User talk:Luna Santin/Archive 3

Talk – Sandbox – Suggestions

This is an archive of past discussion. Please do not modify it. If you need to continue or revive one of these discussions, feel free to start a new thread on my talk page.

Archives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 1 « 2 ‹ Archive 3 › 4 » 28

Help Request

Hi, I've found a possible copyvio, but it's not from an internet url... looks like someone copied out an entry in a who's who, or something! Could be very difficult to find the original, he's definately notable enough for wikipedia, so is there anything I should do apart from note the possible copyvio on the talk page?

Thanks for your help, --Sepa 11:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I've checked the copyright pages, and the procedures all hinge on there being an internet source. However, the article was googled and there is nothing - the article really does read like an entry from a dictionary of biography or something. I guess I'll just leave it with a note on the talk page... I'm categorising uncategorised articles, so don't want to get sidetracked... there's a huge backlog. Cheers, --Sepa 11:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

sorry, marked entry as minor and it's not...--Sepa 11:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think I've figured out what they've done... they've copytyped from a dictionary of biography, which they've then put as a reference at the bottom of the page. Should I just delete the majority of text and write a quick short stub? That wouldn't take too long, and would at least get rid of the copyrighted text?

I enjoy categorisation, you learn all sorts of odd things, but there are soooooo many uncat pages out there!! Thousands!--Sepa 11:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Decided to rewrite as a stub, as didn't take long. The user has only made one edit, so might leave it there, as yes, don't particularly want to get too much more involved! Thanks for your help and moral support!!--Sepa 11:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting my userpage. DVD+ R/W 21:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from Alphachimp

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia. With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you. (Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp laudare 01:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

And good luck on your current RfA! alphaChimp ^laudare 01:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Third opinon?

Hi, I am currently arguing with 203.45.125.4 (whom you reverted vandalism) and I need your Third Opinon. Thanks. Mapletip 06:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It's okay, thanks anyways. Mapletip 06:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome, having probs already

Hi Luna, Thanks for the welcome!!! I had an account before but the password was recently changed by someone and I hadn't put an email in to change it again so had to create a new account. Ah well :)

I'm doing my best to follow Wiki guidelines and of course everyone has their varying interpretations. Two disputes are going on over external links I've created and the subsequent deletion, re-posting, removal, blah blah blah. Remaining polite and calm I'm following 'dsipute guidelines'. Could you please tell me though about anyone's authority telling me NOT TO POST the links again? I've questioned them on this but get no response and they have deleted my questioning.

Thank you for your attention to this and I look forward to your reply. Wiki is a wonderful addition to the internet and I use it frequently for reference. As someone of first nations heritage my first Wiki edit was to bring in correct history and information and additions to a geographical page about the nation who's traditional territory was being referred to. This gave me a feeling of pride, so I thank the creators and maintainers of Wiki!!!! Inspirit 05:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)inspirit sept. 04 '06 10:52pm

Khatri

Hi! I'm not entirely sure what's going on at Khatri, but several sockpuppets have been vandalising it, and I could use your help keeping it clean! HawkerTyphoon 09:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Grab an admin ASAP, see if you can get it sprotected quickly. He's using one-use accounts HawkerTyphoon 09:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA

Good luck Luna-San! You'd surely make a good admin. --CableModem 06:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Hehehe, I made a barnstar better barnstar for you. :P

---

---

--CableModem 07:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC) --CableModem 07:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

/me munches on the lettuce star thing --CableModem 08:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message

I hope I've done this right but thanks for your helpful message!

The Green Dragon 00:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 5th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 36	5 September 2006	About the Signpost

Everyking desysopped	Explicit images spark debate
Report from the Italian Wikipedia	The English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 administrators
Voting begins in Board elections	Wikipedia in the news
News and notes	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

My userpage

Thanks for reverting the vandalism. That guy's been after me ever since I reprimanded him for trolling on Jimbo's talk page. He still hasn't been blocked, though...it'll be nice when we're admins and can deal with things like this ourselves. :) --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 01:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam

Thanks for the help reverting that linkspam... strange stuff. Guy appears to be some writer trying to plug himself. What a loser. I think we got it all, for now. Thanks again. --Bri 06:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for reverting the damage done to my talk page. Note to vandal: Phocoenidae is not Delphinidae. --Gray Porpoise 22:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks =

Thanks for reverting my userpage Dina 13:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify

Thanks for signing up for our project! Let me know if you have any questions. -- Merope 04:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage! Hut 8.5 17:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from me too! --Spankr 02:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

It has come to my attention that someone using this public IP adress has been vandalizing your pages. As a frequent user of Wikipedia, I understand how much a pain that can be. On behalf of whowever it was, I apoligize. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.63.225 (talk) 9 September 2006.

Declaration of slavery

It's funny, lighten up esay, why don't you eat a taco or something hombre then you can ride your little donkey pablito into town to see how the civil war in your shithole backwards asshole of a nation is going:) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikfaldu Dod (talk • contribs) 9 September 2006.

