User talk:Tariqabjotu/Archive Twenty-Three

Archbishop item See CNN and BBC News, which mention him admitting it. -- tariqabjotu 06:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC) Is this in the article yet ? If so, please revert my edit on ITN. I'm working on shortening DYK at the moment. Thanks. --PFHLai 06:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC) The only admission of anything I could find in the article was about his signing a cooperation statement with the secret police in 1978. It's not clear to me if he has admitted to anything else the newspapers have reported. If that's good enough for you as the same as "admitting he worked with Poland's Służba Bezpieczeństwa ...", okay, I trust your judgement. --PFHLai 07:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC) common images I know the process, but forgot to copy the rest of the image info because I was in a hurry. I thought I'd gotten it because I was looking at the commons version of the image in another browser window. Thanks for fixing it. Savidan 20:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC) It wasn't the image info that was the problem; it was that the image was not uploaded locally in the place of the image taken directly from Commons. -- tariqabjotu 20:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC) Oh, I see. Won't happen again. Savidan 20:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC) Mark Lund Okay, thanks for letting me know. Nishkid64 21:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC) Rush Limbaugh protection Hi Tariqabjotu. Just wondering. Why did you fully protect Rush Limbaugh? I didnt know anyone had requested it, and all things considered, the recent editing (last day or so) is a little less contentious than usual. Not that I mind. I could use a few days off from having to defend it from vandals, but I am curious. Caper13 21:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC) No one has to specifically request that a page be protected. I was in reality looking at a request for unprotection, and simply rejected it in favor of full protection upon looking at the history. -- tariqabjotu 22:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC) Ok, thanks for the explanation. It seemed like it came out of the blue. Caper13 22:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC) The editing dispute you referenced on WP:RFP is a revert war involving the addition of a 5-word sentence-- protection is an overreaction. As Caper13 said, things are a bit less contentious than usual, and while he may appreciate the protection to take a 'few days off,' I, for one, would like to continue to try to improve it. (He can rest assured knowing that I'll protect it from vandals! :-) I've consequently relisted it for unprotection or a return to semi-protection. Though you should know. 72.128.82.88 04:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Sorry, I somehow got logged out. The preceeding was written by GertrudeTheTramp 04:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Thank you for giving Infinity on High Protection but there is one problem The current information on the page is false and was put there by a IP spammer right before you protected the page. Is there a way that you can put the proper information in and then reprotect it. The proper information is provided in the Talk page for the article. Thanks a lot. --Russ is the sex 22:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC) If you have a source for your suggestion, I'd consider it. However, consider posting your request to the talk page of the article with {{editprotected}}. -- tariqabjotu 22:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC) I gave three sources on the talk page. But I will restate my post on your talk page. The proper tracklisting should read as follows: "Thriller" "The Take Over, The Breaks Over" "This Ain't a Scene, It's an Arms Race" - 3:32 "I'm Like a Lawyer with the Way I'm Always Trying to Get You Off (Me & You)" "Hum Hallelujah" "Golden" "Thnks fr th Mmrs" "The (After) Life of the Party" "The Carpal Tunnel of Love" - 3:23 "Bang the Doldrums" "Fame < Infamy" "You're Crashing, but You're No Wave" "I've Got All This Ringing in my Ears and One on my Fingers" Confirmed at [1][2][3] Someone should fix it, because the information on the page is currently false. --Russ is the sex 02:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC) I made the requested change. -- tariqabjotu 02:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC) {{USRepSuccessionBox}} This template has never been vandalized, and has been undergoing edits and improvements. Please do not pre-emptively full-protect pages; it infringes on the fundamental free editing nature of Wikipedia. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 04:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC) It's used on over two thousand pages and with the recent template vandalism (perhaps you have not heard about it?), pre-emptively protecting a rarely-edited, high-use template, despite no history of vandalism, is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. You can request an edit using {{editprotected}} or, if you feel compelled, take the issue to WP:RPP. -- tariqabjotu 05:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Why not just semi-protect in these circumstances? