User talk:Caulde/Archive March 2008

- Please click on the filing cabinet icon on the top right of the screen to return to archive mainscreen

Help with deleted page

You deleted a page I put up on myPartner. I put a request on the talk page asking what I needed to fix and/or change. Instead of getting a response, it was just deleted. I would still like some information, so I can make the page stick. Thanks! Blm0303 (talk) 21:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response. I can see the original page now, but there is no talk page. Blm0303 (talk) 21:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

sprotection

thanks so much for the semiprotection!Cholga^talK! 20:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Glad I could help. Rudget. 21:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding semi-protection can I suggest you look again at Manchester. In the four days between your removal of SP and its subsequent re-protection there were just two instances of vandalism amongst many other edits. As such, there is no valid reason for SP. Please see the SP policy at Wikipedia:Protection policy. Thanks. 82.20.28.142 (talk) 23:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that you are not that well acquainted with the (semi) protection policy, otherwise you wouldn't have protected Manchester. Please explain how two instances of vandalism in four days justifies your action. Could you also review Mathematics. This is yet another article that remains SPd without good cause. There are very many more such articles. It seems that one of the problems is admins applying SP with overly long expiry, or no expiry at all. 82.20.28.142 (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:GM

Hello there Rudget!

I came originally to ask you a question, but, I've since (and only just) realised you've left WP:GM... Why????? I understand you're busy in your admin role, and have had disagreements with Malleus, but they're no reasons to leave!

I found your membership to have been very enriching for the project. Won't you reconsider joining us again, even if it is just in spirit? I work closely with Malleus, and rate him as a premium editor, but still believe you are more that welcome to work with us as a unit! Of course it is your call and you may have your reasons.

My original question was regarding the archive bot on WT:GM - it appears to have stopped archiving! Just one good example as to why I believe you should still be around helping us. Seriously. -- Jza84 · (talk) 01:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd love to be still informally associated with WP:GM, but time restrictions prevent me! I'll still help and provide opinions where necessary. And that adminship offer still stands. Rudget. 19:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I enjoy the writing of articles much more than getting involved in debates, which seem plentiful around the role of administrator at the moment to say the least! My main concern is that I don't have enough experience in the fashionable sections of behind-the-scenes Wikipedia, but also that my love first and foremost is in article space; admin tools for me would probably be used infrequently, probably a page move here or there.

Since your offer of adminship however, I have ensured every edit has a summary, I've tightened up how I work in talk page debates as well as expanded some of my work into guidelines and admin nominations. I know I would be a responsible and repectable administrator (whether I could convince people of this is another matter), but whether I really lust after the tools is something I really need to think about before the scrutenisation of RfA.

Anyway, thanks for taking time to fix the bot. I'll think about adminship on the promise you'll maintain contact with WP:GM! -- Jza84 · (talk) 19:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You better get ready then! :) Rudget. 12:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposal RE: User:Mikkalai's vow of silence

You are a previous participant in the discussion at WP:AN/I about User:Mikkalai's vow of silence. This is to inform you, that I have made a proposal for resolution for the issue. I am informing all of the users who participated, so this is not an attempt to WP:CANVAS support for any particular position.

The proposal can be found at: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed resolution (Mikkalai vow of silence) Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 01:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Favor

I was wondering if you could do me a huge favor. My last RfA failed, and failed bad. I am getting ready for re-nomination later on in this month or next month. I was wondering if you could look over my contributions and tell me what I've been doing good and what I need to improve upon. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Undeath (talk) 05:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Genesis vandal

I blocked five version of him myself this morning. The first was Pbuee (talk · contribs) at about 9 am EST. He brought on a new account about once every 3 minutes for fifteen minutes. I posted them all for an IP block. Good times, though, huh? – ClockworkSoul 14:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for the comment, you've made my day. :) αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 15:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the Barnstar! And yeah I am bored of And-Rew so I thought I would use my middle name, Joshua, which has already been taken so Joshii sound good lol _└^and-rew_┘^┌_talk^┐ 16:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Viacom

Was page protection here really necessary? I only see one recent blatant vandal, and he's been blocked.   jj137 (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Aah, yes, I see they did it once yesterday under a different IP address. But, besides that, it hasn't been edited in about two weeks, so I ask again.   jj137 (talk) 16:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. It is fine with me either way, but I was just curious about why you protected it.   jj137 (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thanks for the answer.   jj137 (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:Reply

It worked great. I was just getting different admin's opinions, because my RfA won't have people who vote all the same way. Undeath (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Danke Herr Rudget. Undeath (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You might like to know....

Your a wikipedia boss now, apparently :P The Daily Mail just to mention one ;) See yah around! Tiddly-Tom 20:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Canvassing

You know, I looked over the rules and think that only one word was wrong. I said "for Minnesota" and could have said "on Minnesota". It was not my intention to only get support votes. Any sort of feedback would have helped and was begged for at 1, and 2 and on several talk pages as well as where you replied at 3 and in a peer review where there was zero feedback. Unfortunately there are articles with higher priority and maybe the portal really isn't something that many people knew about yet. In any case I mention this because of a situation of another editor who is working on a FAC. They were told today to raise the awareness of editors who may be informed on that given topic. So I believe except one word, there was nothing to worry about and and that the canvassing rule makes ample room for asking for attention. Hope this helps. -Susanlesch (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The Last Temptation of Krust FAC

Hi Rudget. You were the GA Reviewer for The Last Temptation of Krust. The recently closed FAC for The Last Temptation of Krust was closed with 2 comments and one "Support" after 2 weeks, and I'd like to start another FAC for it soon. Do you feel you could "Support" the article in its current status, if I started another FAC for it? Is there anything else that you think I should do first, to further improve the status of the article? Thanks again for the GA Review. Cirt (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure thing. Rudget. 09:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I will notify you when the FAC starts (but only a neutrally worded notification, which will be to you, the GA Reviewer, the editors that commented at the previous FAC, and relevant WikiProjects, SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) said that was okay). Cirt (talk) 09:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

• FYI, started another WP:FAC for The Last Temptation of Krust. Cirt (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you very much for giving your support to my admin application, which recently closed successfully (36/3/1). I hope I can continue to justify the confidence that you have placed in me. If there is any way that I can help out more, or if you have any handy tips for a freshly-hatched admin, please drop me a line. Thanks again. - 52 Pickup (deal) 21:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Here's a barnstar for improving Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! The Helpful One (Review) 22:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Rudget. 09:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA cleanup

Ah, thanks for removing that. I knew I'd forgotten something. :) GlassCobra 10:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Tks

Tks for looking out for me. I guess my warning really pissed that guy off. Makes you wonder what he's doing to the ones that blocked him ;-) How you been? — Rlevse • Talk • 14:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Same as recently, Scouting stuff (just had another make FA), arbcom clerking, and sock fighting. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

ADCO

I put my name down, iirc. But knowing my memory, I'm probably wrong. Yes, I would be absolutely delighted to go under ADCO with you. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 14:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I appreciate this. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 14:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Venkanna H. Naik

Thanks for educating; I did not understand the meaning of {{hangon}}. I would not renominate while it is already nominated for deletion. Tangi-tamma (talk) 14:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA reply

I'm not planning on self nominating. Jimfbleak will probably re-nominate me too, but a co-nomination would be great too. :) Undeath (talk) 16:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Call me stupid, but your last comment put me in one of those confusing situations. Was your statement a confirmation that you might co-nominate me at my next RfA? Undeath (talk) 03:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

New RFA

The RFA you asked about is now active. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Supported. Rudget. 17:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The mechanix

Thanks for responding to my request of speedy deletion of The mechanix redirect. I noticed that you deleted the talk page for The mechanix, where I had also placed a db-maintenance template (along with my explanation for the speedy delete of the redirect). The actual redirect still exists, however. This is my first request for speedy deletion, so I'm not sure how the process goes. Is a decision still pending? I put a db-maintenance template on the redirect page, but didn't want to break the redirect, so I put it underneath the #REDIRECT code. Consequently, it's not obvious; accessed normally, the page simply redirects. Was that not the proper way to place the template? Noca2plus (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: semi-protection of Napoleon I of France

Thanks for putting on semi-protection. I have been working on this page for a few weeks now, and unfortunately I have had to spend more time on reverting vandalism than on article improvement. Feel free to leave the status as long as you want, as the article seems to be a vandal magnet. Historymike (talk) 13:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

HomeLink Wireless Control System

Hi, this got respeedied before I had a chance to replace the article, per the {{hangon}} I'd set. Could you restore article and talk page, please? Thanks,NapoliRoma (talk) 18:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

(You wrote): "you had an hour?"

I'm not sure what the objection is here. Do you mean I had an hour since I posted the hangon? During that time, another admin speedied the article; he restored it at my request, but did not restore the talk page, so I had to request that and wait for him to do so. Getting that all sorted out took a chunk of time.

I posted my reasons for the hangon as soon as I possibly could, and then turned to editing the article, which I now have ready to post with citations, at which point I found it had been deleted again.

Given all of the above, can you please restore the article and talk in place? I'm confused why this had to be deleted so quickly, given the hangon and explanation posted in the article and talk page, respectively. I'd like to think it was clear I wasn't sitting on my hands during that time, but actually working on researching and integrating citations for the article -- as I said I would be doing on the talk page.NapoliRoma (talk) 18:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the restore!

