User talk:Gwernol/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

Sorry

I'm sorry, I did not know I coulden't vote on it. Won't happen again. Nookdog 00:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Reagrding the use of a different sig: I used Yadda for a scarsasam effect. I think I'm goeing to take down the vote, It seems like that merical I was hoping for just isint gonna heppen :) Nookdog 00:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for assisting me in withdrawing the RfA. Nookdog 00:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

OK.

Alright, whatever you say, man. RocketMaster 16:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Admin

Gosh, that terrifies me. Do you really think I could do that? I suppose you must or you wouldn't have said it! Let me think about it; having hung around RfA for a while I have seen how nasty they can get, and I am sure I must have made some enemies here, though off-hand can't think of anything really bad I've said or done, except:

1. I never used any edit summaries for about my first six weeks, which were a prolific time fo me
2. I once said another user looked 'ugly' from the photo on their user page. It was meant to be funny (UK humour, "slagging"), but in retrospect it was a callow thing to do and I now realise it wasn't the right thing to say.

Maybe with a disclosure and an apology I could get away with them, do you think? --Guinnog 20:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your kind offer. Yes please. Do you watch User talk:Petros471, or should I copy my messages to you as well? My last message there should give you a good start when you do the informal review; it will be useful to me regardless of whether I decide to go for adminship or not. --Guinnog 21:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Buzzcockian

Thanks. Yes, I am a great fan; I remember saving up my pocket money to buy each new single as it came out. I have everything they ever did, and was lucky enough to see them, though only in 1989 when they were arguably past their best. Do you like Magazine and/or Buzzkunst too? As I said to you about Iain Banks, being a fan can actually be a big drawback when editing. My favourite band was The Clash and I've done a few wee odds and ends there, as well as on The Damned and Big Audio Dynamite. I would like to popularise the adjective above as much as possible.

I see you like railways; have you seen http://www.railscot.co.uk/ ? I find it a really fascinating resource.

Best, --Guinnog 22:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for letting me know, Gwernol. Not sure what happened there...I didn't get an edit conflict box. Cheers. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

My RfA thanks

Hello Gwernol/Archive 9, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grandmasterka 07:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Plot Synthesis

Hello, I am the user that you wrote about my plot synthesis about Zoey 101 and The War At Home TV Shows. It is beacause it take too much space and people only want to know the episodes that actually aired, not the summary of the episodes.--67.34.212.66 13:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Who was trying to remove the Zoey 101 list of episodes article? I'm only asking because I saw your note in the Zoey 101 history page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chrisstilwell (talk • contribs) .

Okay, that's cool, thanks for letting me know. I sorta consider myself a protector/guard of the Zoey 101 page on here. I am also the editor of the Zoey 101 place over at TV.com. Hopefully you can get that user to stop doing that.

I'm going to need your help with the Zoey 101 page on here. Different users continue to edit the page and add info as if it was fact (Nicole info, Dana info). I keep on editing the page back to what it was, but once inawhile differnet user keep adding that rumored info back. I dont believe rumors should be listed on the page, but should only be discussed on the article's talk page. Thanks!--Chrisstilwell 17:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thanks for taking time to give your opinion on my RfA. I can work on all of the constructive criticism given before I consider RfA again. I hope to see you around Wikipedia. Thanks! Abcdefghijklm 21:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

User talk:72.65.235.239

Why has this user been slapped with five warnings, including two test4 warnings, and not been blocked yet? User appears to be a blatant anti-alcohol vandalism account. I've submitted him to the admin noticeboard twice with little results. --Liface 02:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Can user of hoax-suspected article just delete the tag unnoticed?

See: [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HJensen (talk • contribs) .

Conrad Devonshire

I'm not sure if you've seen this thread at the admin's noticeboard but since you were one of the people he trolled I thought you might be interested enough to comment. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 20:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC

My Rfa

I can't seem to get the format to work correctly. I was wondering if you could make one for me? I would appreciate it. JakeDHS07 18:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)JakeDHS07

ip user

Ok can you explane me the logic ,of keaping warnings on ip pages for all eternity?Why don't just directly add it in the default text.It's that kind of stupid rules that atracts vandals.--87.65.186.9 18:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Was trying to find that...

Just couldn't seem to locate it. Thanks for the link. -- Shane ^{(talk/contrib)} 18:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Yes it was if it is upsetting to you I'll remove it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JakeDHS07 (talk • contribs) .