Move

Sorry, but what are you talking about? --Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 21:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I thought so but I wasn't sure. Thanks for pointing that out. I never really noticed the move button before. I'll use it next time. --Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 21:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

I added a reply to WP:AN/I regarding the issue I brought up. I realize that the issue is already closed, but I wanted to clarify a few things in a public forum. I'm feeling a little pounded upon for bringing up something that I thought was a legitimate issue at the time. Several people seem to feel that I made a mistake as I somehow should have known better, but I don't see how I could have. On a completely different note, congratulations on your impending adminship. -- Gogo Dodo 00:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Admin

A shiny new mop for you! Have fun with the new buttons -- Samir धर्म 07:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! You're now an administrator. Two pages you might find useful are the administrators' reading list and the administrators' how-to guide. Good luck with your new role. Angela. 15:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I was the first to see this! 'Grats. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 15:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Well done. enochlau (talk) 15:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Those vandals won't stand a chance! :) --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 19:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Hooray! jam es^(talk) 22:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

'FUCK YES' YOU WILL TOTALLY PWN THE VANDALS NOW BUDDY! :D --CableModem 03:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

• Congrats! Well done. Here's a mop. -- Samir धर्म 07:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! You'll definitely be a very good admin. :) --WinHunter ^(talk) 08:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

CTho's Userpage

Just an FYI — I know CTho personally, and my edit was not vandalism. He's added it back in himself, albeit on a subpage :) Brock256 21:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

sorry >.< i suck

thanks though...and my question was only for help creating the pageSuperme 23:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Vandalism Patrol...Sahaj Marg

Gee! I have seem this Wikipedia system at work and it's great!! Thanks so much for your "interception". Information will set us free! I can now believe it!! I have been to the Mountain and I have seen the face of G.. NO! just kidding...LOL

I am now a "bigger booster" of Wikipedia...Everyone in my circle (seniors) told me this Encyclopedia would never work!! I now have some evidence that it does and on the "honour" or "anarchically"...LOL I wonder if we can now push for "voting on line and on issues in a "DIRECT DEMOCRACY"??? HMMMM! The revolution has begun....Information is now in the hands of the "masses"...Rise up, Rise up....LOL...

4d-don

What is with it

Anita934 how many has she created? Sugarpine^t 01:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Meaning she won't be creating any more accounts for a while due to the fact he's created 5 or 6 accounts. I heard somewhere you have to wait 24 more hours to create another one. Is that right? Also, I'll let you know if she comes back tommorow. Can you add Template:Indefblockuser to all of them? Sugarpine^t 01:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!!!

Thank you for blocking Great_American_Football_Genius AND Rzandy just in time!

@kshay 07:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page.--Andeh 08:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

O'Reilly double-standard

Hello, you unfairly blocked me from editing O'Reilly and called what I did vandalism. This is nonsense. What I added was well-cited and demonstrably more balanced than what was there. You're also not enforcing the 3R rule for people who are changing MY additions even though, as all is extensively documented, there's no hint of a libel possibility. You make repeated references to civility but only a fool thinks being civilized only refers to omitting words middle-class assholes find offensive. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.12.116.69 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Nevertheless, you did violate WP:3RR, and very probably do need to read over WP:CIV. You're more than welcome to file a report at WP:AN3 if you feel other editors should be blocked for similar reasons. Luna Santin 08:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The issue is your conduct, not mine. How do I go about reporting it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.149.54.179 (talk) 12 September 2006.

I see you've already found a spot; good luck, for what it's worth. Considering edits like these [1][2] and your 3RR violations, the block is perfectly in order. I don't have any opinion on the content dispute; I haven't participated in it, and have no current plans to -- community disruption, on the other hand, worries me. Edit warring and personal attacks will lead to blocks; if you play nice, you have nothing to worry about from me. Luna Santin 05:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You characterized my *Bill O'Reilly* edits as vandalism That's just a naked lie. You know it, I know it, anyone who looks at it knows it, so don't try to pretend you're just trying to protect the community. You're abusing the tiny bit of authority you have, pure and simple. As I said when I reported you, I'm not blameless. But the bigger issue is you propagating your little ideology by mischaracterizing what I did, which--don't forget--came first. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.149.54.179 (talk) 12 September 2006.

Uh, if you say so. Please see WP:3RR and WP:NPA for additional explanations of your temporary block. Luna Santin 05:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I do say so. There's not a legitimate, factual argument to the contrary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.149.54.179 (talk) 12 September 2006.

WP:3RR/WP:NPA. As I said, I have no disposition on the content dispute, but the edit warring and personal attacks bother me. Unless you bring up a new point or take this in a new direction, this conversation seems to be going in circles. Luna Santin 05:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

It's going in circles because you're simply not acknowledging the issue for me: you characterizing my O'Reilly edits as vandalism. I've already said I have some blame, but not for the content of my edits. You just bring them up as a red herring. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.149.54.179 (talk) 12 September 2006.