This is actually kind of amusing (now that I can look back at it with some level of detachment :-): it looks like you redeleted the page about two minutes before the other editor restored its talk page, or about 11 minutes before I had a chance to finish posting my rationale for the hangon...

(Maybe there needs to be some rule-of-thumb for speedies, such as "allow at least one day before deleting for every year the article has been in existence. :-)--NapoliRoma (talk) 19:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Seraph

That would be great. Proposing a candidate is not an excecise in ego-stroking, it should be with the idea of the best for the project, and more co-nominations just goes to show the community how well-thought-of and appropriate the candidate is, so please, if she approves, go right ahead. -- Avi (talk) 19:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

If she gives the OK for you to co-nom, I'll copy it out of your sandbox and place it in the subpage. Thanks! -- Avi (talk) 19:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Nicely done, except for some gratitious hyperbole about your co nom {:-o -- Avi (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you for your support and the lovely comments :). Seraphim♥ ^Whipp 21:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Your advice

I may just take your advice there! I may have made big steps recently but others wont be able to see that unless I wait a while. Will contact you if I have any questions, thanks for the offer! --Camaeron (talk) 19:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

PS: 39S vs 16O; why did it fail anyway? --Camaeron (talk) 19:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Omg, hope I dont have to work it out myself. I hate maths! --Camaeron (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Dan Wesson

Hi Rudget ! I might need some help with my article ... There are differences between german and english Wiki Version - copy and paste is easy - to solve more complicated not. So i need some time ... and perhaps a litte help from your side. I am member of DanWessenForum its a community project to help each other with our colletibles ... Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

looked at deletion log: 18:02, 4 March 2008 Rudget (Talk | contribs) deleted "Dan Wesson" ‎(G12: Blatant copyright infringement)

Sorry made the mistake not to save after inserting hangon ... so ariticle was deleted while i was editing ...

i am a bit slow i know .... but i still have the page in my browser and try to finish now ... OK ?

uoops now it blocked .. pleses release it again - Thanks -- Tom 19:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Germans writing in english Wiki ... struggle struggle ...

Thanks a lot for helping me ! Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

• -- Merged from first and second Dan Wesson headline entry -- --Dan Wesson (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It needs a lot of work. Corvus cornix_talk 19:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Good luck.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 19:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Germans writing in english Wiki ... struggle struggle ...

Thanks a lot for helping me ! --Dan Wesson (talk) 20:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

It got deleted? Corvus cornix_talk 03:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

.. cry ... deleted once more while editing ... see my user talk ... thanks to Rudget i had a good base ... now i feel like Don Quixote --Dan Wesson (talk) 10:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

... working again at it ... @ Rudget you might have a look: [1]--Dan Wesson (talk) 12:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Rudget !

CC said: It needs a lot of work. ___ indeed but i have nearly done it _____

As the first person beeing gentle to me in wikipedia i adress myselft once again to you :)

Please have a look to my sandbox [2]- i am thankful for any advice.

Yours Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 10:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Dan Wesson_talk

RE: RfA

I don't know if you want to or not, but I'm probably going to have my RfA set up either tonight or tomorrow. I'm going to ask my previous nominator, Jimfbleak. If you would wish to co-nom, please do so. I could use all the help I can get. Thanks in advance. Undeath (talk) 03:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Added some responses

... at User:Asenine/AC. :) αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 14:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Post

First of all, your message hurt my delicate eyes. ;) As for your question, I haven't done anything in the last several weeks with my WikiProjects. Football is done, baseball hasn't started, haven't been gnoming, haven't been copyediting. But I did just block a n00b for posting a full body shot pic of his own naked and erect self on several userpages. (maybe that's why my eyes are burning and not your message)... Is that a WikiProject? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up my talkpage. As for your I've just checked the Bible, and realised I can be stoned to death for excessive use of exclamation marks edit summary, not to worry. Look up John 8:7 and see if anyone would dare to throw a stone at you....:-)Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The Working Man's Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		In recognition of your excellent set of contributions, all of which are so very useful in helping us all move Wikipedia forward, I award you this barnstar. Keep up the excellent work. :-) Lradrama 20:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Seconded! -Susanlesch (talk) 21:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Spain

Hi. I saw this passed and happy to see it. I made one small copyedit to correct the total supports. -Susanlesch (talk) 21:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. Thank you. Rudget. 21:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

FPC nomination

I'm glad you took the criticism of the image so well. ;-) And thanks for the prospective support if ever I do need it.. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 21:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

CobaltBlueAnthony (talk · contribs)

I think I might want this user name, to redirect to me... Thoughts? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 21:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

It's another user who was impersonating you? Rudget. 21:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but since he's indef. blocked, he can't have that name, now can he? :-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Baird Jones

You may get a complaint from user Asingleton-green (talk · contribs) about the speedy deletion of his page Baird Jones which I tagged A7 and you deleted. Don't worry unless you do, but if you do, my discussion with him about it is here. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Rudget. 21:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Ow. Dlohcierekim 19:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC) UR welcome. no prob. Oh. When I said "Ow," I meant "how did I do that?" Cheers, Dlohcierekim 20:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You have a new fan

Viz., User talk:Toast1966—mean anything? AGK (contact) 21:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Award

Hey Rudget!
Congratulations on finding the page that does not exist. Here is your reward; you've earned it. User:Selfworm/HiddenLinkAward Congrats!selfworm^Talk) 04:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you help me out?

Hello Rudget. I see that you frequently nominate users for adminship. I was wondering if you could take some time and check out my contributions and such, and let me know what I would need to improve upon in order to work towards becoming an admin. Thanks alot! Grsz 11 06:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem when you do it. Grsz 11 18:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Your generous words

I just saw that you namechecked me in your RFA nom of Seraphim Whipp [3] and felt I could not let such a lovely and generous comment go unacknowledged so here I am to say, well, thank you! and to let you know how deeply flattered I am to be referred to in those terms and in such a public way too. You have made my day. kindest regards, nancy ^(talk) 09:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfB

I wanted to personally thank you, Rudget, for your support in my recent RfB. I would have had grave doubts about your judgment, being that you supported me, until your decision to co-nom SW with me. That proves you have excellent taste, and just slipped up hitting "S" instead of "O" at my RfB . I am also glad I ran in to you personally, and hope we can collaborate in the future. As for the RfB, I am thankful and appreciative that you feel that I am worthy of the trust the community requires of its bureaucrats, and I hope to continue to behave in a way that maintains your trust in me and my actions. I have heard the community's voice that they require more of a presence at RfA's of prospective bureaucrats, and I will do my best over the near future to demonstrate such a presence and allow the community to see my philosophy and practices in action. I hope I can continue to count on your support when I decide to once again undergo an RfB. If you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. -- Avi (talk) 16:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re closing per snow

Hey Rudget, thank you for the message on my talk. I apologize for not following the general unwritten rules of closing an RfA via the snow clause. I was attempting to be bold in doing so. I appreciate you coming to me civilly and professionally to let me know. A non-admin closure of an RfA wasn't something I planned on ever doing, but I shall endeavor to be extremely mindful in the future - although I don't really see myself doing it again for fear of stepping on toes :) Cheers mate. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 16:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar.  Sunderland06  18:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Pseudoscience discretionary sanctions

Hi! As somebody who commented on a January proposal to place all articles related to homeopathy on article probation, I would greatly appreciate your input on a new proposal to help combat disruption that would scrap the probation and implement discretionary sanctions. I apologize for any intrusion, but this is to my knowledge the first time sanctions of this nature have been attempted to be enforced by the community, so I feel that a wide range of opinions is necessary. Thank you in advance for any comments you may make. east718 (talk) 18:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Dan Wesson

(reinstalled after MiszaBot III cleanup)

Hello Rudget !

As the first person beeing gentle to me in wikipedia i adress myselft once again to you :)

CC said: It needs a lot of work. ___ indeed

Please have a look to my sandbox [4]- i am thankful for any advice.

Yours Tom Dan Wesson_talk --Dan Wesson (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Had a look ? Need advice Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 17:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The article is splittet - please begin with User:Dan Wesson/Sandbox/Dan Wesson --Dan Wesson (talk) 17:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

. Thanks for advice ! Before clicking it, i still want to have some fine polishing to make it shiny :)

Any idea about portal question ? Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

====> there are 103 featured portals, of a total of 548 portals

which one should i use? i'm not to lazy to check them all - but a second tip would be fine :) --Dan Wesson (talk) 18:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

its not concerning the page - it for having a partner concerning contents --Dan Wesson (talk) 18:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

in german wiki we have specialist for weapons in wiki - most of the join the portal support --Dan Wesson (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok ! Thanks a lot for being such helpful and gentle to me - i really like ask for your help sometime again Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 18:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

@ qualitystaff (forward?) Qualitätsoffensive --Dan Wesson (talk) 21:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC) .

Curses!