How to spell Chihuahua

Just say it out loud, incorrectly, thus: Chi-hoo-ah-hoo-ah. Chi hu a hu a. See? If you're a non-Spanish speaker, that's usually easier than remembering that hua is pronounced hwa (and that hwa is spelled hua.) But for the least stress, just type KillerC or KC. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Chuck Marean

Noticed you reverted Chuck's edit to the policy about removing warnings from a user's talk page. Just letting you know there is a long history with Chuck on this (and related) issues. In case you need to know, here are archives of his talk that he's removed: [2] [3] [4]. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 23:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't like a long talk page--Chuck Marean 18:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Chuck. That's fine, but you never gave that reasoning before. If you want to discuss, leave me a message on my talk page. Cheers. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 01:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Block on User:62.255.83.8

This brief block was on an IP belonging to a NTL proxy used by many people, including me. Cyde unblocked because of collateral damage, and I have reinstated in with the "Block anonymous users only" box checked, which will hopefully achieve the results you intended without the undesired side effects. --Tony Sidaway 14:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

It appears this user (Gwernol) reverted my changes (while not logged in) to Team America World Police on the sole basis of the IP address without looking at what the changes were. This seems sloppy to me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dhimwit (talk • contribs) .

You are incorrect. I removed the citation needed tag and added a citation. Cheers. Dhimwit

When you reverted my edits, you changed Janeane Garofalo back to Liv Tyler. Janeane Garafalo says the "read papers and act like it's our own opinion" line, not Liv Tyler. You also changed http://www.drudgereport.com/penn.htm back to citation needed. Dhimwit

bossy tone on my talk page

You're comment on my talk page seems so bossy it makes me mad. Although what you said might be a good idea--I'm not sure it is--it does not agree with the little I've read of the rules. I've read stuff like this: "Don't be afraid to edit—anyone can edit almost any page, and we encourage you to be bold (but please don't vandalize)! Find something that can be improved, either in content, grammar or formatting, and fix it."--Chuck Marean 16:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

If I may interject, Gwernol's tone was not "bossy" Chuck, and its unfortunate that you took the message in that manner. It was a good faith mention that "usual practice" is to discuss substantive policy changes, which has been pointed out to you countless times. As I've noted before, you certainly can edit any page - that's the beauty of a wiki. Just be prepared to have unconstructive edits reverted if you decide not to to consult with the community or build consensus first on substantive edits to policy. Cheers. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I think people should avoid name-calling, incluing implied. If I said to you, "Just be prepared to have unconstructive edits reverted," I think you would consider it insulting because you would think it implys you make "unconstructive edits." Also, that '"usual practice' is to discuss substantive policy changes, which has been pointed out to you countless times" doesn't agree with what I've read of the policy. I don't think it's usual practice and I don't know if it would be a good idea because it would limit editing to people on Wikipedia all day. A good edit is a good edit, whether discussed or not, and I'm not sure what you mean by discuss. It sounds like you mean a lot of messages, which again would limit editing to people who are on Wikipedia a lot. I've read that we explain our edits in the Edit summary box, and if we need more than 200 alphabet letters we continue on the talk page. Simply reverting a page without even reading the edit or because it wasn't discussed doesn't seem right to me. If a page doesn't need any editing, it wouldn't be possible to edit the page.--Chuck Marean 18:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

test5

i meant to add test4 sorry. [wossi] 18:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Dukeboy (Talk ) - vandalism?

Hi Gwernol.

You've had call to warn this chap before, but he seems to have something against WikiProject Thomas.

Have a look at the deletions he's done overnight and you'll see what I mean. I don't have time to revert all his changes today. Perhaps you can apply your Admin weight to him?

EdJogg 08:28, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Jacknife Powerbomb

This article is useless; everything listed is at Powerbomb, it's not wikified, it holds no new information, it's written in horrible grammar and to top it off it doesn't really describe the move in question. How can it not be a speedy delete candidate? --- Lid 11:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah I see you redirected it, that's fine by me. My only problem was a wish to keep that article. --- Lid 11:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok this is really weird, going to Jacknife Powerbomb leads to the old article, but pressing edit shows it's only a redirect. What is going on? --- Lid 11:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit: nevermind working now, must've been a glitch in the software. --- Lid 11:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Re; Xanax

I've indef blocked this user, until a consensous can be reached at AN. Other administrators are free to unblock as they see fit. --Pilotguy ^{(roger that)} 18:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Nookdog

Yeah, I can verify his tale—told several times with a slight variation each time. I've indef-blocked his admitted sock User:Ferick as a result, and I'm going to add account creation to his IP block. Thanks! RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Isiah

Why did you block me I have never done anything remotely like vandalism. I really dont like the idea that people can just go around blocking each other without any evidence. The Isiah 21:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Isiah

Well it said when I tried to edit a page that you reported me a vandal becuase someone used the same ip that I used and it said "User is blocked From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing.

You were blocked by Gwernol for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Nookdog". The reason given for Nookdog's block is: "Self-admitted vandal account".

Your IP address is 64.233.173.81. "

which I dont. I have only just receantly tried wikipedia.

