User talk:SpK/Archive 1

New Pages

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. BigDunc (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

why did you mark Ryan White for speedy deletion?--Pendingthecynic (talk) 19:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hi SpK! That is interesting that you were contacted and asked to change your username due to copyvio... Regarding your attempts to contact me - I have not received an email or a phone call from you. Did you send me an email through Wikipedia by clicking Email this user in the toolbox of my user page? My wikipedia email address changed so that is how to do it. Regarding the show - I will check to see if we have anyone doing our tech already for the play - I don't think we do... That is nice of you to offer... Talk to you soon! κaτaʟaveno^T_C 23:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi again... I checked and the tech work has already been arranged for the show. Thanks again for your offer! κaτaʟaveno^T_C 12:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi again... yes there are already 3 students doing the tech. But thanks so much again for offering. κaτaʟaveno^T_C 19:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay... thanks again for your offers... I would appreciate a visit in mid June to update the MediaWiki server; that would save me some time and it would be great to catch up with you. κaτaʟaveno^T_C 00:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, SpK. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. β^_command 04:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Bumping of Side Content

Responded on your wiki. κaτaʟaveno^T_C 14:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, SpK! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel (talk) 06:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

User:SpK/sig

I've deleted your signature template. Please don't use subpages like this to get around the restrictions on length in the signature option in preferences, they were put in place for a reason. Further, having 7 line breaks in your signature is incredibly disruptive to threaded discussions. Mr.Z-man 20:43, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Maggie Sawyer and Category:Smallville characters

She was in a few episodes of the show. I see no reason why she can't be in that category.--Rockfang (talk) 22:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Merger of WikiProject Free Software and WikiProject Software

Greetings, I have made a proposal for the merger of WikiProject Free Software and WikiProject Software here. I invite you for your valuable comments in the discussion. You are receiving this note as you are a member of WikiProject Free Software. -- Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk ● Contributions) 20:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:SMSCrest.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:SMSCrest.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Signature Help

{{helpme}} Why won't the 'K' in my signature link to my talk page? You can see the code here. Thanks :) --~SpK 18:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The link is working correctly. When you use your signature on your own talk page, it won't link to here because Wikipedia won't create an internal link to the page on the same page. If you use your signature on another page, an article talk page for example, then it will show up normally. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 18:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Bully!

Why are you picking on me? Leave me alone! 92.15.41.187 (talk) 22:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Revert of Camfrog Article

Hi SpK,

The edit I made to the Camfrog article was not vandalism, there was an extra set of notices underneath the article's introduction (clones of the notices already currently at the top of the page) and and extra infobox that was stretched out like this -

| name = Camfrog Video Chat

| url = http://www.camfrog.com

| type = online chat

That obviously did not display correctly.

The previous state of the article can be viewed here -

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Camfrog&diff=prev&oldid=289764268

Thanks,

78.147.102.74 (talk) 04:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

ShArOlAiD

Gurl! Why you be deleting Sharolaid's contribution to Fort Lauderdale? She is the Queen of YouTube and the founder of BHH. You let Jeffree Star have her own page, and she owes most of her catchphrases to Sharolaid. Don't be hating on a sister, yo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.95.251 (talk)

First of all, I'm not a girl. Second of all, I deleted your vandalism to the article, not your contribution. Quite frankly, you are just a vandal, and I don't need to spend any more time dealing with you. ~SpK 13:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, gurl! You make me feel like I've just been to church!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.95.251 (talk)

tsk tsk

I'm disappointed. The last few times I have vandalized those watching the edits (on RC patrol I guess) blocked first and warned later. This time I had to compel two different editors to issue a total of four warnings before the block warning message came up. It should have been obvious to both of you that the account was being used in vandal-based editing exclusively. Next time block sooner :) 75.26.17.42 (talk) 03:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Um, not really sure what this was about, but thanks SpK. Cheers, —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 04:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem; and very few people have any clue what vandals mean half the time :) ~SpK 15:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Photo help

I took a photo and put it up on Wiki Commons to put on this article here. It said I had no licence, but surely if I took the work I know that I am not infringing my own copyright? Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.246.55 (talk) 22:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