Using my admin coaching method, are ya? Stealing my hard work, eh? Well cool, at least I know that I did a good job developing it. ;) Malinaccier (talk) 22:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

March Newsletter, Issue V

Delivered on March 8th, 2008 by Jza84. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Sending one out of hope and courtesy! Hope you don't mind. -- Jza84 · (talk) 02:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Pudgee Tha Phat Bastard

I've been doing some new page patrolling and noticed this title come up again. I saw you deleted it because of copyvio but it has been recreated. Maybe you could check to see if it now complies, or has it just been recreated as it was? Mjroots (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Lantz631

I'm considering his unblock request ... the artist seems to be notable by one major-label release, and I've asked him to find and provide some reliable sources on his page. Do you have any comment? Daniel Case (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Scottevans

Thanks; good work! —TreasuryTag talk contribs 12:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I see you decided to block this user (Scottevans05 (talk · contribs)) despite my concerns, the user was warned a lot previously so I accept the block. However, the edits were not persistent and obvious vandalism so I do question whether it was appropriate to report it to WP:AIV, and to be honest I am not sure that a indef block was necessary either. I will keep any eye out for any indication that the user wishes to learn lessons from the block, and take things from there. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect Camaron it was seen to be persistent not only by TreasuryTag (TT) but also Porcupine and Jayron32. Yes, I do understand there was a large time period between the final warning issued today and the one imposed previous to that. However, the user obviously knew what he was doing, and the attitude in which he carried out the edits for which he had received notes and then progressively moving towards warnings, continued. I will however shorten the block if there is a call to do so, but I should still think that it should be for a lengthy period of time; by which I mean the block should reflect the editing manner which has been conducted. Regards, Rudget (?) 12:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out that I didn't actually see the report at AIV, but was infact looking at this and then decided to follow the redlinks, as I usually do. I am weird like that. Rudget (?) 12:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I was very clear, there is no doubt he was persistent, the point I am making is it was not persistent and obvious vandalism, hence why I questioned the report at WP:AIV. However, I generally agree the user was being disruptive. Thanks for explaining anyway, one issue with AIV bots is it removes requests of blocked users regardless of if the blocker has seen the report. I have found from past experience that these types of users often don't take warnings seriously for some reason, get blocked, and then after the block has expired (if it does) start making constructive contributions. That is why I am now leaving a note on this users to explain the block in more detail. Camaron | Chris (talk) 13:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess it's up to him whether he does want to constructively contribute or not. Rudget (?) 13:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Done, this will help us found out the users intentions. If he makes no further edits or just blanks the page etc then we will just have to move on. If he does respond postivley, which I hope occurs as this user did actually make some good faith and reasonable contributions within the disruptive ones, then we can consider accepting that the preventive nature of the block no longer applies, and a unblock can be considered. Camaron | Chris (talk) 14:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course. Rudget (?) 14:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Project Report

Hey Rudget! Nice job keeping the Project Report for the Signpost running! I've been gone for a while, and was worried it might not be continued...thanks much, and keep up the good work! Cheers, ( arky ) 18:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

What right do you have to do that? I believe Collins is in the right and none of you mysterious senior editors are talking on the level and without contention. On what grounds would you have to block? At least unblock Collins on the talk pages so we can hear what he has to say. Mecha12 (talk) 13:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject report

I see that you are the writer for the WikiProject report in the Signpost. I'm wondering how you can apply your Wikiproject for the segment for a future issue. The Chronic 05:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling. So how does the process work? The Chronic 04:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, any interviewee would do good. I would recommend interviewing either Nikki311 (our first PW admin) or any person in "The Kliq" (a group of the more active PW editors). The Chronic 15:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

One more question: is it possible for multiple people to be interviewed? The Chronic 16:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, let's see: TJ Spyke, LAX, RobJ1981, Naha, and (selfishly) me. :) The Chronic 16:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I am a part of The Kliq, and would definitely be interviewed if possible. iMatthew 2008 18:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd have to say, that maybe, if we could do a fifteen question interview. We could have fifteen users answer one question each. There are a lot of experienced, active editors in our project. The fifteen I would say would have to be: Nikki311, LAX, Naha, TJ Spyke, ThinkBlue, Truco-X, NiciVampireHeart, GaryColemanFan, Zenlax, The Chronic, Gavyn Sykes, D.M.N., Alex, The Hybrid, and myself (not to be selfish). iMatthew 2008 18:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

15 is way too many. For the interview why not have 2 questions for two people, and three for another: those can be IMatthew, The Chronic and Nikki311. The report will be placed on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-03-10/WikiProject report. Rudget. 10:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thats cool. I'd speak with Nikki and Chronic about who answers which questions. But a question for you, once we decide, can I start answering the questions? iMatthew 2008 12:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Well I'd like three and four, but I'd like to make sure that Nikki and Chronic are okay with that. iMatthew 2008 12:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I've been busy in real life. I'd love to participate in the interview, and I'm fine with iMatt taking #3 and #4. Nikki311 18:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I've answered three of the questions. Would you mind adding that we also have a Featured Topic to the introduction? It's a pretty big accomplishment, in my opinion. Thanks. Nikki311 23:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Your quitting the MEDCAB case

You have quitted, while leaving the MEDCAB page full of indirect talk about your recess and about individuals - rather than about the article, so I opened a new MEDCAB case. By the way, after I opened the new page - the old page was closed by Addhoc. Eliko (talk) 19:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:ED_Railway_Sign.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ED_Railway_Sign.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 17:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Mine RfB innit?

Why thank you! As you know, my RfB passed successfully with (133/4/3). And that means I pretty much own the universe now! And you're partly to blame.... But in all seriousness, thanks for your unswerving support and dodgy questions, I appreciate them both in equal measure! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal

What happened to WP:FPORT page colour? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!

For the cleaning up the vandalism on my talk page! Xdenizen (talk) 12:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Jeygopi Panisilvam

Hello, my page Jeygopi Panisilvam was deleted because it was an unsourced biography of a living person. Actually, Panisilvam died in the 40s. Could you please restore the page? Thanks, JPAnis (talk) 12:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Scratch that, it's working now. JPAnis (talk) 12:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

People keep doing bad stuff to it. Can you stop them doing it? JPAnis (talk) 12:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! JPAnis (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you please unprod Jeygopi Panisilvam? It is notable and I do cite a source (see the references section). JPAnis (talk) 13:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rudget. The book JPAnis offered as a source doesn't seem to exist, according to Amazon and Google Books, and Calcutta Press doesn't seem to exist either, except as a simple printer. Furthermore, the article itself is very silly - apparently he was killed in 1948, but became tribal leader in 1956, after the tribe had been dissolved in 1947. Looking at the page history, I suspect that this is a class of schoolkids playing games with each other. Could you consider whether this can be speedied as a blatent hoax/vandalism, or failing that unprotect/reduce to semiprotection so I can nominate it for deletion? Cheers, Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 13:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hiya. I've listed it at AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeygopi Panisilvam, but since the article's protected I can't put the AfD template at the top of the page - would you mind adding it please? Thanks Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 14:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Review

Hello Rudget,

Just a note that I have started an editor review process for myself with purposes of getting feedback on where I can improve upon my usership. I may use it in any admin nomination way down the line. I don't expect you to participate (I understand that third parties should be involved here), but wanted to let you know I'm being pro-active about this. -- Jza84 · (talk) 13:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

wikibreak

[5] Date changed per request. Enjoy your relaxation time! - Revolving Bugbear 14:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I remember the wikibreak enforcer... hated it, despite the fact that it carried out its intended purpose. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I managed to remember the password for User:Andonic. Hehe... · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Report (3-17)

Is it still open? I'd like to make a request for Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones. Just reply if possible.^Mitch32^contribs 11:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

My pals had a question. Can you interview more than just me, we've got 4 people willing to be interviewed if that's ok with you.^Mitch32^contribs 16:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Muse_Man_12321

I don't know what to do about this guy. At first glance he appeared to be a typical vandalism only account: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] but then I looked further and saw he had some positive, if minor, contribs: [12] [13] [14]. I don't get how someone's done as much vandalism as he has without a block, but on the other hand it seems odd that he does good work mixed with vandalism and ignores all the warnings. :/ Any idea what to do? -- Naerii · plz create stuff 14:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Level

• Hi Rudget, you probably don't know me at all, I do a lot of vandalism patrol. Anyway, I've been looking at the vandalism level, and I would personally think that level1 would be warranted, but I think I should ask you. What do you think? Steve Crossin (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

• I will re-elevate it for now, as it seems very obvious to me that the vandal level is very severe (I checked a few things to be sure). Just wanted to be sure you didnt object. Steve Crossin (talk) 14:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Rancile

Delete and salt, please. This is this article's 6th reincaration. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Protection rationale

I saw that you protected User talk:Oh wiki your so fine your so fine you blow my mind because “user and sockpuppet are vandalising page”. Would you mind sharing some of those edits? Both the vandalism and the sockpuppet edits would be helpful. — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the requesting editor may have misjudged the situation. I’m going to remove the protection for now. If you have links to the vandalism or other information I should be aware of, please let me know. Thanks! — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

That was a single episode of vandalism from over two days ago. I do not think this demonstrates that "user and sockpuppet are vandalising page". Furthermore, if Adrian is vandalizing a page, then he should be blocked; protecting the page he is vandalizing doesn’t really make sense to me. Now if you’re suggesting that because his old username is under a username block, his talk page should be protected, that’s a different matter — one I didn’t see in the protection rationale nor made clear to Adrian. If you are going to protect it for that reason, I would suggest first placing a prominent notice at the top directing users to his new page. It’s quite an amusing name — blocked for length, not for inappropriateness — and other users may wish to contact him. — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheapshot's Sucka Breaks

