User talk:Eagles247/Archive 17

Well, here's a weird one

Eagles, take a look at this: [1]. This user has cut and pasted Don Chandler's page to his user page and substituted his own name, "Moe Reese," for Chandler's. This has real potential to mislead WP readers and readers of WP's mirror sites, and the user has the page listed in "Category:Florida Gators football players" (which is how I found it). Please work your magical admin powers on this----and make it go away. *poof* Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I'm guessing that this is somehow related to this sandbox effort: [2]. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I have deleted both, as they are in violation of WP:UP#COPIES. If anything like this comes up again, just let me know. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Schmeater RFA

Perhaps you could warn this user about his rfa with that template you use? Thanks! Perseus (t • c) 14:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:54, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

How?

How to make a request of adminship? Thanks! « CA » (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Please follow the directions at WP:RFA/NOM. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Why "not live yet" ? « CA » (talk) 18:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Read the guideline I pointed out above. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! « CA » (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

HELP :O « CA » (talk) 18:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes? Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:43, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Help in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Meaghan :| « CA » (talk) 19:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The first thing you have to do is wait for Meaghan to either accept or decline your nomination. If she declines, I will delete the page, since there is no reason to keep a declined nom. If she accepts it, she will have to answer the three questions at the RfA. You may want to expand upon your nomination statement, as !voters want to see all the good things Meaghan brings to the project. When she finishes answering the questions, you can then transclude it at WP:RFA. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

GRACIAS - THANKS - MERCI - DANK - GRAZIE

« CA » (talk) 19:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism tools not requiring special permission

Hey Eagles 24/7! Regarding this recent discussion, it’s one thing to revoke someone’s rollback privileges so that they can no longer use Huggle, and to blacklist them from Twinkle, but how do we keep them from being able to use the other counter-vandalism tools (e.g., IGLOO, STiki, etc.)? I’m concerned because of this suggestion to a recently de-rollbacked editor that states, “There are also other vandalism tools out there that don’t require special permissions.”

My query has specific application to the case we have been discussing. But, it also has general application: why does Wikipedia permit an editor without rollback privileges to effect rollback-like edits with counter-vandalism tools? It seems to me that there should be a policy against it. If there were, unless I am mistaken, only Huggle would be in compliance. I have been thinking of this for sometime, but do not know where to go to propose it? Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)? Thanks!

— SpikeToronto 20:13, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Excellent questions. It really doesn't make sense that users with rollback could use a counter-vandalism tool to rollback edits. I would ask at WP:VPT. In regards to blacklisting Wayne from other counter-vandalism tools, we could do one of two things. We could either (a) contact the developers of all of the counter-vandalism tools to see if we can blacklist for their tools, or (b) tell Wayne that if he uses any type of counter-vandalism tool before his mentor thinks he is ready, he will be blocked. We could try the first one first, and if the developers say we can't blacklist for their tools, then we go to option (b). Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:23, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Speaking here as Wayne's mentor: I would support blocking him if he uses anti-vandalism tools before I think he's ready. May I suggest that I coach him on what vandalism is and isn't? It would certainly be an easier way to tell if/when Wayne is ready to use anti-vandal tools again. I believe trying to get him to work in areas such as NPP, AfC, and DYK wouldn't hurt either. I'd appreciate your input; you're more experienced than I.

SpikeToronto: I would oppose applying that policy to Twinkle, since rollback is itself more powerful than Twinkle. However, if Igloo, STiki, and Lupin's tool (along with any other anti-vandalism tools I've forgotten to mention) are as fast and efficient as Huggle, then those tools should certainly require rollback first. Disclaimer: Twinkle and Huggle are the only anti-vandalism tools I've used, although I have seen Igloo in action. --Dylan620 ^{(t • c • r)} 21:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Dylan, you might want to peruse Wayne’s talk page and talk page archives to familiarize yourself with what mentoring he has already received as well as problem areas to which you may want to direct your mentoring efforts. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 01:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to teach him whatever basic concepts a vandal-fighter should know. You may also want to mention the potential consequences should he use a counter-vandalism tool before you think he's ready to him on his talk page, as well. The first thing he should be working on is content creation. DYK/AfC/NPP comes after. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:49, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Eagles 24/7, I agree with you that the “first thing he should be working on is content creation. DYK/AfC/NPP comes after.” But, from this discussion, it would seem that we are a minority of two. — SpikeToronto 01:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

He has seven members and counting, and they can't direct him to content creation first? Oh well... Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I rather not use any vandalism-reverting tools before Dylan thinks I'm ready. I rather just keep patrolling new pages until Dylan says that I'm ready to go back to rollback and Huggle. WAYNESLAM 23:00, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Wayne. That makes this process much easier for everyone involved. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE:  Eagles, with this edit, I marked the matter resolved. Hope you don’t mind. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 05:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

User:Wayne Slam → Mentorship

I have another mentor. WAYNESLAM 23:41, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

So, User:Dylan620 is no longer your mentor? — SpikeToronto 01:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No, he has additional mentors: 5 albert square (talk · contribs) and Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs). --Dylan620 ^{(t • c • r)} 01:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Like I mentioned above, he has about seven at this point. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Are they going to operate like a committee? How will they decide when he can go back to automated tools? Unanimity? Majority? Funny, I always thought that the concept of mentorship involved a one-on-one relationship between the mentor and the mentee. A cursory search just now suggests that mentor is always singular, just one. Oh well … things that make you go … hmm…I guess. — SpikeToronto 07:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Mentoring can take a lot of time. Now and then, more than one mentor will pitch in to help out with that. How they run the mentorship is between themselves and the mentoree. Gwen Gale (talk) 07:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

My comments were more tongue in cheek than anything else. But now, to be serious, I do not imagine that the group has even begun to coordinate their efforts and devise a mentorship plan. This is not the best way to mentor. It has too many inherent pitfalls: How does a mentoring committee speak with one voice (e.g., deciding when the mentee is able to return to automated tools)? How does the mentoring committee prevent the mentee from “shopping” between them in search of an answer he likes? How does the mentee process contradictory guidance from the members of his mentoring committee? Having had extensive experience with mentorship throughout my academic and professional career, from both sides of the relationship, this is not how it’s done the vast majority of the time. Even our own essay on the topic, Wikipedia:Mentorship (shortcut → WP:MENTOR), says, “Mentorship is an arrangement in which one user assists another user, the protégé.” [Emphasis added.]