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 06:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 2 8 January 2007 About the Signpost Special: 2006 in Review Another newspaper columnist found to have plagiarized Wikipedia Blogs track attempts to manipulate articles Nutritional beef cooks PR editor WikiWorld comic: "Facial Hair" News and notes: Fundraiser continues, milestones Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST 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 07:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC) S-Protect of AVR Butterfly Thanks you for agreeing to semi-protect AVR Butterfly. When will this take effect? As I mentioned in the RfSP the same user/links have been added to the Atmel AVR. So far the unregistered user has resorted in insults on the accompnying talk page. I am trying to create aa discussion about the matter. I would like to request Semi-Protection for Atmel AVR as well. Would you be able to do that or shoudl I post my request on the Wikipedia Request for Protection page. --Rehnn83 13:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/December 16, 2005 Could you comment at this AFD for all individual date pages? I suggested portalifying all of them to Portal:Current events, which may be a bad idea. IIRC you know much more than me about Portal:Current events, so could you take a look and suggest a course of action? Thank you, Kusma (討論) 14:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Discussion is moving, currently some is at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FDecember_16.2C_2005 (and the AFD has been speedily closed). Kusma (討論) 15:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Selective warning Please don't make selective warnings to one side of the dispute. I know the rules, but thanks for reminding me. --Mardavich 16:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC) I was going to say the same thing as Mardavich above actually :) I know the rules, but thanks for reminding me. I also know what 3RR is, and none of my edits were disruptive. I left notes on the talk page as well. But again, thanks for reminding me the rules. Cheers! Baristarim 16:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Response I accept what you are saying, but I think that Persian nationalism is preventing the legitimate inclusion of the commonly accepted alternative name for the Gulf - the Arabian Gulf - in the Persian Gulf article (in fact, in some Arab states it is illegal to refer to the Gulf as the Persian Gulf). Please take a look at the talk page. Also, after stating my point on Talk:Persian Gulf, User:Mardavich and User:Behaafarid appeared to track back on all my recent contributions - namely to Ethnic minorities in Iran and Arvand Free Zone - and reverted any changes I made, including updated wikilinks, fact tags and NPOV adjustments (nothing substantial, just small edits here and there). It is notable that they have not ever edited these article before, so the only reason for reverting was to stalk and vandalise my work. This is disruptive, but is the common experience Wikipedia users have when confronted by nationalists.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 16:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC) That attitude does not help one bit. Stop the excessive reverting and stop throwing accusations of nationalism. Your above statement embodies exactly why the Persian Gulf article has faced numerous issues. -- tariqabjotu 16:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC) So it's my fault? I bring it on myself? I asked you to look at the constant reversion of my edits by stalkers and you claim I am throwing around accusations. Yes, I am accusing and with good reason.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 16:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Unprotect Hi, can you tell me whether I filed the request on Anti-Zionism wrong, or was it an inappropriate request? I'm not very familiar with the procedure. Thanks, Mackan79 16:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC) No, you filed the request correctly. I just rejected it; see the rationale I added to the WP:RPP request. -- tariqabjotu 17:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. It looks like just Chussid against the group to me (though I they were clearly revert warring as well), so I don't see the point in blocking the entire page. In any case, I was just curious for a second opinion. Thanks, Mackan79 17:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Rush Limbaugh Yep, sorry, just forgot! --Robdurbar 19:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Arabian/Persian Gulf Thank you Tariq for not protecting that page. Please take the time to read this: [4]. Jidan 19:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Unjustified Warning/Accusation I not provoking anyone, I am simply discussing content and citing Wikipedia policies, which is entirely within my rights as a user, and user:Ahwaz responds by saying "you are a liar, as well as a stalker and a bully" [5] or that "I can't read English" [6] and you come and warn me? You're an administrator, you should know the WP:NPA policy better than me. Are such comments acceptable to you? If not, then why isn't user:Ahwaz being warned? --Mardavich 23:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC) No, I do not believe Ahwaz's comments are acceptable. And yes, I am familiar with WP:NPA, which in part says Frequently, the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is not to respond at all. I understand it's not just a lone personal attack, but the guy is blocked... there isn't much harm he can do since his talk page is the only place he can post comments. If you stop posting on his talk page, it is very likely he will stop responding. It's as if you're sticking your hand into a lion's cage; you keep doing it even though you know you'll get bitten and even though you can just leave it alone. -- tariqabjotu 23:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC) Actually, I had given up already. But my intention was never to provoke him, but rather to open up some sort of dialogue with