User talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/09

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Barnstar[edit]

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I gladly give this Barnstar to Realist2, Kodster, and Rodhullandemu, for working with each other in a very positive way. This does not happen very often on Wikipedia, and it is to be congratulated, and praised; hence, the Barnstar. Enjoy.--andreasegde (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think perhaps we've entertained this long enough.[edit]

Semi-protect on AN/I? HalfShadow (talk) 01:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any way around this. As I understand (and I make no excuses that I may be wrong), Tor nodes are only sometimes Tor nodes and then they're not. In essence, we'd have to almost literally block every ip ever. HalfShadow (talk) 02:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No argument here; I once suggested that identified school-ips be soft blocked (for every 'legitimate edit' we get from a school-ip, we get about 20 people who think replacing a page with the word 'fuck' 500 times is the height of humor), and I find random ips generally a source of trouble. There are a lot of useful ones, but there are a lot more that aren't. It just seems every time we find a tor node, five more show up. HalfShadow (talk) 02:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still, you can't help but get a warm feeling about thinking of this place someday going 'members only'. I know: impossible and it defeats the purpose, but still... HalfShadow (talk) 02:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Feel free to migrate to or start more closed projects, rather than hijacking ours, thanks! :)
This protection is because we simply cannot stand to have this edit on AN/I, correct? Weak. The talk page is also protected, since March 21, also by Rodhullandemu. That ain't good. 86.44.26.69 (talk) 18:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
persistent and unnecessary, yes, hardly disruptive though. and you cannot unprotect the talk page? 86.44.26.69 (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Prisoner revert[edit]

I just found your recent revert of IP 4.249.84.186's alteration to the discussion of the Danger Man episode "Colony Three" in the article on Patrick McGoohan's follow-up series, The Prisoner, and am somewhat confused. Your edit summary reads, "Rv, Number [Six] DOES leave, in "Fall Out".." True enough (at least on the face of it, but more on that later), but what you actually did was to restore, "Unlike Number 6, Drake does manage to leave eventually...." which he/she had changed to simply, "Drake manages to leave eventually...." Admittedly, when I replaced the word "escapes" with "leaves" due to Drake's advance extraction arrangements which I felt made that word inapplicable to this situation, I thought about that, but as certain aspects of "Fall Out"'s closing moments leave it open to dispute whether this seeming escape was a true one, I left it in. While a comparison to The Prisoner was certainly pertinent, I felt that as there is no definite and permanent escape by #6 from The Village, I myself would not take it upon myself to change this passage (my bad actually, as my own edit had indicated the situations were not analogous anyway). I'm not certain how relevant all THAT it to my question, which is: Why is your edit summary in direct opposition to the content of your edit? (In "preview" mode, I see all this as pretty blunt and maybe even worse at times, but I assure you it wasn't intended to be anything more than a neutral inquiry.) Ted Watson (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're Speculation on Arthur C. Clarke[edit]

Rodhullandemu: "I've just reviewed your additions to Arthur C. Clarke. There is a lot of speculation lacking reliable sources,"

Do you have any citations you can point out for this accusation? So adherents.com which is a valid reference which cites other references is speculation? So Arthur's own words recorded with him saying it which his mouth moving is speculation? You are apart of the war you pretend I am engaged in. You are showing bias. You mere accusations are not evidence of anything. You are breaking Wikipedia's own rules to suit your feelings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Examineroftruth (talk • contribs) 13:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Bones Show[edit]

I guess I used the wrong tag for the article needing to be deleted, I'm still new to that particular aspect of wikipedia. :) What do I have to do to start the process of getting it delete? I didn't really understand the abbreviations in your edit declining the speedy... I know "afd" means article for deletion, but that's it. -Mike Payne (T • C) 14:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image copyright problem with Image:StarKicker.jpg[edit]

fixed

Tom Cruise Article[edit]

Hello, Thanks for your quick response. How can we add the article? This person had attended school with Tom Cruise for 4.5 years. Can we footnote the Public and Middle School yearbooks? If so how? Also there is also information backing article claim (in Andrew Morton's latest book) as well as partially in your existing footnote number 9.

With regards to Photo, it is indeed a school photo taken in 1974 at Henry Munro Middle School Gloucester , Ontario Canada. You are correct SELF is not best classification. Might you have a better recomendation?

Thank you for your patience in this matter.

Continued attacks[edit]

Can you take another look at this. Im the victim of racism, this ip code has called me a nigger and a black bastard. When he was blocked his reasoning for being unblocked was basically "im white so release me, hes black so treat him like shit". Realist2 (talk) 05:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I live half an hours drive outside cardiff, are you sure its IN cardiff, can you get any more specific. Realist2 (talk) 06:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok , thinks that are out close to cardiff sometimes get included in a catchment area, it would be interesting to see if we can get a specific area. Feel free to watch my page, i believe someone else is as well. Realist2 (talk) 07:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at the 2 newest edits on my talk page, very odd ip adress comment. Realist2 (talk) 18:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok thanx for looking into it so quickly. Realist2 (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kununnurra[edit]

Probably wrong spelling - I was trying to ask both to watch that they dont get blocked - and we had an edit conflict there - the OR issue needs to be learnt pretty quick by the main one - otherwise will be in the really difficult space to be- - cheers SatuSuro 13:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tesco[edit]

I wouldn't expect most people to have access to case reports either. It's completely within WP verifiability policy. Then name of the case is verifiable, the date is verifiable, the court instance is verifiable. If people have access to Lexis or Westlaw they can find it there. I'm puzzled as to why you're being pedantic. I'm not really interested in arguing. Wikidea 13:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, by the way, there is an official transcript. And whatever you did with citations isn't standard. Wikidea 13:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jade Goody[edit]