We have a very keen and energetic mentee here who had already chosen one mentor, Dylan620. The others should have dropped out at that time, or indicated that they would take a backup role to Dylan. It should not have been left to our young, inexperienced editor to deal with the pileup of mentors. He did as one might have expected from such an eager, young person: He chose them all. My advice to him would be, since the others did not on their own take a backseat to Dylan, to pick the one with whom he thinks he can work the best, and who is most available timewise, to be his primary mentor, and have all the others as backups for when he is stuck/stumped and his primary mentor is not available. — SpikeToronto 19:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Agree with all of the above. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

@Dylan620: As well as The Utahraptor. Eagles, I think I should have more mentors because I would be able to do better with more than one mentor so I could get more help from various users. It's like getting help from various teachers. Is it bad to have more than one mentor, Spike? WAYNESLAM 21:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Spike thinks it would be in your best interest to have just one main one. Suppose you do have four teachers. They all have different styles of teaching and may have different strategies for solving problems or writing essays. One teacher says "You need to have a semicolon after this phrase," while another teacher disagrees, and a third wants you to do something else. Would that benefit you? Or wouldn't it be better if you had one set of instructions to work with? Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to say something as one of Wayne's mentors. What if his mentors don't teach him the same thing? What I mean by that is, what if I teach him about vandalism, Dylan teaches him about article creation, etc.? It'd be just like high school, I suppose. Different teachers teaching different subjects. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 22:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

If I was going to have to choose one mentor, I would choose a mentor who knows how to revert vandalism on Huggle, knows about the Wikipedia rules and policies, and has experience with the tools and I think it would between Utahraptor and Dylan for that job. Right now, I want to have to multiple mentors. I would choose Utahraptor to teach me about vandalism and Dylan would teach me about article creation since I want to become an autoreviewer. Would it be a good idea if the community votes to see if my mentors (Utahraptor and Dylan) would think I'm ready to go back to rollback and then Huggle? What do you guys think? Anyway, Eagles, will you indefinitely semi-protect my December archive and temporarily indefinitely semi-protect my talk page? WAYNESLAM 22:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think a community vote would be required. I think, when Dylan and I think that you're ready, we'll let an admin know, and they can make the final decision. Community consensus votes are not usually done to make a decision as minor as granting rollback and Huggle rights (although, for the record, the decision to regrant rollback and Huggle rights is not something to be taken lightly). Community consensus votes are mostly used for larger decisions, such as the changing of policy, a new idea for a WikiProject, etc. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 23:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, but your talk page and Dylan's talk page are on my watchlist because you are my mentors. Will you both still mentor me even when I have rollback and Huggle back? WAYNESLAM 23:18, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

We'll probably have to. After what happened at ANI, even after you get your rollback and Huggle rights back, they'll still probably want someone to monitor you. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 23:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I rather not do it alone ever again but I started rollback with no help and I did well until I started making too many mistakes due to it not being vandalism and a high chance that it was a good faith edit even though everybody makes mistakes. I even got tips by Tommy2010. Now, I'll be mentored just for this to be avoided again. Will you do some Huggling for me to see how I should do my Huggling? WAYNESLAM 23:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I guess you could a mentor for each topic, but I would like to hear Spike's opinion on the matter as well. We don't need to go to ANI to discuss who should be your mentor, it's not that big of a deal. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I have semi-protected your December 2010 archive and current talk page, Wayne. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

It's not a big deal, at all, but thanks for semi-protecting my pages. WAYNESLAM 23:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• Wayne, I'm currently working on a report for a real life event, but if you go to my contributions, you don't have to go very far to see some of my Huggle work. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 23:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I see there a few Huggle edits on the bottom of the list, Utahraptor. Being a new page patroller is a new job for me and it's a good job. Have my contributions improved since a few days ago? WAYNESLAM 23:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you are beginning to improve. Keep it up. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 23:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC) PS If you click the "500" blue button on my contributions, it will show my last 500 edits. You can find more Huggle edits if you press that button.

Thanks, and when I click 500, your earliest edit on that list was on November 26. When I keep doing well, will you let an administrator, such as Eagles know that I'm ready. How long do I have to wait before you or Dylan will think I'm ready? WAYNESLAM 23:57, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

As long as it takes, Wayne. It could be a few months, or it could be a year. It all depends on how fast and how well you learn what we teach you. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 00:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I do know that Dylan is Wayne's mentor, not me. I understand that having more than one mentor could pose problems; I was only trying to assist by offering some of the various non-anti-vandal things that I have done. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

When will I start to be mentored because I want to go back to rollbacking as soon as I can? I don't mind being assisted by you Reaper. You could still assist me even if you're not my main mentor. WAYNESLAM 20:49, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll prepare a few lessons when I get the time. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 20:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for taking so long to respond to the above interesting and thoughtful dialogue. I have an off-wiki project on the go that is eating up most of my computing capacity and keeping me offline a great deal of the time.

Generally, one person is in charge of the mentorship program for a mentee. However, if each of the participants in the mentoring program cover separate and distinct areas, mentoring by committee could work. (User:The Utahraptor’s comparison to high school is apt here.) However, I think a key to its success is that each mentor has to stick to their area and direct the mentee to the appropriate other mentor when the mentee makes enquiries in another mentor’s assigned area. In this way conflicting instructions, lessons, advice, etc., could be avoided. Thus, just as a history teacher should not be teaching the student about calculus, neither should the anti-vandalism/Huggle mentor be teaching about article creation. While not the norm, it may not be a bad way to divvy up the workload. Hey, what economist wouldn’t appreciate seeing specialization by comparative advantage in action? Thanks! — SpikeToronto 21:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Schmeater - Adminship

Yes. I am interested in still running for the administrator position. If you would be so kind, could you please and graciously support me on my quest?--Schmeater (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Ugoh

Well I did that [3], but it was removed from the talk page without a response [4].--Yankees10 03:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I mean Talk:Tony Ugoh. I saw the non-response response. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Another RFA

See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/elwology. Perseus (t • c) 21:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

You're late to the party, I have already messaged the user. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:44, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

BTW, just wondering where is that template located? You must be checking User:X!/Tally. Perseus (t • c) 22:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

That page is in fact on my watchlist, yes. The template is User:Fastily/RfA Notice, which is used like this: {{subst:User:Fastily/RfA Notice}} and for new users, use {{subst:User:Fastily/RfA Notice|1=yes}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Schmeater RFA

What happens if nobody votes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schmeater (talk • contribs) 23:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Over a hundred people have WP:RFA on their watchlist and undoubtedly many people will !vote. Have you made your decision as to what to do with your RfA? Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how to put down I want to stay and become an admin.--Schmeater (talk) 18:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

You know what. I'm bored, I'm not running for this anymore give it a speedy deletion and get it over with. I'll request later.--Schmeater (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

A note of caution

Given the number of users who supported your RFA saying you were clueful enough, I expected more of you. There are some situations in which cutting corners may be OK, but this Fat one was definitely not one of them. As a newish administrator, you shouldn't be cutting corners in the first place. You should have made a case for a ban discussion or indef block - not as if you're talking about a single (somewhat stale) incident. Additionally, you should have waited for more time so there is more input - especially if there have been disputes about previous blocks, it was incredibly stupid to think 1.6 hours was remotely sufficient. If the alleged problem was unlikely to stop, then the evidence would not have grown stale in the case of an indef block, so there was no urgency for you to impose a block just because you were asking for him to be blocked in the first place. Alternatively, if the problem was serious or significant enough to warrant a ban, then there was no urgency for the block to be imposed at the moment at which you did. For what it's worth, I'd be more inclined to look into supporting a type of remedy you were after if you'd gone through this properly - unfortunately, I can't ignore the way you handled it. If you believe he's been trolling, then the way you handled this is more to feed it with; it doesn't help address the underlying problem.

Should there be a lack of or disputable consensus concerning that indef block, 'leaving it to someone else' is not a good idea, seeing you blocked within ~1.5 hours of "seeking input"; you should address that issue (and if the indications so far are anything to go by, then that's likely to be the situation). A good administrator would be harsher and more critical of the way this was handled if they were the ones who handled it - that is, harsher and more critical than I, or anyone else has been so far on-wiki about the way you handled this. And the matter was worsened when you dismissed the personal attack as "dunno, probably not that severe"; by that I'm not saying another block is the answer, but you should have addressed Pedro directly about the behavior in question as it was coming from an administrator.