Airport '05

Hi: this user, which you have thankfully blocked (my finger was getting tired of typing{{db-vandalism}} is unquestionably a sockpuppet of Philp the Moose, a.k.a. Charlie the Snake ,etc. The simple proof is that every article he and recently they submit is the same article. I do realise that he can easily generate more sockpuppets, but for heaven's sake block this one permanently. Please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anthony.bradbury (talk • contribs) .

Sorry I forgot to sign the above comment; it was an accidental and I am sure unhelpful oversight.--Anthony.bradbury 18:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Nookdog

Someone claiming to be Nookdog is causing hell on #wikipedia-bootcamp. That's what led me to the revert. If you have any sort of op capabilities on the IRC channels, can you please help deal with him? Ryūlóng 01:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Or this person hacked into Nookdog's account through use of his password and is trying to just screw with whoever Nookdog is, or to quote:

“ [9:33 pm] <WIDA> Now Nookdog cant even appeal the block because his page is protected!!!!!!!!!!!

[9:33 pm] <WIDA> YES! [9:33 pm] <WIDA> FUCK YOU KYLU [9:33 pm] <WIDA> GET OUTTA HERE [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!! [9:34 pm] <WIDA> I REEK HAVOC BY MAKING IT LOOK LIKE NOOKDOG VANDALISES!!

”

Ryūlóng 01:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks for prompt intervention

Your assistance, prompt and efficient was greatly appreciated. I bothered my fellows on because I thought it best to avoid personal internvention in a situation in which I was an involuntary party. Thank you. ww 03:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Brennus Shield

Apologies, I'm still slightly ignorant of Wikipedia's speed deletion. Having said that, Brennus Shield should have still fallen under Patent Nonsense: "material not in English" and/or "badly translated material". The article's fine now, however. +Fin 12:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Fetal Rights Update.

I have completed the modifications to the fetal rights page you asked for. I was hoping you could look at it and remove the questionable neutrality label.

Thanks. Pax.

Jfraatz 19:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)jfraatz

User:Daniel 123's RfA

He didn't list his RfA here and I thought I was doing him a favor by listing it there. But you're right, I should've contacted him first. But I'm only human and I make mistakes. I apologize. --Tuspm^{(C | @)} 20:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Misza13's pile!

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page. Misza13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm. Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.

Re: The Angry Nintendo Nerd AfD

Hi MostlyRainy, I see that you have closed Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Angry_Nintendo_Nerd as keep. However, you should not have closed this as a non-admin. This was at best a close decision so it is not a case of an unambiguous result as described in Wikipedia:Deletion_process. Second it appears you concluded "keep" as a result of a simple count of the opinions expressed. However the "keep" comments were almost exclusively poor reasoned and lacked justification based in policy and many of them were from new users. On the other hand the Delete opinions quoted a number of Wikipedia policies that this article violates and presented a much better argument. It appears to me that the true consensus on this AfD was "delete".

I may re-open the AfD on the grounds that it was improperly closed, but I would like to hear your comments before I do. Thanks, 00:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

If you feel you need to reopen the AFD, go ahead. I closed it because the debate closed nearly even, counting all comments. I didn't know that new user's comments should be discounted, as you're trying to tell me. Mostly Rainy 14:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read my comments above. Close debates should never be closed by non-admins. You should not be counting votes to determine the outcome of AfD debates, but instead following the instructions here, particularly the guidelines on rough consensus. In general the opinions of new users are weighed less gthan those of established users, becasue what is being debated at AfD is the policies and guidelines that apply to the article under discussion. If we applied straight voting to AfD it would be easy for vote stacking to occur which is highly undesireable. I will re-open the AfD and ask another admin to re-consider it. Thanks, Gwernol 14:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Do as you wish, it not a problem to me. I reworded my closing line, to avoid confusion. See [5]. Mostly Rainy 14:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not a problem

Glad to helpout! Aeon ^{Insane Ward} 16:25, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Crisspy's RfA

Is there a reason you removed my addition of Interoit's tool 2 statistics from this RfA [6]? I had understood that it was standard practice to include them. Eluchil404 16:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

No harm done. I figured I would ask since this is a very strange RfA in a number of ways. Eluchil404 16:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Why Give Them Than

You keep on assualting me on my user page!! If I have no right to it or can't do anything to it why do you even give them out!! However, the name "Little Spike" is mine and don't you even think that Wikipedia has any ownership that name for one second!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Little Spike (talk • contribs) .