In order to upload an image, you have to license it. What license you choose is up to you. I'd recommend just releasing it into the public domain to avoid any future conflicts. ~SpK 22:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Be Careful About Vandalism Warnings, You're Mistaken

I explained in both re-edits that they're not vandalism (Isengard (Norwegian band) and Talk:Isengard (Norwegian band)). You should reconsider your "warnings". (And I tried moving first but the previous page had to be deleted, hence it couldn't be moved, that's why I moved the content instead.) Dimitrakopulos (talk) 20:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

First, please do not be agressive, it isn't necessary. Secondly, there are reasons why things cannot be moved sometimes, and if pages have to be deleted and moved, there is protocol to doing these things (i.e. discussions about moves etc.). Please don't just move pages because you feel they need to be moved. ~SpK 20:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

None of that was "aggressive". Hopefully you don't receive quotations as aggression. Now I'm aware of the protocols. Thanks.Dimitrakopulos (talk) 20:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia policy, I will be reverting their pages to their original location, and performing a proper page move on your behalf.

~SpK 20:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, cheers. Dimitrakopulos (talk) 21:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.Dimitrakopulos (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all. If there's ever anything else I can help you with, just let me know :) Cheers,

~SpK 15:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for that extremely speedy cleanup of this vandalism on my user talk. Before I could click "New Message" it was gone! --Vishnu2011 (talk) 23:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. When you're armed with Huggle, there's nothing you can't do :) Cheers!

~SpK 23:01, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ha twice now! I always get so excited to see what new message I have, but it turns out to be a downer. Thanks Again! Vishnu2011 (talk) 23:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I forget to thank you? ..

SpK ,Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Article

Why was my page put up for deletion? I didn't see anything wrong. I had 3 days of work I had just finished, as soon as I post it, it gets overrided by a deletion warning. The first page you probably saw was not done, it went much more than that. Please help me get that back! Rougeloverboy2 (talk) 16:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Be a little careful not to tag for speedy deletion too fast

Re, articles like Concession (comic), wait a little bit next time before tagging for speedy deletion. I think you may have unintentionally bitten a newcomer there when you tagged that one so quickly. Many new users don't know that coming up with drafts before placing into the mainspace is a good idea. For articles like that, wait a little bit and see what the author does with it.

With that said, keep up the good work, especially with the vandalism/Huggling. Thank you, MuZemike 20:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right, I did put it on quite quickly. I'll definitely try to be more courteous in the future, and avoid biting the newcomers. Thanks so much for your feedback :) ~SpK 21:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism warnings

Your "vandalism" warnings with respect to my removing the "popular culture" section of the "Boomslang" page are unwarranted. There is no reason whatsoever to have a "popular culture" section in a zoological article. Moreover, the section itself had been flagged for review.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.4.185.170 (talk)

Just because the section has been flagged for review doesn't mean people have permission to just delete it. Any issues like this should be discussed on the article's talk page, and not just deleted. Also, see Wikipedia's 3RR policy. Please don't remove this section without first discussing it on the talk page, here. Also, please sign your posts by putting four tildes ~~~~ after posts on talk pages of any kind. Thanks, and welcome to Wikipedia! ~SpK 21:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Signing

Might want to sign this post in that AfD. Cheers! Tan | 39 22:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I think that was the first post in all my time on Wikipedia that I haven't signed. Thanks for the notification! ~SpK 22:27, 4 November 2009 (UTC) <-- see, my signature :)

Great job, SpK!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You are hereby awarded this Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your recent and consistent attempts to preserve the hard work of Wikipedians loyal to the cause of making the Internet not suck. κaτaʟavenoTC 15:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Katalaveno! Great to see you around again. I've given up on my own wiki/blog/forum, and gotten rid of my everything-I-could-possibly-install-on-my-vps-itis. Now I'm fully, 100% dedicated to Wikipedia (except when I'm busy at school. Then I'm only about 80% dedicated :) ). Thanks for the barnstar, and great to see you around! ~SpK 16:13, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

LOL at the "vps-itis"... Yes, I understand about being busy. Doing teaching and graduate work at the same time leaves me very little time for other things, such as Wikipedia. But, I try to keep my eye on WP as best I can... Great to see your renewed enthusiasm on WP again! The project is the better for it. κaτaʟaveno^T_C 13:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice work!