I hope this note conveys everything it needs to; I don't want to see your future on Wikipedia as an administrator turning into one that is totally short-lived, and grim. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that you would rather unblock a long-time troll rather than keep a block in place because of the strange way I handled this? Isn't that a little pointy? If you agree with the block, why would it matter in what menner it occurred? I have learned from the mistakes I made in this discussion already. I should have been much clearer in my first post, but that is no reason to make incorrect asumptions about my "motives," as you have in this discussion. When I made the block on TFM, I felt that the overwhelming consensus (IMO) in the first 22 minutes was enough for the block. Should I have waited longer? Yes. But I felt that TFM's trolling in the discussion sealed the deal for me.

Pedro's "attack" was really not a big deal, as I'm sure it was his first offense. If someone had provided evidence suggesting this was an occuring thing, or that he was warned prior, I would have considered blocking him. No evidence was provided, and I thought Sandy's inquiry was rhetorical. This thread has been so long, and it's hard for everyone to read every comment, but here I can tell you personally my views on this whole matter. Thanks for the message, Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

What I am saying is the following (and let me know if I've missed anything or left something too unclear beyond what I've already written above):

• Resist the temptation to do things 'strangely' (as you put it) - doing so can complicate situations more than simplify them. The 'trolling' in the discussion was the temptation. In this case, not resisting has complicated it; it means the focus is shifting between you and TFM. If you did it properly (by resisting until there was a consensus, if any), the focus would probably stay on TFM exclusively. A consensus within 22 minutes is not sufficient - especially for an indef block. It may have ended in the same outcome after 48 hours; it may not have; there's no way of actually knowing. An experienced editor/admin/bureaucrat/arbitrator was given a bucket of grief for doing something similar to you (feeling something sealed the deal in under 12 hours re: another editor); that arb ended up strongly admonished by commenters in the next 36 hours and the action was overturned as no consensus. It was not pretty at all, but it became necessary.
• You need to resist calling people trolls on-wiki. You might be able say that what they are doing is trolling, but calling someone a troll is touching on the NPA line (even if it's used in the wiki sense). Calling an editor a prick probably worse, seeing it can be interpreted as obscene; if another editor did it, they'd probably have received a harsher outcome than Pedro did. For an admin (Pedro) to do it is simply not on; the standards of civility grow with the more privilleges you get - trust comes hand-in-hand with those privilleges, and so does the need for users to be able to approach you without being offended (irrespective of what you feel about them or what they feel about you).
• The discussion does not seem to be ending with a consensus that supports your action; be prepared to unblock - preferrably before someone else does. I'm not sure I support or oppose a block; I think he could be more tactful, but the case really needs to have been made before escalating to such a serious outcome. An indef block is not permanent, but it's not something to be taken lightly either - be it by the user on the receiving end, or by the admin who wishes to impose this measure. That's why the standards are higher - to show evidence that justifies this or a consensus that is in support of it. Ncmvocalist (talk) 19:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• I agree with most of your suggestions, but if Sandy had called someone a prick, I would feel the same way as I do about Pedro saying it. A block due to a one-time offense by an admin/experienced user would basically be a punitive instead of preventative block. What else would you call the behavior of TFM? Anything other than trolling would be considered an understatement. "One who trolls" = Troll. Should I refer to it as "disruptive editing"?
• I think consensus is swaying towards keeping the block/no consensus. The only argument provided by those who want TFM to be unblock is "Eagles247 did not handle this properly." As I said above, if everyone wants him blocked, what difference does it make in the way it was handled? Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• Heh, I'm not saying block anyone for a one-time offense of anything, especially a contributor who seems established enough to know and especially in regards to civility. What I am saying is that when you are made aware of a concern of a personal attack, don't hesitate to at least put a reminder on the user's talk - "You might want to reconsider rewriting what you said here [diff]; it seems like a personal attack." Unless someone's really stressed or reacts violently to that or is just plain stubborn, they will get the message and the issue will be resolved without too much drama. Disruptive editing is too broad; think about why a particular edit that is trolling is disruptive - is it just annoying? It is just silly? Or is it just not helping in any way whatsoever? See also Wikipedia:Troll to see if that helps.
• Well if there's no consensus, it's probably because there are enough contributors who have some sort of respect for the editor to the point that if the editor is to be blocked, it should be properly AND with good reason. It might also be because the editor has not exhausted the Community's patience right at this point in time; in that case, hope that the editor will reform or wait for the rest of the Community to catch up to the point you are at in terms of patience with the user. It might not be quite as disruptive to some people as it is to others, and so it might seem a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT; that could also be the reason why some users don't feel a block is justified at this point. HOpe that helps. Ncmvocalist (talk) 20:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• Gotcha, I'll do that when something like that comes up. TFM's edits are annoying, and silly, and not helping in any way. So... disruptive, right? In regards to the potential consensus to unblock him, I think that if TFM doesn't ask for unblock or promise not to troll, that unblocking shouldn't be an option. Thanks for clearing things up, and I'm glad we are seeing eye to eye now. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• Well, given that it was a question of whether there was a consensus for you to make the block, the block probably won't stick - it's usually better though for the blocking admin to recognise this and unblock than for another admin to reverse it. I should add; although some people find it disruptive, others might not do so; they might see that it is helpful to maintaining their sanity in an otherwise too-serious project, and they might say the blocking admin just has a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT as there are useful contributions. There's no way of knowing when and how the Community will come to a consensus, or if it will come to a consensus on certain matters, and you and I might agree or might disagree with some or all of the details of it. But the thing you need to remember at the end of the day is that the decision is the Community's, and absent a change in the circumstances, that decision needs to be respected and adhered to. The other piece of advice I can give you is to never get too attached to admin actions that you make; it never ends well when that happens. If I'm getting repetitive or confusing, let me know.... Ncmvocalist (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• The thing is, I won't be the one unblocking. I have still failed to see why the user himself should be unblocked. If I unblock, it would be for the way I blocked him, not the reasoning. The reasoning hasn't changed. I, along with at least half of the users involved in the discussion, feel that he is a detriment to the community. I popped in on the WR thread that I originally linked to in the ANI discussion, just to see if TFM has seen that he has been blocked yet, since he hasn't said anything on his talk page. He's laughing. He and the other people there are laughing at our discussion. They, of all people, think that the idea of his unblock is ridiculous. And for that, I morally cannot bring myself to unblock him. I would resign my tools before I unblock him. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Cowboys

I've reverted this edit - because even with a tie, Cowboys couldn't win the division. Like I said, the best Cowboys can do is 8-8. Both Eagles and Giants are on 8-4, so they have to BOTH lose all 4 games to get to 8-8. They can't both lose the game between them. A tie means that at worst they would be 8-7-1, which is better than 8-8. 188.221.79.22 (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

If the Eagles lose the last 4 games and the Cowboys win the next 4 games, the Cowboys would be ahead of the Eagles at 8-8 due to tiebreakers for the Wild Card spot. That would work I think. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Saints are already ahead (9-3) for one spot, and Packers are currently 8-4 too - and have beaten Cowboys, so Head to Head their would lose out if Cowboys did win all and Packers lost all. 188.221.79.22 (talk) 22:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, good points. I see what you mean now. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Good evening