Hello again! I know it was a racist comment so thats why I took it down and first of all I'm a Pakistani-Canadian so I was just doing a joke with my cosuin!! So it wasn't meant in a racist way!! I'am one so I can make fun of them!! And also I took it down after one minute that it was up!! I was the one who took it down!! You people are extremely bossy!! Little Brats!! And thats civilized!! You call me uncivilized your being racist because I'm of Pakistani decent!! How dare you be racist to me!!!!!!! - Little Spike

RfA

Could you do me a huge favor and nominate me for an admin.? Please!!! -Bancroftian

I was told a year ago once I get 1,000 edits I should try to become an admin. by multiple others on wikipedia. They really liked my edits. -Bancroftian

My request for an immediate life time banning was well justified. I was acquainted with the person who had made such vandalisms and he made it clear to me that he intended to do more. He resented my intrest in wikipedia. -Bancroftian

Thank you for understanding. Can I count on your support for me becoming an admin.? -Bancroftian

Alright, thanks for the advise! -Bancroftian

Thanks =D!

For removing the indef block notice on my usertalk page. I really appreciate it. Alphachimp ^talk 20:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Help needed

Help! Vandals have used my user account! They used my account and vandalized Wikipedia. What should I do? I found blocks on my IP and computer. I told all people who had acess to my computer and one of them confessed to doing it. What should I do? Help me!--Yasha I 04:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

reverting vandalism?

G'day Gwernol,

what can you tell me about this edit, mate? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:55, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. The edit confused me, since a) there didn't seem to be any reason to revert, and b) it couldn't possibly have been considered, it seemed to me, vandalism. You've handily explained 'a' for me, and as for 'b', well, we all go a little crazy sometimes. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It's rather rude of me to intrude, but I happen to have an anthology of the Reverend's train-related stories, and I can verify that the character in question has his own story. Several, actually. You can revert again if you'd like; I don't really care. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 ^{(T | C | @)} 20:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks

for the revert to my usertalk. Have a great night!!! Regards, Alphachimp ^talk 01:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you follow me around and look at all my edits? You seem to always make edits to the same pages as me... weird.Dan 12:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

For welcoming me back! I had a great time visiting my brother and seeing the Farborough Air show. I took some pictures which I've already uploaded two of to Wiki. More may follow. Take your time on the review; I realise it's a lot of work. Great to be back! --Guinnog 17:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I.T technician

Why was the article about the I.T technician deleted? He plays a key role in the maintainance of the school. He is arguably the most important staff member because without him the school would have no computer access Dean randall 17:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Oi Infernal Gwwernol !!!!!

You whacked my Wiki. Wassup with your milquetoast machinations, you cannot take a little fibre in the data fields????

Yeesh !

Freekin' flatlander. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.81.77.33 (talk • contribs) .

You whacked my effusive and erudite wiki on dieselize dude.

Oh 2 foot 6 is bastard gauge.....

But two foot is another matter —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.227.184.78 (talk • contribs) .

Datamonitor proof of noteability

Hi Gwernol

Thank you for getting back to me about what needs to be done to get the Datamonitor page active on Wikipedia. i have provided a variety of sources that prove Datamonitor's noteability please see below.

Google news: I fyou search google news for 'Datamonitor' you will see we are regularly sited in many well known publications for our research which is highly repsected and trusted.

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

As well as our research our company is often refered to:

[11]

We can also be found on Reuters see below. [12]

I hope all of this proves our noteability and will therefore mean you will un delete our article? please let me know that you will be doing this and if not what else i need to produce for you to do so.

I am planning to add another 5 articles to Wikipedia about some of the companies we own and services. Am i going to run into the same problem again or as they are all owned and part of Datamonitor will this not be a problem? Please let me know as soon as possible.

Many thanks Jenny Creative Marketing Executive Datamonitor plc —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Datamonitor (talk • contribs) .

Squgie0308

You've got onto me for Vandalism twice now. Once I can understand, but what was the second one for exactly?Squgie0308 02:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Squgie0308

Here's an Idea: you suck

Wikipedia is full of pretentious assholes like you who get joy in being stuck up to people. Funny, because the article I'm mentioning is LUElinks, and I believe the rules for adding an article is that it needs to have some sort of TV attention or some shit, which LUElinks actually did. It has been mentioned on video game shows more than once. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.44.34.88 (talk • contribs) .

Alright, listen, do what you have to do, but my statement still stands. I think you guys are way out line. GGNORE for free knowledge I guess. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.44.34.88 (talk • contribs) .

Here's an idea: You're freaking awesome

Thank you very much for your contributions to Wikipedia, you're pretty awesome. Well, actually what I came here for was to ask you to unblock me. :) Right now it is harder to edit because I am blocked. — The Mac Davis] ญƛ. 18:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, I am autoblocked.

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Gwernol for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "The Isiah". The reason given for The Isiah's block is: "Sockpuppet of indef blocked user Nookdog". Your IP address is 64.233.173.67.

I looked it up on one of the wikimedia tools recommended and got this list from the information I know. [13] — The Mac Davis] ญƛ. 18:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Whoa man, you have got a lot of idiots on your talk page. — The Mac Davis] ญƛ. 18:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thank you very much. -- Mac_Davis

Why did I get block?