Did you take notice of the part where I haven't blocked or reverted you since your return? :) Like I said, I really have no disposition on the content. It doesn't look like vandalism to me, and if I gave you the impression I thought it was, that's a misunderstanding on one or both of our parts. It really is just the edit warring and incivility. Editing signatures and a user page or two didn't help at the time, but it looks like you've stopped that, so. Luna Santin 05:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the block

Thanks on that. Rsm99833 10:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

An unregistered user thought it would be a great idea to vanalize your usertalk page. I've since reverted it back to a previous safe version.--Saintlink 10:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

Thought your nominator should leave a congratulations message on your talk page. Use your mop well. Sir Luna Santin. :) --Nearly Headless Nick 11:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism to my talk page

Thanks for reverting it. Regards. SteveO 13:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 11th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 37	11 September 2006	About the Signpost

Carnildo resysopped	Report from the Hungarian Wikipedia
News and notes	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

STAR TV

Please do not put DISNEY CHANNEL & some STAR MAGIC HBO/MAX PACK package on the STAR TV Article...

DISNEY CHANNEL (DISNEY CHANNELS & PLAYHOUSE DISNEY) is not a part of STAR and they is no such thing as a STAR MAGIC HBO/MAX PACK package in STAR, they are not a cable tv.

You are just vandalizing the article.

Eve215454 13:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

User: Uberrascht

I tried to manually remove this article myself and you reverted back to the old state. I want this "article" to remove all references to me. It was created as a joke in poor taste by a friend without my authorization.

Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.113.168.141 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've nominated the article for deletion at MfD -- go ahead and follow the link to contribute to the discussion. Luna Santin 20:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

How long until this gets deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.113.168.141 (talk) 15 September 2006.

Not too much longer. The discussions tend to be open for about five days, this one's been going for three. You're more than welcome to comment on it here, if you like. There don't seem to be any objections, so I think it'll be gone soon. Luna Santin 22:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Could you block User:Anita949 a sock of Anita934? Here we go again...Sugarpine^t 22:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Go raibh maith agat!

Congratulations on your own recent successful RfA too, by the way! Cheers hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 23:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Keystroke logging continues to be controversial

Luna,

I was wondering if you might revisit this little controversy regarding the Keystroke logging article. You offered some opinions earlier, before you decided to back out before it became a revert war :) I don't blame you at all, and in fact I have been specifically not participating in the little revert war -- but I think at Fedia's request I am going to give it one last go to find a compromise/consensus. It would be helpful if you would weigh in. If not, that's cool too. I hope all is well! --Jaysweet 05:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Autoblocks Vandalbots

Re:

"I believe I've disabled the autoblock in question. :) Thanks for the neatest, calmest, easiest unblock request I've ever dealt with, and sorry for the trouble. Luna Santin 06:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)"

Thank you for responding so rapidly. As you know it is necessary to paste the autoblocking vandalbots message into your talk page. Having pasted it into the appropriate section of the talk page - i.e. the record of carnage caused by vandalbots attacking multiple IP users - I set about editing a short, neat and easy, (if not particularly calm), explanation of how this bot was misbehaving. Fortunately you were on the job very quickly to minimise the bot damage - unfortunately this meant the rational explanation was blocked by editing conflicts. However hopefully the debris left on the talk page from past vandalbot attacks made some sort of impact :-). Winstonwolfe 06:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Request for investigation

I have removed the request the anon made against you, and left him a note on his talk page.--Konstable 07:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

IP block

That's weird, I thought I had blocked anon-only. I just unblocked/reblocked with the "anons only" box checked. Let me know if there are still problems. --Fang Aili ^talk 12:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

ARF

Special:Shortpages is where it's at! - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Question from Boston Globe

Hi Luna, I'm a correspondent with Globe West doing a story about Wiki articles about local cities and towns. I'm hoping to interview some contributors and saw your name on one of the history logs. Please contact me at thomascaywood@yahoo.com by Sunday, Sept. 17, if you can spare a few moments for me. Thanks! Thomas

Bang

Bang (within 30 seconds). --Cyde Weys 21:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Bean

Hi, thanks for stopping the vandal. Incidentally, it's none of my business really, but I was wondering whether you meant to write that you have been an administrator or sysop on Wikipedia since June 9, 2006 instead of editor. Thanks. Bob talk 22:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, righto - well done! Bob talk 22:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

For assuring that the person trying to turn me into Randy Moss was stopped. It's been a lifelong nightmare of mine to end up as a major sports figure. Cheers. Canadian-Bacon ^{t c e} 22:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you for voting, as well as pointing out my IRC activity and my image experience, on my RFA. Thanks to your support, it passed 95 to 1. As an admin, I'll be sure to do all the image handling that you would like to see. In the meantime, I'll be writing individual thank-you notes, like the one you're reading. I hope I can live up to the standard of a good administrator! —this is messedrocker (talk) 08:31, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Helping out with the backlog