How are you doing :) --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 22:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah so so, got a stinking cold, but finally managed to find some bits which make Amiga emulation on the PC a possibility. Means I can get on with some articles I wanted to do. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Just a couple of questions. Number 1 - If I take a screenshot of a program that I'm running, can I upload it to Wikipedia. Number 3 - How do you upload pictures onto wikipedia? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 23:53, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Probably because I missed out question 2 xD. Anyway, the program I want to image is AmiDock, which is an Amiga version of the Windows Explorer bar. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) To answer your third question, you go to Special:Upload. WAYNESLAM 00:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The page is http://www.qdev.de/?location=amiga/amidock and the document is on my main page as its under construction at the moment. Also, thanks Wayne Slam for your help :). --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

There is no Amiga company per se. The old company went out of business a while back and, as far as the software is concerned its open source. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Since Eagles 24/7 has not had the time yet to respond, you might want to try User:VernoWhitney. He has given me wonderful guidance on copyright matters, ensuring that images that I want to upload to add to articles comply with Wikipedia’s image policies. (See Wikipedia:Image use policy, shortcut → WP:IUP.) — SpikeToronto 21:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I responded on their talk page. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn’t think to look there since you respond so often here. I’ll shut my mouth now. :) — SpikeToronto 21:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Skamecrazy123 has been my adopotee for almost a year now (Monday marks one year), and I've never responded here for his questions before. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:44, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you againm but I have hit a bit of a quandry. As was said on the personal site, he has developed a newer version of AmiDock to ship out with the latest Amiga operating system. However, that Amiga operating system is shareware and, I presume like most software that you pay for, may well have some copyright clause hidden in its license. To further complicate things though, I have stumbled across this (http://aminet.net/package/util/boot/AmiDock) where you can download AmiDock on its own. Does that mean I can still take screenshots of it to use on here, or will I have to back off? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skamecrazy123 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Do I still need to state that I'm using the image under this fair use.... thingy? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for that. Oh and I've joined the copy editers guild. I'm getting a little bored with simply going through new pages and tagging. I want to help out a little more! --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Seowiki

Seowiki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is removing spaces from infoboxes from a number of articles. I suppose it's harmless, but it's not really accomplishing anything useful that I can see. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:05, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Why would he be doing it anyway if it doesn't affect anything on the template? Did he discuss this somewhere on the talk page? WAYNESLAM 23:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I looked through his history and saw no evidence that he's ever posted to a talk page, at least not under that ID. The reason I put it that way is that he posted about 20 or 25 times in January of 2008 and then disappeared until a few weeks ago. That alone doesn't prove anything (my own commons ID sat idle for nearly two years), but it does raise questions, or at least an eyebrow. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

He's changing it in one of his recent edits to a simple dash. WAYNESLAM 23:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Nah, nothing suspicious with Seowiki. I told him that it was not necessary to remove spaces from templates, but he said that it would increase loading time speed. I'm not sure about that, but I figured it was harmless anyway. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No talkback template needed, as I'm watching this page at present. I suspect his changes are going to make a difference of a nanosecond or two, but if consensus is that it's harmless, I reckon we'll leave it be. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well there really isn't an official consensus, but there's no policy against it, and I don't feel like arguing over something so minuscule. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

@Baseball Bugs: I just removed it a few seconds ago. Eagles and Baseball Bugs, I think you should just leave it as it as I think he is probably trying to make the page a little smaller in a good faith way. WAYNESLAM 23:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually you could have left it. No harm. :)

I just wondered why he was doing it, and there seems to be a theoretically valid reason, so unless he vandalizes or otherwise screws up the content, there doesn't seem to be any issue. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:42, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll put it back. I don't think he will screw up the content since his edits are currently good faith edits. WAYNESLAM 23:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Of course, you could have left it deleted, too. No harm. :) I could keep this up all day, but I suspect the both of us have better things to do. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter as long as you are okay with it. Anyway, have you ever watched Bugs Bunny before? WAYNESLAM 23:53, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Emmm... (munch, munch)... Could be! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Now, we have the first cartoon that has edited Wikipedia, Baseball Bugs A.K.A. Bugs Bunny! :) WAYNESLAM 23:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I do tend to get animated from time to time. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes you do, Bugs. This is you right here: File:Bugs Bunny Pose.PNG. I never talked to a cartoon before. :) WAYNESLAM 00:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(ec)Very nice, except it's non-free, fair-use-only, and can't be used on a talk page. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Alright, alright, no offense guys, but please take this elsewhere. I'm trying to catch up on The Fat Man Who Never Came Back and determine if "his brother" is actually his sock. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Later, 'gator. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It may be of interest that the user Pats1 has done a mass revert on all of Seowiki's tedious changes, unfortunately clobbering any interim changes as well. Seowiki says he will work only on constructive items from now on. Maybe the first thing he should work on is restoring the interim data. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:41, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I've been following the case. I began to restore the interim edits (if you can help, that would be great!), but I was/am sidetracked for a while. Pats1 has unblocked Seowiki on the terms that Seowiki will stop making loading-time edits in the future. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:44, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I really think Seowiki ought to be compelled to do that work. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

It's much faster and easier if I do it, and I don't mind. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:58, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, if you've got a quick-and-easy way to do it, then go for it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Indef protection of Wayne's Talk page

Not sure this will be regarded kindly. If you look at this, you'll see any protection is meant to be a last resort, since it is considered that editors should be open to incoming communications from any other editor, and indefinitely denying access to unconfirmed editors might be seen as a problem. They way I deal with this, when under attack from vandals and trolls, is to semi-protect and redirect comments to a subpage for unconfirmed editors- see the green box on my Talk page. I know Wayne will see this in due course, so I don't think he needs to be specifically notified. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 00:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

My talk page was semi-protected indefinitely for now, Rod because I don't want any vandal to mess with my talk page since I'm not rollbacking right now. I'm currently patrolling new pages, though. What do you have to say about this, Eagles? I know that talk pages are normally not semi-protected in these circumstances unless if it's vandalism or personal attacks. I'm being mentored now, so IPs or unautoconfirmed don't have to edit my talk page since I'm not rollbacking right now. WAYNESLAM 00:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) Ah, never read that. Would this also apply to my currently indefinitely semi-protected userpage as well, or is it just for talk pages? Wayne, you can still use the "undo" button to revert vandalism, and since you don't have rollback/Huggle, you probably won't have your talk page vandalized as often because you are reverting less often. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Nevertheless, you will be tagging pages for deletion if you're doing NPP and new editors will want to ask you why you applied the tags. Other than in obvious cases of vandalism, you should be prepared to defend your tagging. That's why it's unhelpful to deny them access to your talkpage since the object is not to drive away good-faith editors who simply don't understand our notability guidelines. Vandals are a different case, obviously, but I'd say from experience that your talk page is a long way from suffering from that to the point where semi-protection is likely to be acceptable in principle to the community. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 00:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Eagles: It doesn't apply for your userpage, Eagles. My userpage is indefinitely semi-protected, too. I did undo some vandalism a couple times before and after using rollback, though. I just go to Special:Tags and click on repeating characters and revert vandalism there. I know, Rod, but a user being mentored doesn't need IPs or nonautoconfirmed users to edit his talk page to ask questions even if they NPP, even though they're not going to be asking me questions very often? WAYNESLAM 00:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I have unprotected your talk page per Rod, Wayne. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2)That is why my user talk page is not protected, even though NawlinWiki RevDel'ed about 20 edits and then protected my userpage even without a request (thanks NawlinWiki). I want to be open to new editors asking for help, especially since I am on the Account Creation team. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

How are you able to create other users' accounts? WAYNESLAM 01:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Request an account/Guide. Basically, I and a couple dozen other users create accounts for people unable to create accounts for themselves. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

How are they able to make edits if you created them? WAYNESLAM 01:55, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I create the account and e-mail them a password. That is why I have the 'accountcreator' flag on my account, and since it gives me the 'noratelimit', 'editnotice-editor', and 'override-antispoof' so I can create as many accounts as necessary, including those with names nearly identical to those of existing users (normally, this creates an error). Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)That's largely how I ended up with this name; I was initially going to be User:Aura Borealis, but there was an account from 2005 called User:AuraBorealis that had made two edits, so I couldn't register it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC) My username is longer than most because I figured longer names were less likely to be taken; it's a portmanteau of two of my interests; arcane history and Arctic geography.