Thanks for your efforts on The Bill. We've had problems on there before and I hadn't noticed it til another editor asked e to take a look- I'd been busy on another article. Anyway, keep up the good work. HJMitchell You rang? 23:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

All I did was revert some content removal; no thanks necessary. But thank you anyways! ~SpK 02:29, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, someone's got to do it or the place would be a mess. Well, more so than it is already! HJMitchell You rang? 02:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

I am a new contributor to wikipedia. To start out, I have reorganized about 30 disambiguation pages, some from the cleanup list, mostly found by browsing. After a few false starts with the format (several people have come after me with "tidy a bit"), I hope my future edits will pass review. Not one comment was about the titles of the subject headings or which entry went under which heading, or the descriptions I added, so that is satisfying.

I proposed some standard subject headings in Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation based on this survey/cleanup of disambiguation pages, but the idea got a chilly reception. Maybe I should have used the word "suggested" instead of "standard".

As far as articles go, some of the articles linked from process (disambiguation) could use some organization, coherence, combining, and splitting. I may be looking at this in the future. Obankston (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

That's great to hear, and thanks so much for making Wikipedia a better place. Great to see you're being bold, and that you're really making a difference. You have my heartfelt congratulations on your productive contributions, and if you ever need any help with anything at all, anytime, don't hesitate to drop another message on my talk page. And with the proposed suggestiong at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation, don't be afraid to argue your suggestion and tell people why your idea's better. And hey, if you ever want to run any policy by me first, don't hesitate. Thanks again, and welcome to enWiki! Cheers, ~SpK 00:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

And about your proposed changes, I think (personally) that they would be a good idea. Maybe not including those headings verbatim, but maybe ordering them in that specific order based on the headings that are present on the disambig page may be a good idea. I'll bet you'll get a lot more support on that than you have right now. ~SpK 00:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Prince of Wales

The Prince of Wales page is factually incorrect. I will list the errors I have just attempterd to correct:

1. The first holder of the title was Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, as recognised in the Treaty of Montgomery.

2. Edwarde VII was not Prince of Wales. The title is not automatically given to the heir apparent at birth.

3. The same point applies to Charles II. He was never Prince of Wales

4. Nor was James Stuart

Further points:

The offiicially recognised holders of the title Prince of Wales begin with Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, end with Charles Windsor (the 20th Prince of Wales) and exclude the aforementioned princes mentioned in Points 2-4, as well as Owain Glyndŵr.

Sanddef (talk) 17:24, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. In future, when the factual accuracy of an article is disputed, please discuss proposed changed on the article's talk page, and make the changes once you have reached a consensus. Please also make sure you use an edit summary so reverters and other editors know what your edits are about. If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to ask. ~SpK 17:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. However, it is clear by the very nature of the errors that reaching a consensus and representing historical fact are two entirely different things altogether. I have noticed that Wikis in other languages merely translate the English version, which means that the errors here are distributed even further. I can only suggest that the admins take up the matter. Rest assured, you will find no references that support the errors that I have pointed out. The Principality of Wales page is even worse! Sanddef (talk) 17:39, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Then please, make the edits you feel necessary, remembering to leave an edit summary with the rationale for making the changes. Again, thank you for making positive contributions to Wikipedia! ~SpK 17:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Energy (esotericism) - your edits of 23:09, 30 July 2010

Hi,

I noticed your editing of the Spiritual Healing article - shortening of sentences and name for a reference (macmillan) and was wondering what you were trying to achieve. I'm not disputing your edits, just wanting to learn about why Wikipedias' style would encourage these? Thanks, Adrian-from-london (talk) 00:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

---

I've just realised I've posted this on the wrong users' page - sorry Adrian-from-london (talk) 01:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:APHSLogo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:APHSLogo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy Birthday (2012)

Wishing SpK a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 23:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, SpK. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy, happy birthday!

	Happy Birthday	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing SpK a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, SpK. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, SpK. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:SMSBuilding.jpg

The file File:SMSBuilding.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)