Hi there and congratulations on your brand new sysop flag. Now that you are an admin, you might want to help the community in a way you weren't able to before. The obvious example is clearing out the Category:Administrative backlog :-) You might want to start with Wikipedia:Requested moves which I find the easiest to deal with. Enjoy! :-) --Dijxtra 14:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Konstable's RfA thanks

Hi Luna Santin, thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which was closed as successful last Wednesday with a unanimous support of (47/0/0). I will do my best to help keep Wikipedia clean, green and vandal free. Once again, thank you! --Konstable 14:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo 05:11, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Block

Hi; the block has vanished, although the block log showed it in place until tomorrow. I was stated to be a sockpuppet, which I am not; the admin quoted was User:JvG if memory serves - the message has gone.--Anthony.bradbury 09:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I have been editing since April, blamelessly as far as I know; this is the third time that I have a brief block attributed to another user. No, I am not with AOL; my ISP is BT Yahoo.--Anthony.bradbury 09:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Just happened again, equally transiently. The admin, who's name this time I recorded, is JzG, not what I said before. I am being labelled as a sockpuppet of Celestique, whom I know not. I am the sole user of my PC, and have not been even slightly naughty. Check my contribution record.--Anthony.bradbury 09:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.--Anthony.bradbury 09:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Redirecting alternate spellings of the same word

I have written an article about a traditional African house called a rondavel. The problem is that there are many different spellings of this type of housing including 'rondeval' and 'roundeval' and 'roundavel'. I was wondering how to redirect misspelled search quires to the correct article. Jeff.t.mcdonald 16:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Jeff.t.mcdonald 12:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

User page revert

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Best, Gwernol 20:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia proposed deletion

Hello Luna,

Thank you for your response. As you can probably see, I am very new to this. I submitted an article to Wikipedia because when I searched for a topic (Spanish Thief Pouter), it wasn't there. I submitted my article and now it has a proposed deletion thingy on it, and I'm not sure what to do next. Please can you advise me? Many thanks, GraemeGlassfeather 20:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and assistance Glassfeather 22:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

RE: userpage vandalism revert

Thanks much for reverting the vandalism to my userpage! --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 21:13, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

And thanks again. I guess someone really doesn't like me! --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 22:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, too, for the vandal revert. --Mmx1 15:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

User talk:YBO

Hi. You were one of the administrators that have reviewed YBO's request for unblocking. This user is now engaging in rather bizarre rants on his own talk page. Is it acceptable for a user to put patent nonsense on his own talk page? BigE1977 23:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

OUTRAGE

I did not write about myself. You are totally way off base. I disclosed my bias and added PA's side. There is not one word in this article giving the other side.

The WASHINGTON POST article allows PA people to comment what makes me different? I would be wrong if I made a comment without disclosing my bias. You handled this in a TOTALLY UNPROFESSIONAL way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Edward Saint-Ivan (talk • contribs) 18 September 2006.

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. I appreciate it. Amphytrite 00:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Blocked.

Hello. My username is Blondlieut. When I sign in from AOL, I am blocked. When I sign in from anywhere else, I am not blocked. It appears as if you have blocked anyone and everyone who uses Wikipedia from AOL. I have now signed in from Firefox and have no problem.  :)

I'm not sure why; I'm certain you have good reasons. I'm certain someone was doing something un-good who has signed in from AOL (I saw a specific username pop up when I saw that my IP address-- the general AOL address-- was blocked). But perhaps there is a less onerous, less drastic way to go about doing what you're doing, rather than blocking everyone who happens to take a peak at Wikipedia who happens to be on AOL at the same time. That might apply to, oh I don't know, one or two folks who aren't the individual you are seeking to block.

Thank you so much for your attention to this matter.

Richard Hurst Blondlieut blondlieut@aol.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blondlieut (talk • contribs) 03:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

My talk page

Thanks. I never even saw that. It's usually the user page. I must have deleted something dear to them. Are you going to indefinite block them or shall I? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

And they are blocked. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Stormfront content dispute and vandalism allegations

Luna, I noticed you just denied that my recent edit was vandalism. Could you maybe help explain to Stick to the Facts where he's going wrong in his understanding of that term and the related policies? He's issued repeated vandalism warnings to several users in the little bit as a result of the on-going content dispute. I've tried to explain why our edits aren't vandalism, but we haven't had much luck in successfully communicating that to him. I imagine that as he's a little hesistant to accept our word for things, seeing as how we're on the other side of content dispute (and thereby find ourselves in the unenviable task of removing his criticisms of a racist, neo-nazi hate site). I suspect if I got into a debate with someone defending a neo-nazi hate site, I'd have a pretty hard time trusting them too!