Urban Meyer resignation today

Eagles, Urban Meyer's resignation was announced by ESPN at 2:30 today. Crazed IPs have started trying to add unsourced material, etc. Footnoted material regarding the resignation has been added to the lead and two other appropriate sections. Can you put the article on "established editor lock-down?" Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Looks like another admin has semi-protected it. On a bigger note, Urban Meyer resigned?!?!? That I have to read about. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Yup. Sure did. And what's more, Foley offered the job to Will Muschamp who accepted today. It was announced about an hour ago . . . and, of course, there's a burst of the usual IP users adding all sorts of unsourced material, etc. What shall we do? Suggest "lock down," again. LOL Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I heard about Muschamp's hiring, but it didn't go through my mind that it would be prone to high levels of vandalism. I've semi-protected it for three weeks now (just in time for Penn State to destroy Florida in the Outback Bowl, right ). Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:44, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Eagles. Best administrator we have. Service with a smile, smack talk with a grin. LOL Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Haha, no problem. And I wouldn't say "the best," just ask this user. Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Wayne Slam has posted this on my talk page. I have replied but thought I'd also post here in case there's anything you'd like to add to my reply as I know you were heavily involved in the discussion on his talk page. To be honest I think it's worrying that he is desperate to return to Huggle so soon. --5 albert square (talk) 21:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think he's ready yet either. It's been less than a week since Huggle and rollback were removed, and he definitely won't be getting them back in the next month if he continues to have this mindset. Thanks for the notification, and if he talks to you about it in the future, please let me know. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:11, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I thought it had been made pretty clear to him at the ANI discussion that it would most likely be months before he could even think about getting rollback privileges re-instated. Maybe he perceives this as a time-out rather than a suspension of his licence, so to speak. Perhaps the individual mentoring him in anti-vandalism could explain this to him. — SpikeToronto 21:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to explain this to him on my talk page as I volunteered to mentor him along with others. I will try again :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

No need; as his anti-vandalism instructor, I've explained it to him. Thanks for your help, though, albert. The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 21:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The truth is Eagles, I won't have this mindset. I'll promise I'll be patient. WAYNESLAM 22:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wayne, I wouldn't be so eager to get it back, your new page patrolling is going fine, it's good to see you doing something else. Good luck Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 02:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for appreciating my new page patrolling! WAYNESLAM 21:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Perfomance (band) page deletion

Hello,

I coming to you again about the Perfomance_(band) page you deleted. I've been ill and spent some time at the hospital so i couldn't answer to you. Could you please userfy me this page?

It seems you have deleted the whole conversation on your talk page too, is there a way to undelete it and send it to me via email or put it on my talk page? There was additional sources i published there and i didn't keep a local copy.

I just want to have a copy of what i've written and the researches i've made in order to maybe re-submit my article later if i get more matter to.

Thanks in advance,

NikoDisorder (talk) 11:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)  Eagles 24/7 did not delete your earlier discussion. You can find it in his archives at User talk:Eagles247/Archive 16#Request to undelete a page. Hope that helps. As for userfication, you’ll have to wait for him. — SpikeToronto 15:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, NikoDisorder. I have userfied the page per your request, and you can find it at User:NikoDisorder/Performance (band). As SpikeToronto said, our discussion thread can be found in my talk page archives. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you.

NikoDisorder (talk) 11:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Ralph Nader

User:Eagles247, whom do I contact if I suspect that another contributor is bullying and creating two or more accounts to create the illusion of consensus? 99.59.98.198 (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

You can tell me what your concerns are. I have experience in WP:SPI and I can take admin action, if needed. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:54, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much. My concern is with User:Mystylplx. This is the contributor who accused IPs of vandalism of Ralph Nader-related pages, per the WayneSlam-related ANI. User:Mystylplx appears to be convinced that the means of creating NPOV on Ralph Nader-related articles is to stack them with negative POV, heavily focused on the 2000 elections. Then IP 208.53.80.254 jumps in without prior edit history, holds same POV as User:Mystylplx, followed by newest User:PopeStephen, which is particularly strange. User posts one word to user page, parrots User:Mystylplx from 2000 article talk page. I'm generally hesitant to presume or accuse anyone, per AGF, but I'm beginning to sense some funny business is going on. 99.59.98.198 (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

It appears that the IP may belong to Mystylplx, just accidentally logged out. I don't think he did that intentionally. PopeStephen is very suspicious, mainly because just after creating his user and user talk pages, his first edit was to the discussion. I can't say that PopeStephen and Mystylplx are the same person, since they sign their posts differently. Mystylplx signs with one space, then four tildes, while PopeStephen signs without the space in front of the four tildes. It may also help my investigation if you can confirm that you are the same person as the rest of the "99" IP addresses on the discussion page, as well as the same person who was blocked during the Wayne Slam fiasco. You won't be in trouble, but it helps to eliminate potential suspects. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you User:Eagles247. Yes, I am the 99- IPs contributing to the discussion page and the 99- IP that was blocked. 99.59.98.198 (talk) 22:41, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Nope, no sockpuppeting. And just so you know, Wayne Slam had his rollback privileges revoked for his edit war with you, though you weren't exactly a victim either. Regards, Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Would you check User:SCFilm29 as well? 99.59.98.198 (talk) 23:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... is there any evidence that would suggest SCFilm29 would be abusing multiple accounts per WP:SOCK? CheckUser is not for fishing, and without any evidence a check cannot be done. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:00, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I noted that at least two entries very recently edited by Mystylplx were also edited by SCFilm29, and they are somewhat obscure: Chemtrail conspiracy theory and 9/11 conspiracy theories. But SCFilm29 user contributions with notations like:

1. 23:21, 27 November 2010 (diff | hist) In Praise of Pip ‎ (In praise...) (top)
2. 23:21, 27 November 2010 (diff | hist) Praise of the Two Lands (ship) ‎ (..praise of your...) (top)
3. 23:21, 27 November 2010 (diff | hist) Your Highness ‎ (...your...)
4. 23:21, 27 November 2010 (diff | hist) Hero ‎ (...hero!)
5. 23:21, 27 November 2010 (diff | hist) Chuckles the Clown ‎ (Chuckle!) (top)
6. 23:51, 24 November 2010 (diff | hist) Mystic, Connecticut ‎ (→In popular culture: Mystic) (top)
7. 23:51, 24 November 2010 (diff | hist) Plexus ‎ (plx)

and

1. 00:22, 7 December 2010 (diff | hist) You ‎ (→Etymology: In printing)
2. 00:22, 7 December 2010 (diff | hist) ARE ‎ (Are!) (top)
3. 00:22, 7 December 2010 (diff | hist) Blockhead ‎ (blocked!) (top)

plus

1. 19:55, 8 December 2010 (diff | hist) Nadir ‎ (Nadir) (top)

taken in lieu of Mystylplx's comment on the Ralph Nader discussion page:

"You are the one who keeps trying to remove content. Please stop removing references and putting back unreferenced stuff that's merely in praise of your hero. Mystylplx (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

... seems a bit too coincidental. And quite bizarre. I've got more information that I would rather not post here. If you have an admin email I can send to, I'll provide you with more. 99.59.98.198 (talk) 05:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow. I don't even know what to do at this point. Eagles 24/7 (C) 06:00, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey there, 99. Eagles brought this to my attention on our chat network, and I've taken the action of blocking SCFilm29, as well as two other accounts that appear to be his based on technical evidence. I've also removed a number of the edits you point out above from public view; I think I managed to break all of the "contribution sentences" that are directed at other users so that they either don't appear at all or show up as random gibberish. Unfortunately, I can't be certain I got everything; almost all of his recent edits appear to be very minor, superficial edits made with the intention of getting his edit summary into his contributions. If you notice any I missed, please let me know. I also notice that you said you have some additional information about this; if you're not comfortable posting it on Wikipedia, you can email the Functionaries team at functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org. We're a group of editors with access to advanced level tools that permit us access to certain private information, and we deal with many cases that can't be discussed on Wikipedia for privacy reasons. I hope this helps, but as I said, please let me know if I've missed anything. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 07:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Hersfold and Eagles247. I appreciate your sensitivity to this issue. With your permission, I will provide certain parties with the Functionaries information you've provided so that the party(ies) can contact you privately. 99.59.98.198 (talk) 08:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Eagles247, did you say that IP 208.53.80.254 was used by Mystylplx? If so, he is using IP 207.231.4.168, same range, to appear like another editor and create the appearance of consensus, but has in fact responded with some hostility twice to the same statement, per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ralph_Nader.

For the record, I stated that "The 2000 election is what Nader is most famous for" is provincial, I did not attack the contributor. In this case, provincial is applied to mean local, for such a view is not ascribed worldwide, e.g., in Germany and other countries. As before with vandalism accusations, it seems to me that this user berates, with strawman arguments and false accusations, anyone who does not share his views.

Thank you, 99.59.98.198 (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome to send that email to whoever would find it useful; it's public knowledge, even if what we discuss isn't always.

If you're concerned that Mystylplx is abusively editing while logged out, I'd encourage you to file an investigation request here. As a checkuser, I cannot connect Mystylplx to any specific IP addresses, only accounts, which I've already looked for and found none. An SPI case will allow other disinterested users to look into things and determine what's going on, as well as allow Mystylplx a chance to respond to concerns. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Very good, thank you again, Hersfold, 99.59.98.198 (talk) 17:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, it appears I am unable to file a report, since I do not bear a user name. 99.59.98.198 (talk) 17:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll help you out. Do you want to name the SPI "Mystylplx"? Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Eagles247, I really appreciate your help. I was going to name the SPI "Mystylplx", before I discovered IPs cannot file these, so I think that's a good idea. 99.59.98.198 (talk) 01:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

It may just be easier if you submit your evidence at WT:SPI under a new section header. That's what other IPs have done in the past. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

My Home computer is not functioning so I edit from a public computer. Sometimes I forget to log in, there's nothing nefarious about it. The IP user here has been persistently attempting to remove sourced content and has been reverted by several people, including me. BTW I believe I know who PopeStephen is, but he is not me. I have no idea who SCFilm29 is. Mystylplx (talk) 09:34, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment here, Mystylplx. I figured you weren't logged out to sway discussion. SCFilm29 has been blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry and abuse (can you make a comment on the bizarre string of edit summary that include "Mystic" and "plx"?), but if you have any information on PopeStephen, it would be greatly appreciated. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know anything about SCFilm29, so can't comment on his/her edit summaries. It may be s/he saw my screen name and was attempting to make some unfathomable comment about it. I may know who PopeStephen is. I have a friend named Stephen who I discussed the Nader article with, but I haven't seen him recently to ask if that's him. Mystylplx (talk) 11:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Did you ask your friend to participate in the discussion at Talk:Ralph Nader? Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Not exactly. The discussion was on Wikipedia in general more so than the nader page in particular, and I did encourage him to get involved. He's a 'brew pub friend' though, and I've recently quit drinking, so I'm not sure when I will see him again. Mystylplx (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine then. As long as you know about WP:SOCK and don't violate it in the future in regards to discussions at Talk:Ralph Nader, you're okay. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NFL

What do you mostly do from WP:NFL since you edit NFL articles? WAYNESLAM 23:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit NFL articles mainly. That's about it. Sometimes a new template is proposed and the members discuss it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello again

Are you aware of this discussion on Wayne Slam's talk page? I've no idea why Inka chose to post that suggestion as there's no indication of recent contact between them. I know Inka's suggesting manual reverting of vandalism, but I wouldn't even be happy with Wayne doing that at the moment. He really does need to learn Wikipedia's policies first. Yes it might teach him what's vandalism and what's not but in my view he's not ready for it yet, he really needs to concentrate on Wikipedia's policies first. --5 albert square (talk) 22:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

When I put this, I did click the undo edit a few times, after I made the reply, earlier. They were the ones who told me to do it. I rather just ignore the conversation by closing the discussion and just patrol new pages for right now. This edit should resolve it. WAYNESLAM 23:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this discussion poses any relevance anymore because Wayne "closed" it. Ignoring the fact that I posted in the discussion, I don't understand why it was brought here -- nothing really happened. If you want to know why Inka made that post, you should ask her/him. Tofutwitch11 ^(TALK) 00:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I just wanted to make everything fine per 5 albert square's message, so that's why I closed it. I didn't ignore your message. You should let Inka now about this. I'll unclose the discussion. WAYNESLAM 00:26, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

No, no, you don't understand what I am saying. It's fine that the discussion is closed, you don't understand what I was saying. I meant, I meant I was ignoring the fact that I had participated in the discussion, and albert should bring this forward to Inka if need be, but this is so small, why bother. Tofutwitch11 ^(TALK) 00:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, why bother. It shouldn't be a big deal. I understand since you ignored the fact that you posted in the discussion and why it was brought up here and why it happened was what you said. WAYNESLAM 01:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Wayne knows that he is still far away from reverting vandalism, and is sticking with NPP for now. Inka was acting in good faith trying to help him out, and I see nothing wrong with this. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

That's what I said -- Inka did nothing wrong. I just don't understand why 5 albert square brought it here, nothing really happened. Tofutwitch11 ^(TALK) 13:53, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Steve Hauschka

Could you change it to Steven Hauschka? NFL.com and the Broncos' site say that's the correct spelling. RevanFan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC).

 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle Blacklist

Hey Eagles! With this edit, you added User:Wayne Slam to the Twinkle blacklist. Yet, for some reason, it is still permitting the software to run for him (see here). Near as I can tell, the subsequent edit to the blacklist did not impact your edit. I bring this to your attention not because he is abusing the tool — he is not — but because he is supposed to be doing everything manually as per the ANI discussion.

…

Okay, since typing the above, Wayne tells me that he is actually using FRIENDLY and not Twinkle, the two of which are currently being merged. I guess the Twinkle blacklist is not yet operational on those using Friendly.