him and explain to him the reliable sources policy (WP:RS), since I saw him complaining that nobody is interested in a debate or discussion with him. Unfortunately, he doesn't want to assume good faith and he's only interested in personal accusations and attacks, which is why I gave up a few hours ago. Anyways, your intentions seem noble, sorry for my earlier reaction, I am just touchy and tired because of all that verbal abuse. --Mardavich 00:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC) People born in Jerusalem Hi, I've noticed you was the editor who added the split request to the Jerusalem article. Was that list moved to somewhere or was it simply deleted by the anonymous user who edited it at 17:24, 9 January 2007? I noticed this quite accidentally (I was searching for that section of the article in the page history because I need the template that arranged the list into nice columns), and now I don't know whether I stumbled upon unnoticed vandalism or the list is safely moved to somewhere. – Alensha talk 15:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC) To be honest, I'm not sure what happened to it either. I saw the list had suddenly disappeared, but not moved to another article. I just didn't say anything about it because I didn't think it was necessary for the article anyway and surmised that someone else had agreed with me on that point. -- tariqabjotu 15:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC) I don't know whether it's important for the article or not but lots of cities have similar sections and apparently it was important for those who compiled the list (and how would it look if that anonymous someone's edit was the final say in the matter :) anyway, I'll mention it on the talk page and if someone cares, they can move it wherever they want. – Alensha talk 16:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC) IPs on WP:AIV For future reference, when reporting IP addresses on WP:AIV, use the {{ipvandal}} template instead, since it has important WHOIS links. For instance, in the past half-hour I saw that two reported IP vandals came from the BBC (not blocked) and the U.S. House of Representatives (blocked) due to the WHOIS links. -- tariqabjotu 22:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC) I'm using VandalProof to automatically report the IPs. Any idea on how to change the template in VP? Corpx 22:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC) It has already been suggested on the VP's reqest feature page. Corpx 22:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC) There probably is a way already, but I'm not familiar enough with the program to know. You should get your answer anyway. -- tariqabjotu 22:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC) WP:ADOPT Hi there, Looking through our Archives I saw that you took an interest in the Adopt-a-user program during its formation and development. Well this is just a quick message to tell you the program is well and truly lifted off, with over 200 users involved in the program, 50+ active Adopters and approx. 150 Adoptees, and always expanding. If your still interested please pop by WP:ADOPT, have a look around and ask any questions you want on our talk page. Look forward to seeing you there. Cheers Lethaniol 15:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC) Banned User Returns HKelkar is back in a different username Rumpelstiltskin223 and as is usual is being accorded the same leeway on Wikipedia by the mainly Indian Admins.87.74.29.232 01:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC) I find some similarities between the two accounts, but a request for checkuser reveals that it is unlikely they're maintained by the same person. Regardless, please do not levy attacks against Indian people; those kinds of comments do not lend to civil discussion. -- tariqabjotu 01:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC) Understandable,If you think this was a bad choice of words, apologies.But as we are well aware HKelkar has been a very difficult sockpupeteer, and has been fooling around and hiding behind technology.It is very likely, he is using a proxy or a home internet connection this time.Can we tag this account as a suspect 87.74.29.232 09:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC) Jerusalem Jerusalem Hello Tariqabjotu Please look more carefully, it was my work on Jerusalem that has been reverted by User:Amoruso and User:Okedem simply because of their blatant POV, you can check where they come from. Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 3 15 January 2007 About the Signpost Special: 2006 in Review, Part II New arbitrators interviewed Cascading protection feature added WikiWorld comic: "Apples and Oranges" News and notes: Fundraiser breaks $1,000,000, milestones Wikipedia in the News Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST 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 06:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC) Ararat Arev Well, since my AN/I post, he's edited under two more IP addresses (both blocked now) and keeps stalking me about changing the article. Nishkid64 01:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC) Okay, another IP I blocked. Nishkid64 01:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC) Okay; I'm officially retracting that comment on WP:ANI; a week is perfectly fine, and a further extension could soon be in order if he doesn't stop. -- tariqabjotu 01:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC) Your name Nice name, Tariq means a star Tariqa is the feminine version of the name bjotu what does that mean? Was just curious ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗ 10:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)