So, if you're not busy, could you help clarify the term for him, since you've looked the edit over?

--Alecmconroy 09:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Alecmconroy - he and UberCryxic have been tag-teaming me and agreeing to take turns scrapping my content to avoid the 3RR. This is a form of sock puppetry, I believe. Their talk pages show messages between them discussing it.

I have not recruited nor will I recruit other people to help me out because it is against policy and I don't need to. At the same time, I think these people need to have it explained to them that just because 3 people disagree with one person, they do not win, particularly when that one person has a fact with 11 cites and there is no argument against it. Stick to the Facts 09:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the reply on my talk page. Unfortunately they are unwilling to accept the sentence in any form, even after I addressed all of their concerns. I now realize that their real concern with it is that they don't want the fact to be on display, but I'm not aware that is grounds for removal under the wikipedia guidelines.

I'll take the next step and try to get it resolved, lets see. In the meanwhile - and I ask this will all due respect - would you kindly ask them not to take up their 3RR type complaints with you directly, but rather to have them go through the normal process like everyone else? I believe that constitutes forum shopping - not that I'm suggesting that you are biased or anything, it just doesn't look good to an outsider, etc. Thanks, Stick to the Facts 09:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Luna-- thanks for your comment. Since I have you here, let me ask you something I've been puzzled about myself. Someone's repeatedly editing against consensus. They've got 3 reversions, you have 0-1, and there's been LOT of talk about the situation. SHOULD you edit war to the point to push them over 3, so that the community can impose limits on them, via the 3RR? Or should you just refuse to edit war yourself and leave the against-consensus content in?

It's a question I've wondered since long before this recent dispute came up. I mean, if you do revert, you're contributing to an edit war. If you don't revert, you're just leaving the mess for someone else to clean up, and you're making it harder for people to learn that repeated against-consensus edits are inappropriate.

Probably more of a village pump question,but, since i've bugged you enough tonight, I thought I'd bug you again to ask your thoughts-- not on this specific dispute really, as much as the in-general. Thanks for helping out.

--Alecmconroy 09:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page. --Nlu (talk) 16:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

biosphere-expeditions.org

Thank you for being vigilant. Please visit www.biosphere-expeditions.org to see that this is for a non-profit organisation, so I would argue that this is neither advertising nor spam-linking. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.170.56.231 (talk) 19 September 2006.

Thank you for your comments. I notice, for example, that Peru already contained a volunteering link, and still does in its external link section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MatthiasHammer (talk • contribs) 19 September 2006.

I further note that Wikipedia quotes "External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MatthiasHammer (talk • contribs) 19 September 2006.

As such I would be very grateful if you could be so kind as to undo all the undos that you have made of my edits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MatthiasHammer (talk • contribs) 19 September 2006.

Still disagree, but as a newcomer, I guess I need to do more research. No harm meant, anyway, and nice to talk to you. I am now at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MatthiasHammer.

P.S. the link in the Peru article is "Volunteer in Peru" and in the external link section.

Signpost updated for September 18th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 38	18 September 2006	About the Signpost

"Citizendium" project aims to rival Wikipedia	Report from the Simple English Wikipedia
News and notes	In the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Edits to Rush (band)

Hi Luna - Thank you for looking at the edits made by the Anon IP to the Rush article. The frequent changing from "Canadian" to "North American" band is quite perverse - it is roughly the equivalent of saying the Beach Boys are a "North American" rather than U.S. band - but I have taken your point to heart and have initiated a discussion on the talk page. The Anon, based on his talk page, is unlikely to respond; but I will assume good faith. Risker 06:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your best efforts in keeping Wikipedia vanity-free... keep your finger on that delete button! :)

I don't give these out as often as I should. Another user gave this to me earlier today and I see your name popping up a lot on the blocked users page. Thought you deserved it as well. Best, Lucky 6.9 06:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi - thanks for reverting that vandalism to my user page :) Martinp23 16:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Cyclone: derivation of the term is vandalized again

I don't know how to revert it but it appears you do.

Ivan (Igodard, 19 September 2006)

Repair Botany

When I click on either botany or botanist I receive the message "Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name" and I cannot gain access to the article. I would be like to have someone fix that condition so that I can access the article. Botany and botanist have been inaccessible to me for at least 30 days. Something is improper in the portion of the code that determines whether or not an article exists. Thank you. Velocicaptor 18:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Things are OK, now. I'm still using the same Konqueror browser. The link at John Bretland Farmer works ideally. I had wondered if the textual closeness of the word "bot" was affecting the link. There are many "bots" in Wikipedia. Thank you. Velocicaptor 00:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

application request

I am looking for an application for work on oil platform on sea and physical requirements of canditates interested about it. Can some link be added on the list on the right side of main page? Or, please, give me an instruction how i can find it.

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gimka (talk • contribs) 20 September 2006.