So, this note is less about the particular editor in question, and more about the difficulty the merger of Friendly and Twinkle may be placing on your enactment of ANI decisions. Thanks!

— SpikeToronto 02:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I knew about the Twinkle-Friendly merger, and I saw Wayne using Friendly. I have no problem with him using Friendly, he's barred mainly from counter-vandalism tools. BTW Spike, while you're here, what does the <span class="plainlinks"></span> actually do to wikitext? Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

This all started because, with the merger, Friendly users are getting TW in their edit summaries even though that is not the tool that they are using. So, I thought that there was some glitch that you might want brought to your attention. He didn’t misuse the tool in the example cited. He’s really trying to do things right!

As for the <span class="plainlinks"></span> coding, it makes external links look like this instead of like this. In my browser, the little external link symbol that shows up at the end sometimes messes up the line wrap. Dunno why. Of course, I only use it on talk pages. And, I do not use it when I think it important that the reader know that it is an external link. Therefore, I use it mainly for linking within Wikipedia such as to edit histories, old versions of pages, diffs, etc. You know: external links that are really internal links, for all intents and purposes. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 02:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Civility

[5] I consider your comment offensive to civil discourse, and warn you not to do that again. Gimmetoo (talk) 15:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Can you please explain to me what civil discourse is, and how it offended you? I really don't understand. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

You are wikilawyering to defend a name which characterizes another editor in an offensive way. The defense is far more offensive than the name. If you don't understand why, then kindly cease any further involvement with AN or ANI, in any form, until you do understand. Gimmetoo (talk) 16:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

It's interesting to watch an admin issue a warning to another admin, as if the other admin were a serf. Gimmetoo means well, I'm sure, but what he ought to be doing is clearing and full-protecting the user page, and closing the ANI discussion as being a waste of time. No one with any authority and more than half a brain is going to stand for Fat/BErD coming back without serious restrictions. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Article Userfication

Hey Eagles! Sorry to leave you a message on football day — known as Sunday to the rest of the world — but, would you mind userfying this article (see deletion log) to this userspace location? You can read the background to the request here on my talkpage. Thanks a bunch! — SpikeToronto 21:41, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done (It's Sunday where you are?) Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! No, actually it’s Monday. My weekend is off kilter this week, making me think all day today that today is Sunday. You are not the first person I have done this with today! Thanks again. — SpikeToronto 01:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem, but I kinda wish it was Sunday. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! (Dillonraphael (talk) 01:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC))

No problem, good luck with your article. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:29, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs Ed Wang Fenuki Tupou Bruce Smith (halfback) King Dunlap Phillip Dillard John Michels Alonzo Jackson 2009 Boston College Eagles football team Nate Wayne T. J. Ward Barrett Brooks Wes Hopkins Reggie Wells Dewayne White Harold Carmichael Mike Quick Kendrick Lewis Dedrick Roper Wade Key

Cleanup Madden NFL 2003 List of American and Canadian cities by number of major professional sports franchises St. Louis Rams Merge Nickel defense List of NFL nicknames Washington Redskins Add Sources Adam Jones (American football) Shawn Barber Willie Parker Wikify True freshman Maurice Fountain Maya Academy of Advanced Cinematics Expand List of Chicago Bears starting quarterbacks List of NFL officials Lemar Marshall

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 Nettrom (talk), 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) 04:29, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

User talk:67.81.112.52

otherwise known as CATruthwatcher is back on the same page causing the same trouble. 24.239.153.58 (talk) 22:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure it is CAtruthwatcher, but you do not need to edit war on the article. Consider this a warning to you, and if 67.81.112.52 reverts again, I will block him for edit warring. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for informing me about Elektrik Band’s sockpuppets, even if he didn’t mean any harm. By the way, Michael Vick is insanely good. I would say that I wish the Colts had him, but we have Manning already. Oh well, can’t have everything… The Arbiter^Talk 00:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem, and you'd better hope Peyton is Favre's age when he finally hangs 'em up. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not so sure if Peyton will break 297 games...that's a heck of a record. I'm glad that Vick cleaned up his act and is now dominating. That return by DeSean Jackson today was insane. I felt so bad for Matt Dodge though, Coughlin was furious at him. The Arbiter^Talk 00:24, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

You can't blame the punter for your team's complete collapse. He had a solid game, and there was no reason for Coughlin to unload on him. DeSean said in his press conference that Coughlin was out on the field to talk to Dodge while DeSean was still running it back. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

May I say something? That was the craziest finish I've probably ever seen to a game. It was INSANE!!! Although, I didn't like the taunting at the end of the return. RevanFan (talk) 01:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Biggest comeback I've seen in a while. I didn't see the taunting, but it was probably warranted; those Giants players were nasty and cheap the entire game. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I just want to say that if you watched Dodge all season, you'd understand why Coughlin was upset with him. I'm honestly surprised that Dodge hasn't been cut yet.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 15:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

He's obviously no Jeff Feagles, which is what you expect from a rookie punter. Finding a consistent punter and kicker is one of the hardest things to do as GM/Coach, and it takes time to get that consistency up. Dodge has had some really nice punts this season, and it will take some time for him to develop. Just like with a quarterback (remember how awful Eli was?), punters need time. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I somewhat agree, but when you have a punter effecting the outcome of games, it's time for that punter to not see the field again. The least they could've done is to sign another punter, but keep Dodge on the roster, like the Saints did with Hartley when they signed John Carney.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:15, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there aren't that many free agent punters out there that would be better than Dodge. Now if the Giants could have persuaded Feagles to come out of retirement... Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Either way, he needed to be sat down at some point since he has been atrocious this season and that punt to DeSean "I am an arrogant punk" Jackson was just the worst I've ever seen. And to your earlier comment about the Giants being cheap and dirty, Asante Samuel is the dirtiest player I have ever seen and the Giants NEVER get into fights with other players except against the Eagles because Philly tries to intimidate their opponent using dirty tactics.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I watched Shaun O'Hara a couple times, and he seemed much dirtier than Asante. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Unbelievable. Anyways, speaking of coaches being jerks and unfair, how about Mike Shanahan cutting Hunter Smith because he mishandled the extra point against Tampa Bay? Graham Gano missed the two chip shot field goals he had, and the long snapper snapped it high, and the rest of the team played like garbage. Why cut Smith when it wasn't even his fault? Shanahan has no class, and he's a pretty bad coach anyways. The Arbiter^Talk 16:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

If the Redskins want to cut good players for no legitamite reasons, that's fine by me. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

A favor

Could you protect this user page for me? Some idiot IP keeps vandalizing it. Thanks. RevanFan (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I've left a warning on his talk page. If he persists, you may want to use a template from WP:WARN to warn him, or let me know so I can warn/block him. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew (Matt) Bennett

Hey Eagle, I think it's a good idea to withdraw the nomination. MichaelQSchmidt left me a message on my talk page criticizing me for prodding it in the first place, but they backed it up by improving the article. The subject passes notability requirements, I see now. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Contrary to what MichaelQSchmidt says, I still do not think Bennett meets WP:ENT, WP:CREATIVE or WP:GNG. I'll keep it open to see what others think. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:06, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

93.97.59.17

93.97.59.17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

When I saw that "HELP!!!", I was expecting the following up to be, "I'm bein' repressed!"