Why did I get blocked? I really don't get it... I NEVER did vandalism, because I think it's stupid and useless. --Deenoe 19:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Block message

Since I cannot edit my current section on your talkpage. Here is the block message

Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Nookdog". The reason given for Nookdog's block is: "Self-admitted vandal account". --Deenoe 19:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Still blocked

Now it's Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Rappy30V2". The reason given for Rappy30V2's block is: "vandal from 216.164.203.90". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deenoe (talk • contribs) .

Mac back

Right now I'm thinking "wtf is going on here." Why? Today I've been autoblocked for the third time, for the same reason, but by three different vandals. Might you have an idea why my IP is being hijacked? — The Mac Davis] ญƛ. 01:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me?

I still don't understand what you mean by personal attacks. -Bancroftian

I still don't understand. -Bancroftian

When did I do this? -Bancroftian

Oh, that... -Bancroftian

Can you take a look at this...

I don't know where to report this... so since you are one admin I know, I'll report it to you. An ip user seems to use Wikipedia as an art gallery (IP : 68.11.56.112)

He's adding picture to User:Imagesssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!. Thanks. --Deenoe 14:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Datamonitor

I have no idea what it is you want me to do. Could you please provide a phone number for me to call regarding the issues of noteability as i have provided many examples of our noteability and it seems you are still being difficult. We are a reputable company and wanted to use your service to provide people with information about our company. I think the way it has been handled has not been helpful and i am at a loss as to what it is you want me to provide in order to gain a page on your site.

One of our competitors Gartner has a page with you and seems to lack any citations for any of there claims however they have not been deleted. How is this so could you please explain the difference between what i have been trying to add and their article as i cannot understand it?

Link 2 on our page shows an article on a third persons website stating we are 'leading' so how is this not a suitable reference?

Link 1 was added by Gwernol not myself and is a valid link to Reuters to prove our floating on the stock exchange.

Link 3 references a piece in a book called 'Superbrands' which we were published in and the number of employees is stated within it.

Please explain to me how these sources are not enough? Jenny

When were you born?

Gwernol, when were you born (Month, Day, Year)? Felix 13:04, 26 July 2006

Thanks

For removing abuse from my user talk page. I wonder what I did to upset him? AFAIK I have never interacted with him. Sockpuppet, perhaps? --Guinnog 18:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Please argue

No, sorry. Unless you can demonstrate me that by posting a personal opinion on my user talk page in which i express my belief he got the point i broke the rule of civility, i shall still consider this warning unwarranted.89.32.1.82 18:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Gartner

I know they are notable. Would you like me to edit to remove items that will bring them in line? Please use my talkpage. meatclerk 20:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I rather PROD or AfD, but this is about collaboration. As such, I'll remove objectionable items from Gartner. Please check it in a half-hour. This is my lunch. When I get home from work, I'll review your changes. meatclerk 20:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed User:172.212.21.19

You said - sorry, blocking is preventative not punative. No evidence this IP is about to vandalize again. List empty.

Thank you for your attention on the matter. -- Jason Palpatine 02:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Datamonitor listed AfD

Just letting you know that I've listed Datamonitor as Afd Here. Thanks, Brian 06:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)btball

Nigga What?!

I see you deproded Nigga what!?. Its useful to provide a reason when deprodding, though it isn't required. As there wasn't a reason given, I've opened an AfD debate on the article as I believe it breaches several Wikipedia policies. You can join the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nigga what!?. Thanks, Gwernol 15:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I feel that the article would be better served in Wiktionary, which is the reason I have deprodded it. It is a prevalent phrase in some popular American subcultures, and as such, should at least be documented. That was the sentiment that I intended to express with the comment I left when I removed the prod tag from the article. --ForbiddenWord 16:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree strongly with what you assert. In deprodding it I was expressing my opinion that an expression which has become popular in several American subcultures should not be deleted outright but rather put in the appropriate place on a different Mediawiki project. --ForbiddenWord 16:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the revert on my userpage, I know your intentions were good but you restored the vandalism by User:Micworstensesteinsauce. I know it is uncommon but 152.163.100.12 an anon AOL IP reverted my vandalized userpage. DVD+ R/W 00:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Datamonitor Article

Hi

I have stripped the Datamonitor article down to the bare facts that i was previously told i was allowed to have up. So could you please remove the deletion and leave the article as it appears now Many thanks Jenny

Handface

Are you completely retarded? Apparently, people can make personal attacks against me that are far worse than the one that I made, but I make one personal attack that bothers you, and within seven minutes you come out of nowhere with a one week block, What is wrong with you? Hosfant 18:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

