	Yoshi
Birdo	N	N	N	Y	N	?	Mario
Boo	N	N	N	N	N	Y	Mario
Bowser	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Bowser Jr.	N	N	N	Y	N	?	Mario
Daisy	N	N	N	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Diddy Kong	N	N	N	Y	N	Y	Donkey Kong
Donkey Kong	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Donkey Kong
DK Jr.	Y	N	N	N	N	?	Donkey Kong
Dry Bones	N	N	N	N	Y	?	Mario
King Boo	N	N	N	Y	N	?	Mario
Koopa Troopa	Y	N	N	Y	N	Y	Mario
Luigi	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Mario	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Mii	N	N	N	N	N	Y	Wii series/Mii Channel
Paratroopa	N	N	N	Y	N	?	Mario
Peach	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Petey Piranha	N	N	N	Y	N	?	Mario
R.O.B.	N	N	N	N	Y	?	Robot/NES accessory
Rosalina	N	N	N	N	N	Y	Mario
Shy Guy	N	N	N	N	Y	?	Mario
Toad	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Toadette	N	N	N	Y	N	Y	Mario
Waluigi	N	N	N	Y	Y	Y	Mario
Wario	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Wario
Yoshi	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Yoshi

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Pacifictm‎

No problem with your closure of the above report -- just thought you would find it amusing to know that the user talk pages of each suspect account were blanked four minutes apart. Cheers. – ukexpat (talk) 17:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)