I would like to request Cheapshot's Sucka Breaks be un-deleted. It's a notable release, by a notable group, and it was put up for deletion by User:Cosprings, who has been vandalising pages associated with Styles of Beyond. I've had to revert multiple things he's done, along witht he fact he's hosting illegal torrents on his page. Jay (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion, the page was encyclopedic, however, I am willing to restore it if by doing so you can improve the article and negotiate content on the talk page before any promotional content etcetera. is added. Rudget. 20:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't have any more info to improve it at the moment, but I've actually purchased the vinyl, and once I get it, I can supply the article with more information, such as track times/names/a scan of it for the picture, and whatever else it supplies me with. But yeah, that sounds good. Thanks a lot for your help. Jay (talk) 20:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'm sure you'll do fine. Rudget. 20:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

User:76.250.184.110

76.250.184.110 is back again and adding imeem links to the article. Would you mind blocking? Thanks. -- Naerii · plz create stuff 20:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your support. - J Greb (talk) 22:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Jeygopi Panisilvam G3 speedy

The G3 speedy tag I placed on the article covers blatant hoaxes. This article is most definitely a blatant hoax. There is no reason why the article should survive a speedy it does not deserve to survive merely because there is an AfD in progress. DarkAudit (talk) 00:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Dick's Cabaret

My other account was User:Titlebaumnow, but I lost the password. You deleted Dick's Cabaret, stating that the article did not indicate importance/significance. The article indicated that "In March 2008, the club was placed in the national spotlight when it was revealed that David Hernandez, a singer and current finalist on the seventh season of American Idol, worked at the club in 2004." That seems like importance/significance. Please restore the article. Thanks! -- Fredgremlint. —Preceding comment was added at 04:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks you

Very much for the AWB thing. You may be surprised to know that it's not the first time I've been confused for a bot. Thanks again.--ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 10:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh it's something I look back on very fondly. Especially since it's the first actual message I ever received from someone (third section down). It actually started at AN/I. I Didn't even know what AN/I was at the time. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 11:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea, those were the good ole days, when fighting vandalism was more personal. Recent Changes in one tab, the list of warning templates in the another. I made my first thousand or so vandal fighting edits that way. Kids these days have it too easy. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 11:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Riana's request for bureaucratship

Dear Rudget, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats. I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight. I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community. I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 12:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DeadEyeArrow

I did it now. So in effect, my company just paid me to do this :o) Your co-nom is awaited. Will you tell DEA when you've finished so DEA can transclude it and restart the clock etc? ➨ REDVEЯS is a satellite and will be set alight 12:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

 Doing... - thanks for informing me. Rudget. 12:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done Rudget. 12:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Jimfbleak (talk) 13:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Request

Thanks for the reply, I'll look into it. Solestin (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Question

It's gonna help me how exactly? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

sure. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

This article

Your comment in the deletion log seems to suggest that you deleted it because an author requested its deletion. I (and others) also had contributed to the article and I want it restored. Its surprising that you didnt think it fit to ask the editor to take it to AfD if he wanted it deleted. The article which User:Knowledge Hegemony had authored had problems of {{tone}}, undue and {{POV}} and I'd painstakingly worked on fixing it. I was working my way through the article and was more or less done with the lead. Please restore the article and ask the editor to take it to AfD instead. Thanks. Sarvagnya 18:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I had read the article (though not contributed to it) and thought it to be quite well developed and cited; although as Sarvagnya points out it (like almost any wikipedia article) could be improved. I too would request you to restore the article. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I just realized that User:Knowledge Hegemony has possibly retired. Unfortunately, his email is disabled so we cannot ask him the reasons for his deletion request and retirement.

Anyway, since

• AFAIK there are no privacy concerns,
• the content is GFDL (and it would be a licensing violation to recreate the article based on a cached copy),
• User:Sarvagnya and others (?) contributed to the article, and
• it would have certainly survived an AFD

I think we have enough reasons for its restoration. Abecedare (talk) 23:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Jimfbleak is going to be nominating me for RfA soon. (It says he did already, but it's a link to my old RfA.) When he does that, would you mind being a co-nom? It would be very helpful. Thanks. Undeath (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Report request

Hi Rudget, I'd like to request a WikiProject report on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games. If you're interested in doing one, please reply on WT:VG. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2008-03-13 23:13

I second this request :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Discospinster

Thank you so much for your support in my RfA, which was successful with a final count of 70/1/1! ... discospinster _talk 23:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you

I can has mop?

Hi Rudget :)! Thank-you for the wonderful comments. I hope I can perform in the role of an admin to a standard that truly validates your co-nomination in my RfA and everyone else's support (91/1/1). Seraphim♥ Whipp 11:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:121.220.221.159

LOL. I think I'm one step behind you. I thought I was reverting that IP's vandalism and adding messages to the talk page. Then I go back to the article and see that I actually didn't revert it, but you did, but my warning still went through. Go figure. I was only checking their other edits, I'm not following you, I swear...  :) Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 13:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

userpage

"...where me and a few other administrators close cases..." Hmm... "me" → "I"?? (and no, I'm not a grammar freak ;))--PeaceNT (talk) 15:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Toddst1

Hi Rudget, thanks for supporting my RfA, which passed with 42 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutrals. I'm pleased that the Wikipedia community has trusted me with the mop and I take it very seriously. Of course, special thanks goes to my nominator, Kakofonous. I also appreciate the congratulations. Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Resilience (network)

Hi, sorry about the unintentional copyvio. Am currently splitting the portmanteau page that was at Resilience. I guess isolating the network section in a new page brought it to the bot's attention. Anyway, I've changed the copy. Please drop me a note if I should do anything else. --AndrewHowse (talk) 16:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

My apologies for the delay I've been busy and gone for a few days. Thanks for participating in the RfA, you did bring up some valid points which I'm keeping in mind going forward. No hard feelings and I'm always open to comments about my admin work. Sincerely – Zedla (talk) 02:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support!

Hello, and thanks for your support in my recent RFA! The final result was 61/0/3, so I've been issued the mop! I'm extremely grateful for your confidence in me and will strive to live up to it. Thanks again! —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Report request

Hi Rudget, I'd like to request a WikiProject report on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games. If you're interested in doing one, please reply on WT:VG. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2008-03-13 23:13

I second this request :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I've already got next week's slot booked for the Tropical Cyclones Project. Does the 24th sound alright? Rudget. 11:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds great! How do we proceed? JACOPLANE • 2008-03-15 21:13

A&R

Thanks for the block on this one, but shouldn't the Crazed Hits link also be deleted. Please see my comment on the discussion page. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk page undeletion

Thanks for restoring February 2008 attacks on North Indians in Maharashtra. Can you also restore its talk page, which may have some useful discussion. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 02:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done Rudget. 10:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't realize that the talk page was essentially blank or I wouldn't have bothered asking for its undeletion. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

STARS methodology page deletion

Hello Rudget, I would like to respond to the allegation that Isabel de Pablo is a sock puppet and the reason you gave for deleting the STARS Methodology page. First I wish to clearly state that I only have one account and I use my real name. If you check the IP addresses you will see that I live in Switzerland. Secondly Isabel de Pablo is a real person living in Spain (again please check IP addresses) who is a user of the methodology and wrote the page. She approached me to write about STARS and naturally I am pleased she did this. She is not (and never has been) an agent or paid by me in any way. She used openly available information, including my web site GNU Free Document License pages, and articles published in the American Society for Quality magazine, which they independently verify and edit to ensure accuracy. The ASQ have trust that STARS is a serious methodology and I believe the publication by ASQ meets Wikipedia's requirements for proper reference sources. I would therefore politely support Isabel's request that the page be reinstated, and welcome your help.Hanvanloon (talk) 14:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Here the page content when it was deleted. It is clearly promotional and does not encourage or account for the NPOV guideline here on en.wp. What is the sockpuppetry situation? I don't recall being involved in any such discussion. Rudget. 16:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply and for sending the link to the deleted page. According to the Wikipedia NPOV policy as I understand it, the article must be written as far as possible without bias, contain all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. Is this a correct interpretation? Under this NPOV policy, is the American Society for Quality (ASQ) considered to be a reliable source? It is one of the major (if not the ultimate) quality management organizations in the USA. If it is a reliable source, then surely the article meets the NPOV requirements? What should otherwise be altered in the article to meet the NPOV requirements? I am sure that Isabel would like to know and comply with these requirements.--Hanvanloon (talk) 18:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Afternoon...