Doug Jernigan

I'm new to wikiepedia. Did you or someone else delete Doug Jernigan? I'm trying to understand this process, I keep seeing different individuals, relating to this page. I'm trying to understand What, Where, Why and How? In regards as to this wikiepedia thing.

It seems I have to keep explaining over and over to a host of different individuals as to why Doug Jernigan a renown steel guitarist, inducted into the Steel Guitar Hall of Fame should be included on wikiepedia, what and how do I contribute informative information, Thanks --Beachbumz 13:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)Beachbumz

September Esperanza Newsletter

Program Feature: Barnstar Brigade Here in Wikipedia there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go unappreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go unnoticed. As Esperanzians we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. This is where the Barnstar Brigade comes in. The object of this program is to seek out the people which deserve a Barnstar, and help them feel appreciated. With your help, we can recognize more dedicated editors! What's New? September elections are upon us! Anyone wishing to be a part of the Advisory Council may list themselves as a candidate from 18 September until 24 September, with the voting taking place from 25 September to 30 September. Those who wish to help with the election staff should also list themselves! Appreciation Week, a program currently in development, now has its own subpage! Share your good ideas on how to make it awesome there! The Esperanza front page has been redesigned! Many thanks to all who worked hard on it. Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.

The last AC meeting (full log) The proposals page has been updated, with some proposals being archived. Since the program in development Appretiaion week is getting lots of good ideas, it now has its own subpage. The September 2006 Council elections will open for nominations on 18 September 2006. The voting will run from 25 September 2006 until 30 September 2006. If you wish to be a candidate or a member of the elections staff, please list yourself! The new Esperanza front page design has but put up - many thanks to all who worked on it! TangoTango has written a script for a bot that will list new members of Esperanza, which will help those who welcome new Esperanzains greatly! Signed... Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, Freakofnurture, and Titoxd 04:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.

2 Warnings question

Hi, I like the warning/block message you left with 64.123.118.46 I've not seen that one before, and I've not heard of a two strikes policy, but I have to say I more than certainly approve. Just a quick question though does this apply to non-admins who frequently report vandals. There are times I feel it's the most pointless job in the world to give 3 or 4 warnings to someone before I can report them to WP:AIV, to meet a certain level of etiquette, etc when it's obvious that it's just going to carry on until a block's administered, or they reach test4 playing some form of wikipedia chicken. Cheers for any info/thoughts. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 21:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Please ban...

I am an acquaintance of user: the omnipotent hedgehog and know for a fact that a sock puppet of his is "worshiper of tauret," worshiper possibly being spelled with double p's and tauret possibly being spelled tawret. --The Great Honker 03:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the information and advice you left on my user page regarding changing my username. James68 09:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Was getting tired of their crap. I could have, but really didn't want to go all night trying to fix it back. Took them about 20 seconds before going at it again... They are persistent buggers AndresLucioni 05:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)AndresLucioni

Unblock notice

I unblocked what seemed a clear collateral damage case, User talk:Nemein. Hope this does not present a problem. JesseW, the juggling janitor 20:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

IP 82.198.250.16, WP:AIV & blocks

Hello. I reported anon 82.198.250.16 to WP:AIV this afternoon. User:Glen_S had placed a "Final warning before you are blocked" message on their talk page, and they went on to vandalise and threaten (including me) about half a dozen more times (contribs). You removed the request for intevention without blocking the user. Now, I am not in any sense appealing your decision, but it would be good to have some idea of why you didn't block the user, so that in future I can tailor my warnings to users and requests to WP:AIV more appropriately. Thanks and regards, Mr Stephen 17:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, and there's no need for a second opinion, yours is fine. It was mostly just good timing on the user's part, then. But, given past history, I suspect they'll be back with more of the same. Regards, Mr Stephen 21:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

looking for advice

i'm relatively new to this community. you're obvioulsy a more experienced editor. i was wondering if you could give me your advice about a couple of recent changes that i've made. for example, i recently deleted the 'parodies and spoofs' section of the cheney biography. i felt that in a biography that was already running long, this was not essential information. i have since received messages (from both sides of the political spectrum!) saying i was compromising the article by removing the hard work of others. i'm just curious if you have any thoughts about that kind of edit--i'm committed to doing my part to keep political entries clean and objective--something you also seem interested in--and you have more experience than i. anyway, no need to respond to this if there's no time. but i'm trying to gather some wisdom from a few more experienced editors...all bestBenzocane 18:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 25th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 39	25 September 2006	About the Signpost

Erik Möller declared winner in Board of Trustees election	Wikimania 2007 to be held in Taipei
Arbitration clerk Tony Sidaway resigns	Report from the Dutch Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

User page

Thanks for the revert. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Hellow new friend

What sarcasm were you talking about?