"Even if other people make personal attacks on you, you are not permitted to make them back." But apparently, you can arbitrarily block me but not the other people making personal attacks. That makes no sense at all. Hytorium 18:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I did warn both IPs, although I think I accidentally put the warnings on the user pages instead of the talk pages. Both were already up to npa4. Thanks for the semi-protect. -- LGagnon 20:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the assist regarding my talk page. Rklawton 01:03, 29 July 2006 (UTC)\

Re: Help Desk

"Profanity

Some profanity may crop up on my user page in the discussion of certain films and other media related areas. Is it considered inappropriate? Will it be edited?--SacredVisions 00:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

No, it's fine on your user page. Wikipedia:User page may help you with other questions that you may have. Dismas|(talk) 00:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)"

PLEASE do not hassle me about profanity! Apologies to user:Rklawton, it will stay on my page from now on. --SacredVisions 01:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll give that one. --SacredVisions 01:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Blocking

Be sure not to overuse your authority to block. It appears after reading your entire talk page that you have jumped the gun and blocked other editors for minor reasons on other occasions. Remember, blocking is to be utilised only as a last resort; only when someone has been threatened or faces a danger of some sort I am pasting our communications below regarding your warning to me --209.115.235.79 03:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC):

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you may be blocked for disruption. Gwernol 22:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Um hello, excuse me, but please review the Wiki policy on blocking. Wikipedia belongs to all of us and is a forum for free and unfettered exchanges of ideas, no matter that some may cause some offence. Get a thicker skin. I have not made any personal attacks in my view. Criticism does not equal a personal attack. You should see how nasty User LGagnon has been in the past towards me, and others. Get real, and quit over-reacting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.115.235.79 (talk • contribs) .

I'm sorry but you do not have a license to act in an incivil manner. Nor may you go around making personal attacks. Please read those established and strongly supported policies. Wikipedia is not a free for all, we have rules that you are expected to follow. If you continue you will be blocked from editing. Thanks, Gwernol 23:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC) I'm sorry but calling for blocks in and of itself is considered acting in an incivil manner, and I have read the policies. I believe you are acting in a very high-handed manner and are abusing the authority to which you have been entrusted. I am going to ask for mediation in these circumstances, as I feel that I am being treated unfairly. There exists a clear difference between valid criticism and personal attacks and you are not making that distinction. Valid criticism is "this idea is wrong because......", or "I agree because........", or "I think you should........" Personal attacks are name-calling, or homophobic, racist, remarks. Essentially, you are saying I don't agree with you, so I am going to block you. Please think about this, does this lead to a free and fair exchange of ideas? Is this democratic? Is this going too far in enforcing a policy in a way that it was not meant to be enforced? Are you perhaps in a conflict of interest situation due to a personal relationship with the user in question? I'm not suggesting that, but I'm saying it's in the realm of possibilities. Now, I have no intention of placing any more commentary on LGagnon's talk page. I merely wanted to make the point that this particular user has been quite nasty in the past and has in fact been blocked and censured her/himself. Yet as soon as criticism is directed her/his way s/he runs to an administrator crying for a block. Of course, I expect you'll conclude that what I've just written is a personal attack. --209.115.235.79 23:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

"Clearly she cannot handle constructive criticism; is anger management required here? She seems to believe that because she has a community college writing diploma she is superior to others and is not required to treat others in a civilised manner" is, I'm afraid, a personal attack because you are commenting on the editor not the actions. Placing legitimate warnings on user talk pages is not a personal attack, it is permitted by policy. You are welcome to use any appropriate dispute resolution process - I have no worries about my actions and am happy for them to be reviewed by my peers. I have no personal relationship of any kind with LGagnon. My only interaction with that user were rejecting one of their requests for you to be blocked on WP:PAIN and then this one where they made a justified complaint against you. You will not be able to leave a message on LGagnon's talk page as I've semi-protected it to prevent you posting personal attacks there. Gwernol 23:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC) [edit]

==================================================

If it is a personal attack (and I don't believe it is, my assertion is that it is fair POV) it is of the most minor nature. Please review this section of Wikipedia's blocking policy:

"Blocks may be imposed in instances where threats have been made or actions performed (including actions outside the Wikipedia site) which expose other Wikipedia editors to political, religious or other persecution by government, their employer or any others. In such a case a block of any length of time, including indefinite, may be applied immediately by any sysop upon discovery."

So saying that someone cannnot handle constructive criticism is a serious threat? Does it expose this editor to any sort of persecution?

A block has not been imposed so that's moot. You were issued with a warning, not a block. Also, please review: From a recent arbitration committee finding-of-fact:

The remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly. [1] If you find yourself using this remedy frequently, you should reconsider your definition of "personal attack." When in doubt, follow the dispute resolution process instead.

