User talk:Scarian

vn-21This user talk page has been vandalized 21 times.

Message from my partner:

Hello, Pat. I love you. --Deaaaa^{Call me Gertrude} 17:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

BOO! --Deaaaa^{Call me Gertrude} 18:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Getting to the centre of center

Don't know the precise "Brit" rule. Canucks use both. Le Francais est centre. The proper is centre.(usually) But we are parked next door to the U.S. and for some of them.. we have to dumb it down center is used. Mostly for mathematics. I shop at a shopping centre. I live far away from the centre of town. My UK English spell checker in my Firefox browser tells me that center is wrong. 156.34.142.110 (talk) 19:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I could have been WAY more of a smartarse here... but I decided to play nice even though some/one of the previous editors is less than nice in his personal vendetta. Since his "internal hand" watches this talk page I expect he'll have some whiny-crybaby complaint on some other talk page. :D I am used to anti-IPs. There are lots of admins who are anti-IP (although if it were well known that they were they would never have been admin'd) It annoys me... but never breaks my spirit too much because in the end... I have 10 times the contributions that these editors do and... you guessed it.... not a bad edit in the lot of 'em. My Wiki-ego is outweighed only by my real-life sarcasm Stay on the centerline Scarian :D . 156.34.142.110 (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Nah... unlikely. When they emerge from under their tressles they will have some "not nice" things to say. And then they will sneak back down under... and wait for the billy-goats. :D 156.34.142.110 (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

Scarian, I wish to tender my sincere thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 37 supports, 2 opposes, and 2 neutral. The results of the RfA are extremely bittersweet because of the recent departure of my nominator, Rudget. Hopefully I can live up to his and your expectations. I would especially like to thank Epbr123 and TomStar81 for mentioning that they were preparing to offer me a nomination. The past week has been one of the most stressful weeks in my life, and I appreciate your vote of confidence in me. If you ever need anything, just get in touch. -MBK₀₀₄ 20:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Help desk templates

Hi Scarian! Noting your recent response to User:NASCAR Fan24 at the help desk, I thought I'd drop by and let you know about the help templates we have, one of which resulted in the response he posted (I assume you don't know about them given the context of your post). Please see {{help desk templates}}. The one he used was {{UPIMG}}. {{Creation}} gets the most use. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Anytime:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Hawks10

Sorry for the late reply. I don't think he needs to be reported to ANI or anything - most of his edits are in good faith, he just doesn't understand how Wiki works. He's slowed down editing now anyway. If he carries on, I'll send him a message about wp:npov, wp:cite etc. Funeral 00:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

could you help me "furl"

User:Fat pig73 great username eh??? and his IP sock were caught flagging up a bunch of Canadian Prime Minster bio boxes. I rv'd most and left a note. Some of his flag edits were prots (Harper, Mulroney, Trudeau, Turner) I can't touch them. Could you "furl them up" for me. Not just for me... for Canada :D . 156.34.219.91 (talk) 14:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:

Responded at my talkpage. →Dust Rider→ 19:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Two Points

Don't talk to me in template form. That is contrary to WP:Civil (I know how much you guys like the rules round here.)

Who have I insulted exactly? When you accuse someone of something, its better to use some evidence. Iloveamerica2much (talk) 13:42, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

ILA2M to ANI

Hey Scarian, this isn't really something to be reporting to ANI; we've got several admins already keeping an eye out here. Don't worry about it too much, okay? :) GlassCobra 14:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I already took care of it. Keep up the good work, my friend. GlassCobra 14:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

You have an email

An email you have. Heading out on to the ice now... flags are up. 142.167.66.181 (talk) 14:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

So wadaya think? Is this an NPA, an uncivil or both. Feel like an RCU. I suspect a single set of hands may be at work. Both have edited the article as IPs will have to trace to source and count the chairs. :D . 142.167.73.151 (talk) 17:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I think I got 'em.

Strawberry edits as an IP here and again with the same related edit summary here... this time as Strawberry. The same IP range issues the NPA vio here... and then corrects his signature here to the other "opinion" in the debate. Trying to created some sort of false consensus to rv the article from "encyclopedia build" to fansite. All edits are coming from Rotterdam. Is this a valid RCU or what? I was speaking with Alf about what makes a good RCU I will ask his opinion as well. Can you assist? 142.167.73.151 (talk) 17:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't make mistakes? I think I made one back in 2005 or 2006? :D. How do you think I should expand the evidence above? Alf says it looks "cooked". So an attempt has been made to force a false consensus. Grounds for an RCU if I've ever seen one. There is lots of edits from 62.X and Strawberry where they mirror one another and use repetitive edit summaries. And Tiger tipped his hat and dropped it hard with his signature correction today swapping the 62.X sig for his own. It appears like thing sort of "false con" game has been played out before on that same articles talk page. The editor has a fondness for British blues-rock guitarists. Both names and IP addresses are popping up in other articles. But the hard evidence of consensus fraud all shows up in concrete on the Taylor page. Man, my head hurts!!! 142.167.73.151 (talk) 18:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

They're defo socks... I spoke to User:Snowolf briefly but he didn't reply back to me and I'm partioning my hard drive to install Vista so I'm busy most of tonight. If you want me to... I can RCU before I dash off? Scarian^{Call me Pat} 18:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

That would be great. Do you have enough? Compiling my whiney "back history" along with the edits? Will it be enough? 142.167.73.151 (talk) 18:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

They're the exact same I.P. address :-D We've got enough :-D Scarian^{Call me Pat} 18:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hold on, upon looking through RCU we need to know how they're breaking policy by influencing consensus... any evidence of that? Scarian^{Call me Pat} 18:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Editor 1 disagrees with deleting the uncited fancruft and begins deleting {cite requested} tags. When confronted about how many WP:POL and WP:GUIDELINES his edits will ignore editor number 2 suddenly arrives on the scene and supports editor 1's desire to revert the article back to it's fansite state. Creating a false consensus that the improvement edits are not needed... even though they were accompanied with clear edit summaries and quoted all proper policies and guidelines. 142.167.73.151 (talk) 19:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay I'll say "Use of possible sock account to enforce a false consensus on the Mick Taylor article". Scarian^{Call me Pat} 19:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

You're the man. Why Vista???.... ick! 142.167.73.151 (talk) 19:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Ugh!

You ruined my beautiful edit summary, I was going to say "revert while it is true, you must provide a source and make sure that the content is encyclopedic in nature" on this revert! Although your summary was nice too! ;) 74.133.9.95 (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh man, I'm sorry... hey do you want me to restore to his version so you can write that? :-D Scarian^{Call me Pat} 15:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Because this is vandalism?