We have never met before. Normally, when I first meet someone in the real world or online, I say "How are you?". If I were you, I might say "Perhaps I have missed what's going on, and I realize you might have been wronged. I don't mean to be rude, but perhaps if you explained what is going on, I might be able to help. For your information, I have an official role within Wikipedia, and I would like to make the community a better place, so maybe I can help"

Perhaps in your next contact with me, you will be straight forward and direct, and not jump to conclusions. Perhaps you will stop to think to yourself "Maybe this person has right to be annoyed. Let me be constructive and listen, rather than try to offer advice right now. Then, after I hear from this person, maybe I will offer some advice."

Remember, always assume good faith.

--Nottingham 23:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair Enough

Thanks for the constructive message. As you might expect, I think that Bite instead of Don't Bite has been applied to me.

Ah well. Wikipedia is just a place to waste time. I can read blogs, newspapers, play online card games or board games instead. No need to bother contributing after one administrator of some sort accused me of vandalism for no valid reason, and then didn't bother to apologize and admit to a mistake (as vandalism is a serious Wikipedia offense, I assume leveling the false charge of vandalism is considered noxious). Then, another administrator inserted himself into the situation, thereby making it worse, and also tried to prove his masculinity (that's what it seemed like, regardless of whether he/she is male or female) by "blocking" me for a day and a half. Of course, this self-important administrator (and I am well aware he/she may be reading this) didn't deign to apologize or try to suggest to the other administrator (of the false vandal charge) to apologize or reach out (I respect that you did reach out a second time in a friendly and constructive way; too bad you seem a rarity in the world of Wikipedia).

--Nottingham 00:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

I want to say thanks for blocking 71.135.185.171 based upon the [Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-09-27 External Link Discrimination discussion]. It's a pain to have to deal with his IPs and accounts. I would like to inform you though of his other handles: 68.124.30.103, 64.195.90.51 and his personal account, Calrog. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page, FYI I've blocked that vandal, again. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Complaint

I would like to bring a formal complaint against Emcee. This user has an unhealthy obsession with me, posting comments about me across Wikipedia, on multiple user's Talk Pages and an AfD. Notably, I don't mention this obsessive person except in direct address to him/her and in address to one other person who I asked to intercede, i.e., I have not been obsessive "stalking" (in a virtual sense on Wikipedia) this person. Emcee, on the other hand, is obsessively checking every Contribution that I make, and then running around to those sites and putting up comments.

I would be glad to escalate this as appropriate.

Emcee will presumably be sending you a very lengthy and obsessive comment about me, since Emcee is stalking me (in a virtual sense on Wikipedia) by checking my Contributions. Emcee will likely be posting in multiple places in Wikipedia links to this Complaint.

Emcee has turned an AfD into a diatribe against me instead of a simple discussion of whether or not to keep the page.

I suggested in a place that Emcee already has read that Emcee should start an entry called "Reasons to Detest Nottingham". I would not request an AfD for such an entry, and would argue that it should be kept if he/she creates it.

Notably, I have followed Wikipedia guidelines by avoiding mentioning this person. Unfortuantely, Emcee has no respect for Wikipedia guidelines, and continues making me a subject of discussion in various locations on Wikipedia.

Thanks for your time.

And for Emcee, I think it is time that you posted some more links about me across Wikipedia. There aren't enough. Don't focus on facts. Focus on me.

--Nottingham 02:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

user creations

Hi - Thanks for the help. I actually need to log off about now, so if you could watch this guy for a while I'd appreciate it. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Promotional images need sources too

Hi, just wanted to remind you about our sourcing policy for images. Please avoid doing this unless you also actualy add the required source info (if the source is obvious and you think the person (me in this case)/bot who tagged is just beeing silly, just humor them and add the source anyway, if it's obvious that should be easy enough). Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 10:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Image sources

Hi. You've been removing the {{no source}} warning from a lot of images recently (often with the edit summary 'sourced') without actually providing any sources. Please don't do this. Our copyright situation with fair use images is complicated enough already. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 11:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. The basic rule of thumb for images is that we need both a source (where the image came from) and a copyright notice. (The reason is that without details of the source the copyright status often isn't verifiable: there are obvious exceptions such as the covers of books and so on where it's obvious what the source of the image is). It's also helpful if images being used under 'fair use' have a detailed rationale listed on the image description page for each and every use. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 09:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lubbock af2

I have noticed when you closed the above AfD, you did not remove the category template, "REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD". By deleting this when closing it pulls the discussion out of the category. I have deleted it from this discussion, but if you could review any other closures you have done recently and remove the tag from them it would be greatly appreicated. This is a fairly recent change. The guideline is at WP:AFDC. I have been going through the listing in each of the categories CAT:AFD and removing the tag from pages that are closed and adding the approriate category code for those in the uncatagorised group. Thanks.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 14:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Intelligent Design Talk

Hello, could you please go here and give us your opinion on my proposed change to the article? Thanks! Bagginator 10:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Luna, you do not have to go and put in your two cents over at the Intelligent Design article, but could you at least let me know that you saw this message? Thanks again. Bagginator 09:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

User talk:24.60.198.4

Actually, that is my IP, and I am just hastily changing my talk page because I am currently trying to figure out bugs (with the help of Topaz) in my usermessagechanger.js. I do this to display the "new messages" banner, so I can see if the bugs are fixed. Sorry for the confusion. I'll leave a real message on my talk page next time to prevent confusion. -- TheGreatLlama ^{(speak to the Llama!)} 23:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

'samarpan meditation' - please help identify the deletion cause.