In extreme cases, an attacker may be blocked under the "disruption" clause of the blocking policy, though the practice is almost always controversial. Personal attacks should be reported at WP:PAIN.

So this is an extreme case?

Again, the first part of this doesn't apply since it is discussing the removal of personal attacks, not their imposition. Your repeated personal attacks were reported at WP:PAIN. Also here's an example of comment LGagnon wrote:

don't see the point of using "incredibility" instead of "credibility"; it sounds like you are trying (poorly) to cover your tracks with a rather unintelligible rationalization (yes, there's a Z there; it's called American English, and it's not wrong, it's just different from the British form). And it's just laughable that you define numerous as "two". I'm not going to bother commenting on the rest of your immature, snobbish buffoonery; college education or not, you haven't proven it in the childish way you act (and especially not in the way you put the trivial before the critical). -- LGagnon So is that a personal attack? Well, I would say so. Did I run crying for a block? Of course not! Did s/he by making this comment jeopardise my safety or my health or my job? Of course not! Did I lose any sleep? Of course not! Will I lose sleep that I have been blocked from further editing of her/his talk page? Of course not! Perhaps I am able to handle criticism, or even personal attacks, and respond with debate rather than requests to "block" or "silence" the other individual. Can you imagine in Parliament: "Mr. Speaker...the Member opposite has offended me.....please restrict his ability to attend this House in the future" Yikes, democracy and the tradition of free-speech are in for a rough ride in future years if people are rewarded for and encouraged to be so extraordinarily hyper-sensitive. --209.115.235.79 00:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Even if you are attacked, you are not permitted to make personal attacks back. The fact that another user may or may not have attacked never justifies bad behavior on your part. Much better that you follow the very advise you quote above and report the incidents to WP:PAIN, rather than escalate the dispute by engaging in personal attacks. Wikipedia is not a democracy and is not the British Parliament. Gwernol 00:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC) [edit]

======================================================

I never made the assertion that Wikipedia was the British Parliament (or the Canadian one), I merely used that as an example, and nor did I say that Wikipedia was a democracy (though certainly I would suggest that the vast majority of editors support liberal democratic ideals, judging by the thousands of articles and talk pages I have reviewed, which is a good thing). Academia must always encourage free and open exchanges of ideas, controversial or not. Debate is the appropriate solution to disputes, not forcing silence. If emotion and preventing hurt feelings are considered as top priorities then the purpose of this entire project is compromised. And I won't be "running" to WP:PAIN anytime soon; I prefer to meet my adversaries in a "tete-a-tete", not try to silence them. To me that smacks of cowardice.-- 209.115.235.79 00:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Highway's RfA

Flower power!

Request for Adminship

---

Thank you for contributing to my my request for adminship. Although I wasn't promoted to admin status, with a withdrawn vote count of 14/27/14, I am very happy with the response I received from my fellow Wikipedians. I was pleasantly suprised at the support, and was touched by it. I will also work harder on preventing disputes and keeping cool under stress. Hopefully I will re-apply soon and try again for the mop. Thanks again, Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 13:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: ALCO RS-1 image

I noticed that you removed MY image of the ALCO RS-1 without my permission. I'm sure that Harvey Henkelman (who happens to be me, the author of the image in question) will be very upset by your action. I'm going to reinstate the image for him :) MakeChooChooGoNow 10:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Once again you removed an image that belongs to me, I do not have a problem with contributing one of my own copyrighted images. Read before you delete. MakeChooChooGoNow 19:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Edited your user page

Sorry I edited your user page, I thought it was vandalism on wikipedia but I did remove the vandalism by the ip user. You probably don't mind but I just wanted to make sure you knew--Gdo01 20:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page! — getcrunk what?! 21:30, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

And mine as well. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello mudak!!!

It's not hard to tell the same old story --- truth will succeed, mr. railroad's cretino. 65.54.154.17 13:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

• Degradant from NYC&SF! U will lose like British empire which disappered from surface of Earth! 65.54.155.53 23:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for that

If they are incivil, I appologise, thank you Gwernol. I was just a little concerned. Myrtone (☏)

Zebani

Do you think Zebani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) should be given an indef block instead? I think it may be obvious enough. — Deckiller 22:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It seems he had a couple of good edits, so I'm all for giving him a second chance. — Deckiller 22:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. — Deckiller 22:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Clearing something up

I think you mentioned a few things that struck me as a misunderstanding. First, you refered to changing my signature as my acknowledgment that something was "wrong". There is nothing wrong about it. I've been asked several times now, and the last time I was asked, I changed it (note: the last time I was asked was on a talk page). At the time I made that comment, I did not wish to be an admin. But two months is enough time to think about it. Also note that I didnt nominate myself, so I have no reason for it to be in my self interest, my old signature was far from being confusing and I have a disclaimer on my user page. And that wasnt in June, it was in May.