...so, a month in, and I'm starting to look to stretch my horizons a bit. I'm fine on blocking and unblocking of all varieties, protection, reviewing blocks, deletion and restoration, and have dipped my foot into WP:SSP as there seems to be a constant backlog. Any suggestions where I could look to move into next? _GB^T/C 16:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

There's always ANI and AN :) Rudget. 16:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Got 'em both watchlisted, and contribute where relevant. I was thinking of a more janitorial area which needs admin attention, but as it's not so glamorous, quick, easy, or whatever, doesn't get the amount of attention it deserves. Any ideas? _GB^T/C 16:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Erm... let me try and find something... :D Rudget. 16:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

There's a few places I can think of, but they don't really need administrators, just good users and good judgement: WP:MEDCAB, WP:30, WP:AN3, WP:RFCU (block when confirmed etc.) and you could even try WP:AC to train to become a clerk, but that takes a long time... Rudget. 16:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you - will have a look and see where I can be of help! _GB^T/C 16:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe it's been a month! It's gone mighty quick. I'm trying to focus on article work now though, and still help out at WP:FPOC. I find it quite relaxing and an very enjoyable experience. Rudget. 16:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

AC

Yup, I'm still up for it. Unfortunately I am buried in tons of coursework at the moment so it will have to wait a few days. I hope you understand. :) αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 17:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Vote withdrawal

Just out of interest but why did you withdraw your vote at the rfa of geni? --Camaeron (talk) 17:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

See my neutral. Rudget. 17:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok ; p --Camaeron (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool

Loving the box at the top of your user page (that Contributions, Userboxes, Awards and Other bit, incase you've no idea what im on about). It keeps everything very neat, how did you make it? --Camaeron (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Look at the source of User:Rudget/header-up, then you can say "ahh, I see what you did there" :) JACOPLANE • 2008-03-16 23:04

I actually meant the one on his userpage! --Camaeron (talk) 18:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Gilanyan

Why did you delete the article for copyright violation when that had been at least edited out of the current version? Now it can just go back up and have to go through an AfD again, rather than establishing notability or not, quickly, this time. In addition this encourages editors to simply leave copyvios sitting up on Wikipedia, because they'll eventually be deleted.... This is irresponsible. The copyright violation should have been edited into the history, as I did, then administratively removed, and the AfD continued. Wikipedia does not take problems seriously, like copyright violations, and inaccuracies, so they keep occurring. It's tiresome seeing Wikipedia articles appear at the top of search engine results, articles that are inaccurate, copyright violations, worthless. Editors and administrators need to take this seriously and be responsible. I can predict your "'outraged Wikipedian' than 'anybody' would speak to" you response, so no need to. --69.226.108.255 (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

RFA thanks

		Thanks for the support
		Thanks for your support on my request for adminship, which passed 92/2/2. Heh, I wasn't sure where to post my thanks, but here works. I'll be sure to learn the ways of the mop, and I'll live up to the expectations of the community. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Duke of Zhou Metropolitan Police Authority Currie Graham Labrador Peninsula Sydney Town Hall Republican Governors Association Printemps Zénaïde Laetitia Julie Bonaparte Staffordshire Lorraine Segato Defense industry Toller Cranston McLintock! Arms industry The Flumps Bernard Horsfall Bronislava Nijinska Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester Uyghur people

Cleanup Salford History of East Timor Northenden Merge Random access memory Haughton, Greater Manchester Harper College Add Sources East Didsbury Marketing Manchester The Salvation Army in Manchester Wikify Dollhouse Liberalitas Necrophagist Expand Matalan Polymer York Community High School

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Daniel Boey

Thank you for your response. Is there anything I can do to stop this constant deletion/recreation by these multiple admins? Its really getting out of hand.

Thanks Succisa75 (talk) 18:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Cab gmbh deleted

Hi, ma page was a description of the company CAB. It was not a SPAM or a COI, i readed wiki articles about that. I did exactly the same as ZEBRA for exemple : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra_Technologies Could i know the reason ? thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludovic19 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The rationale for deletion is obvious

Please read more here: User_talk:Nightscream#Deletion_avoidance. ScienceApologist (talk) 17:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I misunderstood. Thanks for your help. Nightscream (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

...

User:21655#There's still a chance Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 18:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

You've been blocked

Hahaha, yeah I just happened to catch it on the watchlist each time, lol, and here's your own funny header :P « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Dont worry

Don't worry I created my own wierd but wonderful navigation! Thanks anyway though and Keep up the good work in the Rfa department ; ) --Camaeron (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your kind comment and award. I will transfer it to My awards page, I have been so looking forward to one of these! Thanks!! --Camaeron (talk) 18:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Protection Request

With all due respect, I STRONGLY suggest that you reconsider your decision to decline my protection request on Todd Schnitt, MJ Morning Show, and Bubba the Love Sponge. If you were to review the edit histories in closer detail, you will noticed that - particularly on the Todd Schnitt article - there is an established pattern of IP vandalism. Reviewing those edits, it is apparent that the edits are coming from listeners of Bubba the Love Sponge, as it has appeared to be his personal goal since returning to terrestrial radio to make MJ's life "a living hell." He frequently talks about MJ on the air and the lawsuit that was filed today is likely to result in not only his on-air discussions of MJ increasing, but also an increase in his fans hitting all of the articles involved and "cheerleading."

Respectfully, --InDeBiz1 (talk) 18:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

copyright violation ?

hi, Today I created my first page, which you just seem to have deleted due a blatant copyright infringement.. I noticed that the bot had found a webpage with the same text as the newly created page, so I followed the 'what to do now' and stated in the 'talk page' on the newly created page that there was no copyright infringment because the site in question borrowed this text from the original source (which I mentionned)..

hmm this sounds confusing.. so I created a page about a 'Who's Who' with the text that accompagnies the online version, but another website also has used this original text and now the bot suggested that I took the text from this third website, but in fact it is the other way, so this isn't a blatant copyright infringement imo, so can this page be restored ?

18:18, 18 March 2008 Rudget (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Who is Who in African Art" ‎ (CSD G8 - talk page of a deleted page)

18:18, 18 March 2008 Rudget (Talk | contribs) deleted "Who is Who in African Art" ‎ (G12: Blatant copyright infringement: http://www.buyafricanantiques.com/whoiswho.htm)

--Bruno.Claessens (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Albany1.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Albany1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 22:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC) --Polly (Parrot) 22:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Intercontinental Hotelcorp Logo.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Intercontinental Hotelcorp Logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 22:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Withington

With all due respect, I fail to see what is "incorrect" about my changes, so please do tell me.

• The dialling codes are certainly not incorrect (I can provide citation for this). They may not be consistent with other GM articles, but that doesn't make them wrong, and I am willing to make this case at WP:GM if necessary.

• Concerning the student population of Withington, your original lead-in is, in my view, potentially misleading as it could easily be interpreted as stating that the area is predominantly inhabited by students; whilst there is a sizeable student population, this phrasing overlooks (by failing to mention) the sizeable other demographics. My re-wording is both clearer and more consistent with the h2hg citation which you originally provided in the Transport section - quite bizarrely actually, as that point didn't really have much to do with transportation hence the reason I moved it. I also think that it is generally pretty bad form to remove a useful citation simply because you don't like the wording; citations re-enforce the authority of an article - admittedly h2g2 isn't the best source, but the point still stands.

• With regards to the Parliamentary Constituency matter, I feel that Withington the constituency and Withington the village are two substantially different topics, both in terms of subject matter and as geographical area (the boundaries are substantially different for a start); this point is quite clearly established by the fact that there have been two separate articles for the two separate topics for quite some time. Your original wording begins the article with Withington is a village and parliamentary constituency [...] - this could quite easily be taken to imply that the article intends to cover both subjects rather than being concerned primarily with the former and simply touching on the latter; whilst you do make a link to Manchester Withington (UK Parliament constituency) you name that link as simply "parliamentary constituency" which a reader could quite easily assume to be just a link to the Parliamentary constituency article and completely overlook the fact that there is a separate article on this particular constituency. If you honestly believe that the Withington article ought to cover both topics - I for one don't - then I suggest starting a debate on the matter by proposing an article merger, rather than what appears to be a deliberate attempt to muddy the waters between the two through ambiguous wording! My rephrasing emphasised the differences between the two separate articles and made the fact that Withington was merely one of many towns in the Manchester Withington constituency much clearer!

• Finally, since your reversion, you have also added an additional point that the UoM and MMU combined have the largest UK student population. Not only is this point completely meaningless (for instance you could try to claim that all the London Universities combined have the largest student population in the UK or for that matter that all the universities in England combined have the largest student population in the UK!), but it also overlooks the point that UoM by itself has the largest population of any single campus university, a far more meaningful statement.

So yes, please tell me exactly what I have changed that is "incorrect". I appreciate your improvements to this article which are for the most part constructive and highly beneficial, but you have to realise - admin or not - that good articles come from constructive collaboration rather than reverting changes at a whim because you don't like them or because they deviate from previous standards even if those standards might be questionable and could be open to constructive debate. Otherwise you could be be accused of bloody-mindedness, which I am sure is not the case.

I am now going to revert your reversion in the hope that instead you'll raise your points for public debate in the appropriate article or wikiproject discussion pages, so as to reach a more reasoned consensus and hopefully also bring other opinions and interest into this article.

-- Fursday 20:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not revert most of your changes, I just made the changes to the lead-in and a couple of other points for the reasons I stated above. Besides which you were the one who started with the blanket revert - which was kind of my entire point!

I am very pleased and grateful for your contributions to this article in general - perhaps I should have emphasised this more; I share in your aim to improve the articles quality, and by absolutely no means whatsoever do I want to dissuade you from your continuation! Blanket reverts - at least those without prior discussion - can come over a bit heavy-handed and are likely to ruffle people's feathers! Especially if you're reverting many different changes for different reasons all in one go. You must admit that I did have at least a valid argument w.r.t. the above and I'd rather have an argument about the changes than a revert-war, which is what this boils down to.

Regarding the dialling codes, you may well be right that this goes against established style, and in that context please do revert them and let me argue the case in the appropriate channels.

