User talk:RexNL

This user may have left Wikipedia. RexNL has not edited Wikipedia since August 29, 2009, except for 9 edits in 2022. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

	Leave a message
	Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11

Please post new messages at the bottom of this page (or use the "leave a message" button) and sign your comments by typing 4 tildes (~~~~). Thank you.

Thanks

for the quick reverting of vandalism to my userpage! Qqqqqq (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. RexNL (talk) 22:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to thank you for reverting my page after vandals defaced it! I know its delayed, but THANKS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrancee (talk • contribs) 21:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amelialism

I Send This Message To Ask You Why You Deleted My Page I Created Informing People About The New Religion Called Amelialism.. I Was Simply Creating The Page To Let People Know About What We Believe In. It Was Not Spam. Please Reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rorasaur (talk • contribs) 19:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amelialism is not an existing religion and the article is therefore classified as patent nonsense. The article has been deleted in accordance with the criteria for speedy deletion. RexNL (talk) 19:51, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance needed

If its appropriate to request this and you have time, would you please check out comments made at Talk:Python_reticulatus#Debate_regarding_length_claims_made_by_various_zoos and Talk:Python_reticulatus#Verifiability. It is my position that I've endured days of personal attacks and incivility from User:Mokele and User:Jwinius.

User:Mokele has told me "Cry me a river. I see absolutely no reason to listen to a mere amateur. Come back when you have a graduate degree in herpetology. Until then, stop wasting our time" and represents his editorial standpoints as "I don't give a crap if the news articles meet some overly-vague WP rule...we should stick to peer-reviewed scientific journal sources ONLY" and has referred to my good faith edits as "unencyclopedic crap" (all comments at [1]).
User:Jwinius has informed me that I am "silly", [2], "petulant" , "irritable", "thin-skinned", [3] etc.

I've lost count of how many times I've encouraged courtesy in these users. Perhaps encouragement of good behavior coming from someone other than myself and User:Cygnis insignis might have effect. User:Cygnis insignis's comments on our discussion begin as follows “I've waded through the incivility, bold assumptions, uncited assertions, expletives and other obstruction to this good faith contribution. However this is not the place for identifying this obnoxious pattern of behavior...” (see hidden comments at [http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Python_reticulatus&action=edit&section=17) Ultimately, this dispute is about a claim made by User:Mokele and User:Jwinius to allow certain content at Python_reticulatus#Captivity that they deem unencyclopedic. Thanks for considering my comments. -- --Boston (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note this edit summary by User:Mokele "Put up or shut up, amateur. Show me this mythical "outside arbitration", because you seem to lack the balls to use the talk page anymore." I need help dealing with these editors. -- --Boston (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're getting on my nerves

LOL I just wanted to say great job. You're one step ahead of me EVERY time I find a vandal... GOOD JOB RexNL :) Kudos, Dusti^SPEAK!! 15:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:-) RexNL (talk) 15:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage, you caught the vandal so quick i didn't even notice he messed my page up! --Bhockey10 (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. RexNL (talk) 22:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

googolflexplex

hey i was just wondering why you deleted the googolflexplex page. a googolplex is considered real but a googolflexplex isn't?

No, it is not real. RexNL (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

.......yet Fourteenstix (talk) 22:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Googolflexplex

why did you delete this page. Since all number represent an figure and they are themselves not a reality apart from a represent figure. Why cannot googolflexplex be the largest number ever. googolplex is only a 10 to the googol power so one could easily assume that 10 the googolplex would the larger number and that number would need a name. googolflexplex is that name. so a recap googolflexplex is the name representing 10 to the googolplex power.

See above. RexNL (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

just having a little fun

Here you can have a lot of fun. RexNL (talk) 22:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if we get a feature in a local newspaper, will that legitimize our page?

No, unfortunately not. If it would be a national newspaper, maybe the answer would be yes. RexNL (talk) 22:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there another way that I can have an accessible page that my colleague and I can attribute too without it being deleted after 12hrs and that we can directly link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glennking (talk • contribs) 22:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not on Wikipedia. Unless it's about at notable subject of course. But there also plenty of web hosting services on the internet that might be able to help you. RexNL (talk) 22:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

one last question: what if i had a doctorate in mathematics, would that change anything? afterall, a PhD means i can establish my own theories... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fourteenstix (talk • contribs) 22:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know the answer... (or read this). RexNL (talk) 22:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last Edit "Liverpool High school"

I was not adding nonsense, that edit was info about a valid issue.

Request

Sir, the User: Swapnils2106 is disrupting me a lot. i noticed that you have blocked the IP User talk:203.123.34.138 for making personal attack on me. now he has returned with his account. WP:EVADE C21K ^talk 13:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and he violated WP:3RR on Bhimsen Joshi C21K ^talk 13:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I just want a consensus to be reached before the script can be deleted, Why is he not discussing it on the talk page first? I just want other users to know about the issue. Please intervene. Swapnils2106 (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Sorry about the earlier cases of vandalism. I am writing a paper at my university and it involves wikipedia and the average time it takes for edits to be spotted. I had every intention of replacing the text.

Best —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.79.72 (talk) 15:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oldie but goodie for ya...