On a more serious note, do you think I've gone over the line in the Fat Man debate? If so, I'll back off. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Haha I was expecting another legal threat. And I would recommend you stop with TFM. You're just feeding the trolls at this point, and gaining nothing from it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:41, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

"Fat Bastard" was irrelevant before he was blocked. He is now more so. HalfShadow 01:43, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Ooh, good point! The boy wins a cigar! OK, enough of Fatso. Onward into the fog! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:45, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I was considering "The Massed Avenger", but I'm happy with my choice. HalfShadow 01:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

They're both good. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Happy Holidays!

Dear Eagles247, Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;) Love, --Meaghan [talk] ≈ 15:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Meaghan! I hope you have a great holiday, too! Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Back in the heyday of "Polish jokes", we would have said something like, "OK, Stosh, here's dat snowball you vanted. Now throw it!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Roster template

Any way to prevent the whitespace after the reserve lists here? Would seem to come into play during training camp, when there's no FAs or PS section. Also, there seems to be a bunch of whitespace if only one or two of the FAs section =yes. Pats1 ^T/C 00:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

When we were playing around we it earlier, you wanted the whitespace between the FAs section and the Reserves section, and between the FAs section and the count. If you don't want this, the whitespace you pointed out in the diff can go away. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Change it and let's see how all the scenarios look. Whitespace is so much fun. Pats1 ^T/C 01:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I've made the changes. See User:Eagles247/Sandbox and the diff you provided above to see the changes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:46, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Here are the possible scenarios: Offseason=no, PS active -- whitespace above PS but not below, Offseason=yes, no FAs -- good, UFAs only -- whitespace below UFAs but not above, UFAs and RFAs -- whitespace below RFAs but not above UFAs, RFAs and ERFAs -- whitespace above, RFAs only -- whitespace above, ERFAs -- whitespace above, UFAs and ERFAs -- whitespace neither above nor below, UFAs, RFAs, and ERFAs -- whitespace neither above nor below. ...Probably way too confusing and almost impossible to fix. Pats1 ^T/C 02:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I have struck out the scenarios which work now. The remaining three have no chance of working in the current system. I'm going to try one last thing, though... Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:23, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The problem with the last one is that we need the break when rfa=yes and/or when ufa=yes, but we don't need it when both =no. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I have fixed the problem. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:57, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

You're good. Thanks! Pats1 ^T/C 03:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Cannabis Jesus theory

I'd like to have my previous article re-established as I've found some sources that may be noteworthy. At the very least I'd like a copy of the article that I had written.

• http://books.google.com/books?id=Yi_jYO1BUu4C&pg=PA29&dq=cannabis+jesus&hl=en&ei=G_QSTc6bJIK8lQfymZnHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=cannabis%20jesus&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=w8N4DwMb19oC&pg=PA25&dq=cannabis+jesus&hl=en&ei=G_QSTc6bJIK8lQfymZnHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=cannabis%20jesus&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=0bzj3RtT3zIC&pg=PA259&dq=cannabis+jesus&hl=en&ei=G_QSTc6bJIK8lQfymZnHDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CEsQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=cannabis%20jesus&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=XInl7BpDQvwC&pg=PA62&dq=cannabis+jesus&hl=en&ei=X_YSTZXPF4eglAezs439Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=cannabis%20jesus&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=Qq-A4A0KB0kC&pg=PA92&dq=cannabis+jesus&hl=en&ei=X_YSTZXPF4eglAezs439Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCYQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=cannabis%20jesus&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=IR08_JXH47kC&pg=PA70&dq=cannabis+jesus&hl=en&ei=9_YSTczvFIK0lQeWkrzxCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAzgU#v=onepage&q=cannabis%20jesus&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=xj_GAAAAIAAJ&q=kaneh+bosm&dq=kaneh+bosm&hl=en&ei=QfcSTankKsKqlAedueHUDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA
• http://books.google.com/books?id=vFcQAQAAMAAJ&q=kaneh+bosm&dq=kaneh+bosm&hl=en&ei=QfcSTankKsKqlAedueHUDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBg
• http://books.google.com/books?id=CXPwq_r4wQoC&pg=PT28&dq=kaneh+bosm+Jesus&hl=en&ei=zPcSTd6FFMLflgebp9TcDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=kaneh%20bosm%20Jesus&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnReAL13D (talk • contribs) 07:20, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Those Google books results are not impressive enough to restore the article, but I will userfy the page for you and you can find it at User:UnReAL13D/Cannabis Jesus theory. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:39, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

“ And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God. ” — (Alma 7:10)

The Thing ^T/_C is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:User:TTTSNB/Merry_Christmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks and I hope you have a great holiday, too! Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

WAYNESLAM has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!

Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:User:The Utahraptor/Christmas tree}} to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.

WAYNESLAM 00:15, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and I hope you have a great holiday, too! Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas (3rd one, I guess)

Well, here's mine. Merry Christmas. I can barely type after playing Need for Speed all day, but I'm typing what I can. Have a good time! RevanFan (talk) 02:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and I hope you have a great holiday, too! Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!

Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:User:The Utahraptor/Christmas tree}} to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.

--The Utahraptor^Talk/_Contribs 03:44, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and I hope you have a great holiday, too! Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the tip, but I am thinking of contributing to articles a lot when I am an administrator hopefully because I will be more powerful so I could contribute more, and the reason why I am running for being an administrator is to revert vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammed Awny Dabbour (talk • contribs) 20:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I would do as you say, but I do not know how to give up my request for adminship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammed Awny Dabbour (talk • contribs) 21:04, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Mohammed Awny Dabbour 21:06, 27 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammed Awny Dabbour (talk • contribs)

Please delete the page.

Mohammed Awny Dabbour 21:11, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Need New Page for Derrick Townsel

I took a picture of him yesterday; he is a rookie on the Houston Texans (no. 14), but there is no page for him. Could you either create a page for him or recruit someone else to? I am intellectually unable to do it. Thanks. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 23:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

He's on my to do list, and I'll be happy to create it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:13, 28 December 2010 (UTC) I just realized Townsel was never added to my to do list...

Thanks a million! The article looks great. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 01:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem, your pictures make any article look ten times better. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Sanio346

Ok, I'll become an administrator after some more experience. Regards ! Sani0346 (talk) 07:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Indefinite Wikibreak

I'm taking an indefinite wikibreak. I messed up on the wiki-editing side of things because of an internet outage and I have lost faith in my abilities as an editor as a result. I hope you had a good Christmas and I wish you all the best in the new year. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:28, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

In all honesty I'm not sure, but I really appreciate what you have done for me. I couldn't have asked for a better mentor really --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox college football player

I can't figure out why the colors for NC State Wolfpack aren't working on this template (see Russell Wilson). I don't see any problem in Template:Infobox college football player, Template:CollegePrimaryColor, or Template:CollegeSecondaryColor... I could have sworn the colors worked when I created this article, but now it's just the standard gray color. Any idea what's going on here? Strikehold (talk) 02:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

This is really bizarre. I can't find anything wrong right now, but I'll keep looking. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I found the problem. Template:Infobox college football player uses Template:CollegePrimaryHex and Template:CollegeSecondaryHex for its colors, not CollegePrimaryColor and CollegeSecondaryColor. I have added the colors for NC State for the appropriate templates. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, must have changed when the player template was renamed. Nice work, thanks! Strikehold (talk) 02:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem, glad to help. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:58, 31 December 2010 (UTC)