-- Fursday 16:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Advice

Can you tell me if I was right to investigate and follow up on [15] this edit made by ShieldDane? I don't want to spark the whole situation off again! Igniateff (talk) 11:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

He creates his account the day the other account was banned. And he is drawn to dead topic where he feels he needs to put in his two cents? Not to mention he tells me to stop 'trolling' that page, when it's obvious after my 'owned' I had no further interest in posting there. Was I right? Was I wrong? Perhaps a little of both, but i feel the spirit in which he interceded is wrong, and more than that I suspect he isn't who he would claim to be. ShieldDane (talk) 06:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ani#Igniateff_is_Joshuarooney —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShieldDane (talk • contribs) 12:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Alphonso M. Lunt

Resolved

 – Notifier has already re-created it. Rudget. 16:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that you deleted this article do to copyright infringement however the information contained on the article was not subject to copyright laws and is available as free information from the government. If you check the reference that was on the article it will lead you to a United States Army website. Please restore this article at your earliest convenience.--Kumioko (talk) 17:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal promotions

Hello. Are you aware that the bot updates the talk page and adds the featured portal star? Gimmetrow 16:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

FPOC Portal:James Bond

What is the IE you stated on the FPOC page? Ultra! 17:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Internet Explorer. It may just be my one. :P Rudget. 17:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Doctor Who serials

Thanks again; I fear I may have to come back soon. As I said on the page's talk, it's been a lovely three months with semi, then yesterday it all started again!! And as the new series starts in a fortnight, people are more anxious to add rubbish than ever... I'm afraid you'll have to expect me coming asking for reprotection :-( —TreasuryTag—t—c 17:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, very good, thanks! —TreasuryTag—t—c 17:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

User:NewYorkDreams...

...is requesting a review of their block from you in particular. Thought I'd let you know. _GB^T/C 06:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the rollback granting — wow, you're fast! Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 12:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Caulde. You have new messages at Toddst1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

STARS Methodology - Reliable source

Hello again, I did not see any response on whether you consider the American Society for Quality to be a reliable source that meets the requirement for NPOV. Could you please advise? --Hanvanloon (talk) 19:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure that you know the editorial policy of the American Society for Quality (ASQ). Every article is first reviewed by a minimum of two people (sometimes 3) to decide whether the article is a serious, factually accurate item and of interest to its readers. For articles they accept, there then follows an intense editing regime, the editor works closely with the author. Finally it is reviewed again by another reviewer and any additional edits made. This is a very rigorous process. It takes at least 6 months from submission to publication. It is why I believe quoting any article published by them is a reliable source and meets the WP:SPAM, WP:NORand WP:NPOV criteria. That is why I find Daniel Penfield's attitude to be enormously offensive. I tried to have a reasonable discussion with him but he just used policies as hammers, and has changed his position/interpretation several times as well as taking actions that I have to interpret as breach of the WP policies he has thrown at me. While I am not a long term contributor to Wikipedia and acknowledge I have made some mistakes in my early editing, it is people like him that make me questions whether I should just give up and pull all my contributions back. --Hanvanloon (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The source isn't the reason why the page was deleted, so focusing on that will no re-instate the page. As the page can be seen by non-admins at User:Rudget/STARS methodology - it is clear that the pages intention is to promote. Also, can I ask again why sockpuppetry was mentioned in your first query here, you don't seem to have written any more regarding that issue, which is more important than restoring the page, IMO. Rudget. 16:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, in my work I only get occasional times in the evening to write. To answer your comments in order. 1. The page is promoting a methodology that is available under GNU Free document license and considered serious enough for ASQ to publish. A quick search under STARS gives a page: S.T.A.R.S. Members (Resident Evil), would you consider this as promotional? Another page from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star - goes to http://science.howstuffworks.com/star1.htm, this page definitely promotes and runs advertisements!! I guess this confuses me, why don't editors delete these links, they seem far worse to me than another editor (Isabel de Pablo) linking to a GNU Free doc licensed page without advertisements. --Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

2. I reread the user talk page of Isabel de Pablo and found that it was Daniel Penfield made the allegation of commercial interest as the reason to delete the page, i.e. he implied that she was a sockpuppet. She has actually responded to this on her talk page but there has been no reply to her (which I think is rather poor). Reading what she wrote, I think she considers restoring the page to more important than the sockpuppetry issue. Furthermore Penfield clearly wrote this to Helixweb who restored a PDCA text section without any links --Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)--

-- [# (cur) (last) 16:44, 17 March 2008 Helixweb (Talk | contribs) (2,478 bytes) (→"Some of the content looked okay from my first quick glance.") (undo)

1. (cur) (last) 13:40, 17 March 2008 DanielPenfield (Talk | contribs) (1,779 bytes) (+WTF, redux) (undo)
2. (cur) (last) 13:39, 17 March 2008 DanielPenfield (Talk | contribs) (1,664 bytes) (+WTF) (undo)
3. (cur) (last) 09:09, 17 March 2008 Helixweb (Talk | contribs) (empty) (←Blanked the page) (undo)
4. (cur) (last) 15:42, 16 March 2008 DanielPenfield (Talk | contribs) (3,498 bytes)(Special:Contributions/Hanvanloon) (undo)

[(13:39, 17 March 2008 DanielPenfield (Talk | contribs) (1,664 bytes) (+WTF) (undo)) "Some of the content looked okay from my first quick glance." You never directly answered the question posed in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AHelixweb&diff=198819168&oldid=198645301 . Am I to assume you're sweeping it under the carpet?

Yes, I am. Helixweb (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

What's the point in having a WP:SPAM policy if you're just going to roll over when a spammer complains that vigilant editors have removed his website/publications for sale from articles after repeated warnings? What's the point in having a WP:NOR policy if you're just going to give in when a crackpot complains when his pet theory is challenged? What's the point in having a WP:COI policy if you're going to look the other way when a spammer complains when sham articles set up by his crony/sockpuppet/shill account are deleted per Wikipedia policy (viz., Wikipedia:Proposed deletion).

It appears you're misinterpreting my comments. I never said not to remove his website, his NOR or his created articles. I said you need to calm down a bit, which I think given your tone towards me, is an entirely warranted criticism. Remember to be CIVIL at all times. This scorched-earth policy of yours to undo every single one of his edits is proof that you are NOT taking the high ground, and will likely antagonize him further. You would be a much better editor if you read WP:Civil a couple more times. Helixweb (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC).]

BTW, is there a standard way to quote/mark these extractions? As you have previously stated on your user page that you are involved in the sockpuppet submission board I can see how Penfield's allegations would trigger a rapid deletion. So apologies if I was not clear in separating the two components of the sockpuppetry and subsequent page deletion. To further inform you why I think this is a vendetta rather than unbiased editing, here is a further exchange between Penfield and Helixweb.--Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

From what I've seen you've undid many of his edits to his own talk page, which I believe is bad form. Helixweb (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)] --

I have added the talk page reference for you if you wish to go there directly to make sure I am not making this up.--Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I have admitted to making some mistakes when initially editing (i.e. doing it anonymously). BTW, Penfield did this too at times. At no time did I reference web site pages that try to sell anything from the pages I wrote (Quality Management, PDCA), the links are to GNU Free document license information pages about PDCA, the methodology, ISO15504 info, etc. This was in fact better than several external links that existed on the PDCA page when I first edited it (and that occurs on many other pages too). So (maybe incorrectly) I did the same. I have not even made any external links for several months. Penfield has kept external web site links that actually DO try to sell things (from PDCA link to ASQ page - they sell their Quality Toolbox at the bottom of their PDCA page). So while he likes to quote policies, he is at best inconsistent in applying them, at worst he is acting as Helixweb notes (scorched-earth approach). In fact I tried to engage him in an equitable discussion about these points some time ago but he edited my page, so I gave up. --Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I tried to contact the lady who wrote the STARS methodology page, but she appears to be unreachable at the moment. I noted before that if you perform an IP address check it will show that I cannot be this person. If it helps, I can try to get into contact with her and arrange a three way discussion so that it is absolutely clear that she is not me.--Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the long discussion but I feel that it is easy for Penfield to accuse me and harder for me to defend myself. My perception is that being a loud critic is far easier than being a content editor. I appreciate your time to read and respond. --Hanvanloon (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Since I believe your main aim is to restore the article, I am declining mainly because of the deletion I carried out and per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 16, where five editors endorsed the deletion. Regards, Rudget. 11:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adminship

I know, sorry about that. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well thank you for thinking of me as a great editor, but I'm sorta nervous with answering the questions and all. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

my RFA

Thank you! Thank you for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (73/3/1), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you need help, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an admin. Have a nice day! :) Aleta Sing 18:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

re: Hanvanloon

Could you please explain the problem with username User:Hanvanloon? I understand in general the reasons for a username block but I don't see the specific problem in this case. The block log explains a COI regarding the STARS methodology but I don't understand how a COI relates to a username problem. In any event the user has chosen a new name and has requested an unblock. Thanks. Sbowers3 (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Ping

Get into IRC, plz. FYI, I'm in ##RudgetKnight. Maxim_(talk) 14:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done Rudget. 14:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup

STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Irish!} 22:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and the top two in each pool advances. STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Irish!} 13:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That month. STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Irish!} 13:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The FAs. STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Irish!} 14:23, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

my RFA

Thank you! Thank you for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (73/3/1), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you need help, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an admin. Have a nice day! :) Aleta Sing 18:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

re: Hanvanloon

Could you please explain the problem with username User:Hanvanloon? I understand in general the reasons for a username block but I don't see the specific problem in this case. The block log explains a COI regarding the STARS methodology but I don't understand how a COI relates to a username problem. In any event the user has chosen a new name and has requested an unblock. Thanks. Sbowers3 (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Ping

Get into IRC, plz. FYI, I'm in ##RudgetKnight. Maxim_(talk) 14:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done Rudget. 14:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the rollback. I was wondering why I clicked on diff and it reverted the edit. But then I checked and you gave me rollback. So you were going to give me it before?--RyRy5 talk 16:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		A small token for giving me,RyRy5, the rollback feature when my request was only up for 10 minutes and for already considering me to have rollback. Thanks alot!--RyRy5 talk 16:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Your very welcome. The rollback can be very useful to me in my RC patrol. I already made 2200+ edits in only 1 month and 3 days. Now, that can really improve. Thanks again.--RyRy5 talk 16:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Catherine of Aragon/Katherine of Aragon

Thanks for trying to protect this article-- since the redirect, what are you going to do? (Don't want to bollox the article history because of a zealous newbie that's already been blocked once. Cheers --Yamara ✉

Hi again. If it were as simple as "K over C" then I'd be happy to leave it at that. But both are verifiable and correct-- one is the popular, one the historical/scholarly. This is a verifiable recipe for constant, pointless edit wars. Please see rpp page... --Yamara ✉ 19:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Wait.. huh?