User talk:DUMBELLS is requesting an unblock. You were the blocking admin. 30 months ago, and I am not sure if you remember him. I am inclined to give him one more go, given the tone of his request, and we can always reblock if he goes off the reservation again. Just seeking your opinion on the matter. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking of school

Here's information that you may need:

   *  Start of block: 18:54, 29 January 2009
   * Expiry of block: 18:54, 29 July 2009
   * Intended blockee: 65.18.64.222

School is out for the summer and this means that vandalism probably won't be done much. When school starts again in late August, the range of IP addresses will be unblocked. Is there any way to block it before anybody starts vandalizing Wikipedia as school starts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patman21 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Dear RexNL,

Thank you for blocking the user I reported. I thought his username may present trouble.

All the best
Limideen 12:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Hertha BSC Berlin players

I have nominated Category:Hertha BSC Berlin players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. ClubOranje^T 00:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Participation in Wikipedia Research

RexNL,

Your Request for Adminship (RfA) process was reviewed and studied by our research team at Carnegie Mellon University early in our project to gain insights into the process. We reviewed what voters discussed about your case, and what qualifications you brought to the table as a candidate. In total 50 cases were personally read and reviewed, and we based our further research questions in part on your case.

In continuing our research, I would like to personally invite you to participate in a survey we are conducting to get perspective from people who have participate in the RfA process. The survey will only take a few minutes of your time, and will aid furthering our understanding of online communities, and may assist in the development of tools to assist voters in making RfA evaluations. We are NOT attempting to spam anyone with this survey and are doing our best to be considerate and not instrusive in the Wikipedia community. The results of this survey are for academic research and are not used for any profit nor sold to any companies. We will also post our results back to the Wikipedia community.

This survey is part of an ongoing research project by students and faculty at the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science and headed by Professor Robert Kraut.

Take the survey

Thank you!

If you have any questions or concerns, feel free comment on my talk page.

CMUResearcher (talk) 19:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please check my attempted editing at 'clitoris'.

The Truth About Female Desire 1of4 48:02 – http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8713466496134688969# The Truth About Female Desire 2of4 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8713466496134688969#docid=1207275495578315833 The Truth About Female Desire 3of4

The Truth About Female Desire 4of4 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8713466496134688969#docid=3090961681362723776

[2008 First time ever - Sex Research Centre - The Kinsey Institute: Summary - Clitoris is 9 cm long and vagina walls need use or decay.]

The Truth About Female Desire - Parts 1 2 3 and 4 - of 4 parts long video

The Truth About Female Desire was a four part UK television series broadcast in 2005 which was a collaboration between the respected sex research centre The Kinsey Institute, London's Brunel University and Channel 4." In a major science event led by John Bancroft, six single girls share a dormitory at Brunel University, London, where scientists from the Kinsey Institute perform sexual experiments on them to determine the true nature of female desire. It's now 100 years since Freud first speculated about female sexuality but with the new technology available today we are closer to working out what makes female sexuality so mysterious. Over the course of a week, a group of real life Carrie Bradshaws, Samanthas, Charlottes and Mirandas will have the adventure of a lifetime as they take part in a series of cutting edge experiments to work out what makes their libidos tick. Fact will be separated from fiction as the scientists discover whether there is really a g-spot, why women are attracted to certain men, whether it is possible to tell whether a man is going to be good in bed and what the real turn ons and turn off are from a female perspective. The four episodes include: "The BIG O, SEX DRIVE, EVOLUTION HOW WE WORK." Ricardodefaria (talk) 07:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 22:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Left-floating table

Template:Left-floating table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go away

I am a retired man and I am not editing wikipedia. Will you and your stupid friends please stop sending me stupid warning messages? I don't know who you are and I don't care about you. Have a bit more care about where you send your messages as I am NOT one of your young friends and I do NOT need to receive your communications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.25.163 (talk) 02:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(delivered by mabdul 23:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC))[reply]

WikiIndaba and Wikipedian in Residence Notice

Dear RexNL

As a Wikipedian interested in African subjects and specifically Malawi, I would like you to be aware of the following two opportunities:

1. Wikimedia South Africa and WikiAfrica are organising an WikiIndaba for February 2014 – a continental meeting for Africa-based Wikipedians to get together, discuss challenges and drive the agenda for Wikipedia from Africa. If you support this initiative, then please sign up on this site: http://wikiindaba.net – we also want to hear what you want the Wiki Indaba to achieve. What are your expectations? What does it need to include? Who and what do you want to see happen at WikiIndaba? What is your area of interest? Languages? Data? Please share your ideas and thoughts on the Community Portal

2. WikiAfrica is looking for a Wikipedian in Residence from Malawi. This might be a position that you would consider. Or it could be the perfect opportunity for someone you know from Malawi, please spread the word! For more details, please look at this page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/wikipedian-in-residence-malawi

If you have any questions about either of the above, please contact isla on isla [at] wikiafrica [dot] net : Isla Haddow (talk)

Hello!

Hello, I'm going from this: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:83.26.6.193&redirect=no (Yeah, it's old.)

I'm very sorry about that, but I didn't do this. I'm a registered user in polish Wikipedia and I would never do something like this. I know that it's my IP, but I don't know, who's done this. Really.

Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.6.193 (talk) 14:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Caption

Template:Caption has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alakzi (talk) 12:00, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]