Hi Luna,

Can you please let me know the reason for deleting 'samarpan meditation' topic, so we can submit proper request to have it in Wikipedia. I am reachable on http://www.samarpanmeditation.org/ContactUs.html

thanks, Diwakar

No consensus

I'm just curious how you considered the vote "no consensus" with a 12 delete and 7 keep(two votes are from users that having been following my edits). Does a 11 year old article that called the subject not disguished really pass the notability test? Arbusto 06:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald M. Kendrick. Please read that many people wanted to keep the article because had played Carnegie hal, but as another user pointed out the promoter contracts and allows people to play there for a fee. Arbusto 07:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific -- which discussion are you referring to? I'm happy to explain when I have the time, though you may want to just take your issues to deletion review if you're not satisfied with my answers. Luna Santin 07:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thought that might be it, but better to be sure. So. As you're probably aware, consensus isn't about vote-counting, but a weighing of arguments; while a strict vote count would have led me to delete the article, many of the delete votes didn't look to be very thought out. The subject appears to be a borderline notability case. The article isn't cruft, and has some verifiable sources. I was leaning toward "delete" and "no consensus" results, which leads me to close as "no consensus" -- if I can't decide which way consensus was headed, it indicates to me that consensus isn't settled. You're welcome to take the matter to WP:DRV if you like. Luna Santin 07:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I never asserted my argument based on votes. Please explain what part of WP:BIO he meets. The main keep argument comes from a user who is following my afds[3] and removes my comments from his talk[4]. (I will be dealing with that matter through other channels. _

Note JJay claims, and three people vote based on his comments, he played Caregnie Hall as meeting notability. However, the promoter who booked this subject will lease out the building and let people play for a fee. As discussed by another user who voted delete. Arbusto 07:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Your opening statement, "I'm just curious how you considered the vote 'no consensus' with a 12 delete and 7 keep" implies a counting of votes, is why I mentioned that; but, fair enough, you weren't. Beyond that, please do consider DRV. While I am interested in seeing your concerns addressed, I'd prefer to allow for more community input. Luna Santin 07:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The point was nearly twice as many voted for delete. However, the second line is important as well: "Does a 11 year old article that called the subject not disguished really pass the notability test?" Is that what you are basing your "borderline notability case"? Is that what you are using to judge WP:BIO? Arbusto 07:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

That reeeeally sounds like vote counting. News, tours, appearances -- these are the sorts of things I look for. He's at least more notable than some huge number of the pages I run across in deletion discussions. Anyway, please, DRV. Luna Santin 07:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The majority of keep votes were based on an article this person played Carengie Hall 11 years ago. The paper claimed he was hired because he was "inexpensive not distinguished." Moreover, as another user noted on the deletion that the promoter who hired Kendrick specializes in bringing out-of-town choirs to NY to sing there " - for a fee". Are the tours notable? Or did he simply hirer a tour agent and spent his two week vacation in Europe? I opened the DRV, but am still curious as to what WP:V and BIO policies used. Oh well. --Arbusto 07:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

On further research the creator of this article put the afd at the Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board, that is the same user who removed the afd tag. Arbusto 08:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

In regards to my defamatory remarks

How would I make them non defamatory? I didnt use the name, only the initials which could be anyone or anything. 58.107.175.127 09:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

regarding warningmessage on User talk:68.100.230.189

please do not replace my warning messages with your own, add new ones after. _→AzaToth 19:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 2nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 40	2 October 2006	About the Signpost

New speedy deletion criteria added	News and notes
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Wells

Sorry! Was trying to do this at the Cork AfD, not the Wells one, and it got really messed up. PT ^(s-s-s-s) 21:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Block

thanks for that block u did on an ip Jeffklib 09:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

User talk:130.126.138.6

I think protecting this page while the party is banned is going a bit far, he has blanked the page, true, but only once. I would suggest a warning instead. He needs to be able to voice his opinion. Urek

User talk:130.126.138.6

I'm taking an interest as I ran across a number of good edits by this user, they seemed to be trying to clean up POV, which is pretty much why I myself joined Wikipedia. I think we have a potentially useful user here who may just need to "learn the ropes", and is going about it in a slightly more confrontational manner than you or I. Urek

Good luck to you as well! I'm still quite new myself, so still learning the ropes, if you have any suggestions on places to work, I'm open to them. Urek

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for being a great vandal fighter and outsmarting me on the patrol. :-) Best regards. Húsönd 23:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)