Hey man, nobody told me you were back. I know it's a bit late, but welcome back! --Sharkface217 00:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Hertfordshire

Could you do me a big favour by finishing off the table, then I'll go through and add the citation sheet links and fill in the blanks in the lead. It might be ready for FLC tomorrow. I'm on IRC (#Wikipedia-en) if you need to speak. Thanks, Qst (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I should be able to finish it today. Rudget. 12:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Wait there, please don't initiate the featured list candidate yet. I need to do one more thing to the list first. Qst (talk) 14:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead :D Rudget. 14:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've got to run for a while now, unfortunately. By the way, who's nominating it? Me or you? Qst (talk) 14:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Erm, I don't mind. What were you thinking of adding? Rudget. 14:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, then. I'll write out a brief nomination statement now. Oh, and I've completely forgot what I was going to add, but if it comes back to me - I'll sort it out. :) Qst (talk) 15:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, the list is ready for transclusion. Just say when you're ready, and either you or I will transclude. Qst (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

You may aswell transclude, after all, you wrote it. Rudget. 16:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I sent you a few messages on IRC regarding the list, then realised you'd been offline for over 40 minutes, the silly IRC client didn't tell me when I was messaging you. :) Qst (talk) 17:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

harrasser of Toddst1 (talk · contribs)

Fattiesshoulddie (talk · contribs) is now Monkeyballs200 (talk · contribs). Track IP? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks like he has been blocked. Rudget. 16:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

{{Great Offices of State}}

Thanks for protecting {{Great Offices of State}}. However, Electrobe's edit is still in place and needs to be reverted. Also, the {{pp-dispute}} is visible on pages it's attached to. Thanks. --Philip Stevens (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Has it been fixed? Rudget. 17:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Not quite, you need to put <noinclude></noinclude> round Category:United Kingdom politics and government navigational boxes otherwise the pages the template is on are added to the category. --Philip Stevens (talk) 17:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for that. Rudget. 17:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Much better, thank you. --Philip Stevens (talk) 17:23, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hanvanloon

I ask that you unblock User: Hanvanloon on the basis of WP:BITE and WP:AGF. He has made useful contributions to several articles in the Quality management area, which apparently is his specialty. As a beginner, he has made mistakes but I've been working to teach him our way of doing things. I think the right way to handle him is with careful explanations, then possibly warnings, if necessary escalating blocks. Starting out with an indef block without any user talk page warnings, and without first trying short blocks, seems excessive. I'm confused, and he no doubt was confused, by "username" as the block reason. That apparently is not the reason, COI is the real reason. But COI is not a prohibition and not a reason for an indef block. Sbowers3 (talk) 18:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

COI is an integral part of the {{uw-ublock}} (username) block. If a company comes here to promote their work, they are clearly a single-purpose account, and therefore blockable. This is reflected in the two unblock reasons on the respective talk page. If you wish to state this case at WP:ANI, you are welcome to do so. Rudget. 18:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out that all username blocks are for an indefinite period of time. Rudget. 18:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding SPA, consider his major expansion to ISO 15504. He didn't mention STARS at all. He came to that article not to promote his work, but to improve the encyclopedia. His edits to Quality management and PDCA added substantial material that was totally unrelated to STARS. It seems to me that his purpose was to improve the articles, and he thought that mentioning STARS would help do that - not that adding STARS was his purpose.

I understand that a username block is indefinite until the user changes name. In this case, his name is not a problem - it's his own name, not a company name - and he is prepared to change name. That would ordinarily lead automatically to an unblock. What action by this user would lead to an unblock? Sbowers3 (talk) 19:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest bringing this to ANI, I don't know whether to unblock on the grounds of good contributions or keep the same for quoting himself in references. Further input is needed. Rudget. 19:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

GTA IV Protection

Thank you so much for Semi-Protecting the GTA IV article! :´) I was about to have a breakdown! Emil Kastberg (talk) 20:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA

I started this once before. Not sure if I'm ready to dig in (e.g. find diffs, etc.) to try to promote myself in that way again. But it would certainly be easier for vandal-fighting. Any thoughts would be appreciated. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be with you in about half an hour. Tied up with a list at the moment. :) Rudget. 14:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Reason #1) Life happens. IRL stuff (work, home) was interfering with my effectiveness in my extracurricular online life, so I had to trim it back; #2) the comments here I never addressed, due in part to #1. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather get it done. Postponement is a definition of my life I'd like to shed. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

...sounds like a logical procedure... - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you can call me Tony... Anthony only if I'm trouble. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Transcluding... oh sure, use words I don't know the meaning of right away and make me look dumb. :P - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Why, what's wrong with that? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Has it been transcluded yet? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know the code for it or where it goes... exactly... - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

<Wow, really deep... Um, yes, I would appreciate that. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Is it appropriate for me to inform selected administrators of this RfA, or just to let it go by random passersby? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

What does this mean? What's wrong with question 10? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I caught that. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting to note that the disagreement on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen King (soccer) has garnered support, where I took issue with the opposition that was based on that same discussion. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

ADCO

αѕєηιηє ^t/_c has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I did Stage 3! :) αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 06:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added some more questions. :) Rudget. 16:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Withington

Nice work here! Looks great! I hadn't noticed you'd been expanding the page. Looks like a new forthcoming GA from you??? --Jza84 |  Talk  14:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you're really keen on going for it, I'd be more than willing to help out!... I'll have a flick through a couple of my books for Withington factoids if that helps. Would be great to squeeze out a new GA between us! --Jza84 |  Talk  14:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Very much so. It's been a while now since I've done any article work, so I want to get stuck in. Rudget. 14:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'd welcome your input on main article space, especially one that is WP:GM related!

I've had a look in my three main pan-Greater Manchester books, but sadly, Withington doesn't get a mention, which is a shame. I'll see where-else I can help. Is there anything in particular that you think needs work? You may or may not be aware that all photos in this photo set have been released to a licence compatable with WikiCommons :-) --Jza84 |  Talk  15:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Goody! That'll be a great aid. Maybe Withington isn't notable enough :) Rudget. 15:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I only know the place "fleetingly", so I must admit my knowledge is limited. I always assumed Withington was more akin to industrial Chorlton-on-Medlock than suburban Didsbury, though it appears I've learnt my fact of the day with that one. I'll try to expand the page where I can. Keep me in the loop. --Jza84 |  Talk  15:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Will do. Chorlton-on-Medlock, is that near Gorton? Rudget. 15:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

RfC/Malleus Fatuarum

I noticed you were in the process of adding your view to Malleus Fatuarum's Request for Comment, but decided to withdraw. Please feel free to add your view to the RfC. Any contribution to this process is welcome. — scetoaux (T/C) 14:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Wales

Sorry you withdrew the WP:FPORTC. I think the recommendations brought up in the discussion will help the portal and make it better in the long run - let me know if you would like any help working on it between now and the next FPORTC discussion. Cirt (talk) 20:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Page protection

Can we reduce it down to semi? All of the accounts were created today. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Y No protection now. Rudget. 17:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey!

Hi Rudget! If you don't remember me from before, you gave me rollback rights. I was just wondering if you liked baseball. Do you?--RyRy5 talk 17:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Erm, not especially. I'm not American in so many words :) Rudget. 17:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Dmcm2008

Hello Rudget,

I just wondered if you felt that I ought to seek some kind of early-stage formal mediation or other kind of input regarding User:Dmcm2008, a contributor whom I've had a content dispute with which ended in a consensus in my favour (for want of a better phrase). I've tried to bring the best out of this user during and since our dispute but have continued to face some, well, "challenging" conduct from him.

I'm not asking from intervention (or input) from yourself (or anyone else), but I'm mindful that I think I've exhausted most recommendations made by the various policies and guidelines such as outlining that I have the article's best interests at heart, suggesting a compromise, and requesting third opinions. I have no interests in making things unpleasant for Dmcm2008 but I am alarmed by recent comment from him that attest he is unlikely to amend our relationship.

I think the various threads at User_talk:Dmcm2008 (complimented by User_talk:Jza84#Whiston) coupled with his contributions give the best portrayal of where we're both upto. Do you have any thoughts/suggestions on where I ought to take this? I'm coming to you specifically as someone who is a) an entrusted and respected administrator and b) someone with more experience than myself with this kind of thing. A response is not mandatory (of course) but most welcomed! --Jza84 |  Talk  18:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be giving one tomorrow. :) Rudget. 18:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. --Jza84 |  Talk  00:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Due to a futher bout of incivility, I had actually posted a noticed at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Dmcm2008 to obtain feedback on this user. I have offered an olive branch to him/her in the past but it was not effective (obviously).