Second, about the WP:BIO scenario, there wasnt a clear definition on a guideline or policy to say why the article I created wa not aloud. But note that I did not recreate the article once, its still in my sandbox awaiting notability. Also theres not policy that says I doin fact have to "submit to" a guideline. The guideline states that not all have to follow it. But since then I have seen reason to follow such guidelines, and use them in many instances in my edit summary, as well as for discussion on AfD.

And lastly, you referred to a more recent event where a friend in real life posted personal information about me on WP:AN, and I responded on my talk page to him about it, noting that I have never done the same to him. Which was cleared up and he apologized for.

There are no hardships for bringing this up on my RfA. I only wish to clear this up with you, so there is no misunderstanding. Have a nice night (or day, depending on your time zone) :)

SynergeticMaggot 02:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Now I feel like a moron. In my edit summary of this talk page, I typed too fast and instead of using o's they were p's. Forgot to sign :p SynergeticMaggot 03:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I changed my signature because I was taking that helpful advice, over other editors who preferred me to leave it as Zos, which I still like alot actually. And again, I didnt change it because of RfA, as I wasnt even going to go so far as to self nom myself for another 3 months. I simply changed it do to confusion on talk pages, where other editors who were meeting me for the first time were getting confused as to which one was my user name and which was my signature. To avoid this confusion, I finally changed it. And yet there is still nothing wrong with the signature, so I'm wondering why this is even an issue frankly. And I accept the apology, not needed and no harm done, I for one know that people can make a few honest mistakes :p

Back when I created the bio article in question, I did not find it clear as to why my article was being deleted. After careful review of it, and the deletion process, I soon realized I was wrong. And if you still are not sure that I have an understanding of WP:BIO, you can check a few AfD's in which I supported deletion of bio's. Heres one, a more recent and this one is not much, but its me agreeing that WP:BIO applys, yet on this one I actually say that the bio fails it. But the best I can do from history is to show how I personally agrued for the deletion of an article that failed wp:bio here, where I initiated a major argument against it, and others agreed with me. If thats not enough to make you see that since my foolish attempt to get an article I created god knows how long ago (seems like ages) I've changed, then nothing will :)

On a last note, I never expected that you would change a "vote" (its not really a vote, its either support or oppose). And I did not contact you on your talk page for that purpose. I just believe that if you don't understand something in my history, that it should be addressed and discussed with me first, before you oppose me :) No ones perfect. Best regards and thank you for taking the time to discuss this with me. SynergeticMaggot 11:29, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

nonsence

I think that you should find better things to do with your time and extract your head from your rear end. I think you are a sad strange insignifcant homunculus individual. Please Get a real life you north american loving americophile.Please keep your nose out of other peoples business.--86.139.17.4 12:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

is you startin, I AM A ARD NUT AND I COULD AVE YU, I SAYS DAT U IZ A POOF AND WOTS U GONNA DO ABOUT IT? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.139.17.4 (talk • contribs) .

It is outta there!

For your continuous help to the RfA process, and kind words to weary candidates, I award Gwern the Copyright-confusion bat (to avoid violation ;) Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 16:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

I realize that you suspect me being a sockpuppet. I may or may not be, but does it really matter if I am not doing any harm? I make positive cotributions to wikpedia, so by blocking me you are hurting wikipedia. --The greatest man in the universe 18:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I think all sockpuppets should be blocked. We really don't need to add "is this a good sockpuppet or a bad sockpuppet" process to our workload. Rklawton 18:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not necessarily saying that I am a sockpuppet. I'm just sayingthat if I am accused of being one, I should have the right to make constructive edits. Also, is there some sort of Wikipedia constitution that I can look for defining blockable sockpuppetry. I will look on Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry --The greatest man in the universe 18:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

On Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry it states, "Use of sock puppets is discouraged in most cases. Jimbo Wales has said: "There's no specific policy against it, but it's generally considered uncool unless you have a good reason," and " ... multiple usernames are really only a problem if they are used as a method of troublemaking of some sort. For example, to generate an appearance of consensus, or to vote more than once, or to hide from public scrutiny." That statement by Jimbo Wales agrees with my statement. I have not done any troublemaking whether I am a sockpuppet or not, so there is no problem with it. --The greatest man in the universe 18:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

YOU MISINTERPRETED ME. I said I didn't cause trouble under this account. I didn't say I didn't cause trouble under other accounts. --The greatest man in the universe 20:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Trouble makers should be blocked across all accounts. Rklawton 20:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

YEs, but I don't want to be a troublemaker anymore!!!!!! The breakfast club was created before I started this account!!!! If you look on User talk:The Breakfast Club, User:Deskana advised me and the others to start a new account and make good contributions. I've been doing that for the last month and no one has complained!!!I have not harmed anybody under User:'sed