I should add I wasn't notified about edit warring, but for a reason. I did go upto 3 reverts only once a consensus at a central talk page had been formed against his/her point of view, in which case I thought it was fair as the discussion had closed with WP:SNOW. I do however greatly appreciate your input Rudget! It would be a shame to loose this user, as we really need someone with enthusiasm for Liverpool to start raising the standard. I hope this input has an effect and we can get this user on board. Thanks again, --Jza84 |  Talk  13:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I hope this is where the line can be drawn. Rudget. 13:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

:) Spebi (talk) 05:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Replied. Rudget. 16:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

A sock

Hi, I noticed that you were the one that blocked MJD86 (talk · contribs) for sockpuppetry. I believe another sock has popped up: TodayIAmAClown (talk · contribs), who added the same thing to an article that previous MJD socks tried to add. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Blocked indef. Rudget. 12:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift responce

Thanks for granting my request at WP:RFR. And even more thanks for the speed at which it was granted :) Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 12:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) Rudget. 12:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

regarding your message to me. I am not trying to 'edit war', forgive me I do not know others 'edit war' with me. As whenever I seem to edit for the purpose of enhancing an article or correcting something, as in Falkner Square, I am challenged by either Jza84 or Kitchen Knife. Jza84 is very experienced when it comes to telling you the WP rules and I am fed up with this; I had tried to be a good editor --- a new learning editor ---- but I find these two want to challenge the majority of my edits. As one backs the other up it is also perceived that I am outnumbered. Personal attacks on Jza84 are because the user needs to stop being so silly with his action. I have to argue with an outside of Liverpool over areas I have 'knowledge on' when I am not able to provide a reference. It means when I see something as wrong or put something I believe is correct, based on my knowledge, these two users work against me. No matter what I say I am being 'bullied' for want of a better word. Which I will leave these two users to do their bullying to someone else, I have no interest..I will keep an eye on WP articles but there is no point getting too involved with those two around. Dmcm2008 (talk) 13:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC) I had tried to work on wikipedia but got harrassed by those two editors at different times. I worked on the Vauxhall,Liverpool article from almost scratch, and got praise and help from Snowy. Sadly other edits I made had been targeted by the above. As all I wanted to do was expand or correct items-but Jza84 in particluar reverted them and began to sprout WP rules. That is his way not mine, I only wanted to do simple edits he took it too far particularly my judgement on Liverpools suburbs--AS did KK. Dmcm2008 (talk) 14:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: my last comment

You've set up your Werdnabot to archive within 24 hours, so perhaps you missed my last comment, but I was wondering how to proceed with the WikiProject report. Are there some standard questions I can put to the WikiProject? JACOPLANE • 2008-03-16 23:01

Re: Your deletions

Import my monobook and you'll see three tabs at the top of most pages - "di/b" empties a page or category of its images, "di/t" traverses through image categories at high speed, and "dp/b" will delete all pages linked from the page you're visiting. east.718 at 19:43, March 17, 2008

What?!

Oh snap, the DEA is an admin

They call them croissants I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, which I'm very glad to say was successful at 81/7/0. Some of the very best that Wikipedia has to offer came out to support or oppose me and the kind words from all the editors has really given me confidence to be an admin and I can't wait to start. I will take the advice of the opposes and not jump into any content disputes immediately. As well, I will try to add more content myself. Anyways, in thanks for participating in my RfA, I've made you this French pastry. Enjoy!

WikiProject Video games report

Hi Rudget, I haven't got time right now to work on the report, but I've pointed WT:VG to the preliminary report page. If you want some feedback on the questions you used, please ask there: all people who are involved in the project monitor that page and most people there know each other well. I'll be able to take some time to respond to your questions after tomorrow, I'm currently celebrating Easter with my family, so I have little time for Wikipedia! Take care, JACOPLANE • 2008-03-23 20:07

Atlanta

Hi Rudget. I wanted to find out why Atlanta is semi-protected. I saw that it had been badly vandalized yesterday by Dirkastan, but he's since been blocked. Is something else going on? The reason I'm asking is that it's currently a GA nominee, and semi-protection status could raise concerns during the review. Thanks, Majoreditor (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done Apologies for that. I'll mention the mistake for the GA reviewer and hopefully that'll alay any concerns of unstability. Regards, Rudget. 14:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!! Majoreditor (talk) 14:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Harriet Tubman

Thank you for semi-protecting this page. You noted: "If it returns after the one month is finished, I'd advise asking for indefinite protection." I have requested this in the past (always denied). I'm quite sure it will be vandalized again after one month, and I will certainly request indefinite semi-protection when that happens. Thanks again. – Scartol • Tok 19:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for being available. – Scartol • Tok 23:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

OSx86 protection

Just wanted to say thanks for helping stem the tide by semi-protecting the OSx86 article, so... thanks! – ɜɿøɾɪɹℲ _{( тɐʟк • ¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs )} 20:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Help please

Hey, I was wondering if you can take a look at Transportation in Taiwan and find where the page has gone? It looks like it was deleted after being moved around a few times. Ta. ^┌_Joshii^┐_└^chat_┘ 10:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm.. Am I looking at the page moves or the history of the page before the deletion? Welcome back by the way. Rudget. 15:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

User name block?

Hi, may I ask why you blocked username "RecreationalTherapy"? Thanks. (I'll watch your talk page.) Dan Beale-Cocks 15:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, sure thing. They were advertising for that very product at User:RecreationalTherapy, Recreational Therapy and User talk:RecreationalTherapy. I do note however that at least one of them has been recreated. Rudget. 15:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I feel the editor is trying to make good faith edits to improve the encyclopedia, but is unaware that WP probaly already has articles covering the subject they're interested in. I don't think they're spamming. "recreational therapy" isn't a product. Dan Beale-Cocks 15:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

In the deleted version of the mainspace article, it is slightly promotional and does in my opinion comply with G11 deletion, which if the article creator is under the same name consequents a username block. Looks like LeisureG8R is the new account, so lets see how that goes. He can always contribute under that name. Rudget. 15:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

AIV "clerking"

Hi Rudget, I can trust you as an admin :) I'm asking your opinion. Do you think it's OK what I am doing here. I feel I'm doing fine, it's helping out (I feel) and its saving admins time. But I just wanted your thought on it. I also created a template for this use, non-admin commenting, its Template:AIV comment. Do you think thats OK? I also want to help out at WP:RFPP, you think thats possible. And I'm not an admin. If I was, I'd be blocking/protecting myself, but I'm just a lowly rollbacker. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 15:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that's a great idea, but I don't own the community, so who knows whether it'll be accepted. I don't really see much reason why not to, but I expect some people will say that you don't need a template when you could simply comment – either way it's helpful. :) As with regards to RFPP assistance, there isn't much point unless you can express notes like whether the filer of the request has been involved in a content dispute or for example whether the article is already protected in which case you'd use {{RFPP|ap}}. Rudget. 15:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage...

...is awesome! I highly respect editors who can steal things from other editors and shamelessly post a notice on their userpage =P ! Happy editing, Malinaccier (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage...

Ashumez gd faif plz, Mr Glasgow man :) Rudget. 12:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I will never AGF... cuz thiz iz SERIUS biznis! :) Anthøny 12:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Does not exist? *wonders why* :) Anthøny 12:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

/me thoughtfully wonders of a lolcat *avoiding all response* :) Rudget. 12:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Just don't be going all inactive and retiring on us, now ;) Anthøny 12:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to borrow/steal the formatting of my user page for yourself, even if it is a little complex. Nobody owns (intellectually, editorially or commercially) any part of any page on Wikipedia. Your current lack of userpage confused me (on my watchlist) into thinking this was somekind of bad faith imposter!... though investigation shows it is not of course. --Jza84 |  Talk  13:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Greetings

--Crazy_Anne (Eh..eh..eh) 13:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Participation in editing dispute at Jewish lobby

Since you have become involved in the editing dispute at Jewish lobby, would you like to be added to Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Jewish lobby? --John Nagle (talk) 16:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I will be leaving my comment there shortly. Regards, Rudget. 16:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry that someone attempted to drag you in to this. Normal administrative actions do not make someone "involved" in a dispute. I requested the protection through normal channels, since I believe, as the mediator in this case, that the daily edit warring is non-productive and hindering our ability to resolve the case through proper channels. Thank you for reviewing the protection request and acting on it. Shell ^babelfish 17:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

New Tzatziki Squad collaboration!

Hello! I'm here to inform you that the Tzatziki Squad has begun a new collaboration, history of timekeeping devices. The goal for the article is Featured status. Please pitch in as much or as little as you can, we appreciate your help! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah. If protection was requested by the mediator, that's fine. --John Nagle (talk) 19:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage... (again)

Why don't you make it redirect to the talk page? weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The User:Hanvanloon case

FYI: Update to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Hanvanloon. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 22:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

A message from WarthogDemon.

Korean Fir I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, was unsuccessful with 61 support, 25 oppose, and 4 neutral. I've been taking the advice of the Opposes into practice and hopefully I can improve myself. Once again, thank you. ^_^

My RfA

I can has mop?

Hi Caulde/Archive March 2008! Thank you for your support in my RfA (87/3/3). I truely appreciate the many votes of confidence, and I will exert myself to live up to those expectations. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)