What is so vandalizing about updating her middle name? It is her real middle name. Sorry if editing z list celebrity's wikipedia pages upsets you! Motwu (talk) 18:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birthday[edit]

So I just turned 55. Big deal. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 23:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

R v Bailey[edit]

I quick-failed the GA process for R v Bailey. You didn't finish the GA process (the GA tag never made it to the talk page), but I put a couple comments on Talk:R v Bailey. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just one source for R v Bailey probably wouldn't cut it, I don't think. I don't know the first thing about law cases, but I do know that GA-class always requires multiple reliable third-party sources. Surely there are more sources out there about this case. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:HollyMcCall.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on Image:HollyMcCall.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria.

If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the image can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the image is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the image. If the image has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:HollyMcCall.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sdrtirs (talk) 18:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chade57![edit]

Chade57 needs help! Can you teach me how to block people?! You know block people so they can't edit pages!? Please!! I heard you are really nice to making fined 7! (p.s. I'm actually making fiends 7 i just lost my password!)Thanks for the nice message I know you are busy and couldn't answer my question (do you like making fiends) anyway thanks for the really nice message! Remeber I lost my password so I can't be making feinds 7 so message me. You are a great freind and again thanks for the nice message you should deserve this!

Chade57 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Chade57 (talk) 01:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx[edit]

Thanx for your kind words, i still have a little to take care of first, cheers. Realist2 (talk) 03:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My userbox[edit]

I apologize for the inconvenience. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Let it be[edit]

Response on my talk. --Elliskev 20:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for the prompt help! Kelly hi! 21:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HELP[edit]

Could you check out the michael jackson article and talk page. A user (cooljuno411) keeps adding MJ'S mugshot to the article in either one of two places. He has also managed to start a discussion on race at the talk page. An archived consensus was that the mugshot should not be on the article. Additionally as the guy was found not guilty its misrepresentation and i believe the picture is being considered for deletion. Cheers.

Im also concerned about the edits he made on African American. here Realist2 (talk) 19:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure just keep an eye out, i will appreciate it, im also concerned about the agends he is setting out on the african american article. Im sticking around for now, im determined to get it Thriller up to FA. Realist2 (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey the user has added a new picture, its from a magazine, i know wiki doesn't allow magazine covers but im not user about inside pages. Could you take a look, i apologize for disturbing you like this. Realist2 (talk) 21:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think, but i cant be sure that he's going to leave the mugshot thing now that he's got that pasty picture up. None the less its poor quality, if you look at the bottom of the magazine you can till its not level and im sure magazines are a no no. Realist2 (talk) 22:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Realist2[edit]

I've replied on my talk. --Elliskev 23:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And my friend Rodhullandemu i dont like being named informally, no matter who its by. ;-) That all important "2" at the end of my name is SO important to me. ;-) Realist2 (talk) 00:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something important[edit]

Hi i have a certain issue about a project im working on, i need to speak to an experienced editer for advice about what direction to go but i need to talk outside of the wiki world. Could you point me in the right direction, i trust you enough to talk about it but its rather complicated and im not sure you have the time. Realist2 (talk) 01:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I havent heard of you? Realist2 (talk) 02:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok , yes its quite complicated, sorry im not rushing you, study it hard, think it over, there arent many people i trust here anymore. They found out who the racist editer who vandalised me was, he was someone i had worked with here at wiki. How crushing. Realist2 (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Register.com deletion[edit]

I've rewritten this page using content from the deleted version, removing the stuff that sounded promotional and adding a few references. Since I used the old version of the article as my base, I'm going to restore the history for GFDL compliance and place my rewritten version on top. I know registrars are a dime a dozen these days, but Register.com holds a place in "Internet history" as the first of the commercial registrars and is certainly notable in that regard. --Versageek 02:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you for restoring that user sub-page of mine, and moving it to where it should have been created. Clearly, when I created my account I didn't realise the caps of my name. (I originally tried for the_dark_lord_trombonator, but I wasn't allowed it). Turns out I don't need it after all (may have been a first page creation trial thing?), so I have put that tag on you suggested. Thanks again -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 07:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Speight[edit]

What is your reasoning behind increasing the protection of Mark Speight to full? You should really include it when upping the protection... (FYI, look here, in case you've yet to see it). TalkIslander 16:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bit about his "death" is still there, in the locked version. Steve T • C 16:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look here. Yes, a formal identification is yet to take place, but if the BBC themselves are stating that it's believed to be Speight, there must be something behind it. Unless you can give a good reason why this shouldn't be done, I would like to lower the protection back to semi - many people feel strongly about Speight, and it's not fair to cover up his death when even the BBC have reported it. TalkIslander 16:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still there. In the references section. Steve T • C 16:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Gone. The BBC are saying that it's "believed to be". Yes. You state that this is as far as we can go. Yes. But this is not as far as we're going, the article fails to mention this at all. You cite WP:V and WP:RS, both of which accept the BBC and Sky News. Finally, you state "I would unprotect back to semi but we'd still get editors saying it's true" - that's pre-emptive protection. Yes, this is a BLP issue, but it cannot be denied that the body found is highly likely to be Speight, due to both the Beeb and Sky stating that it is believed to be him. The article should not fail to mention that the body is believed to be Speight. TalkIslander 16:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fire-fighting... fun :P. Still, I believe that unless things get way out of hand, this is good for now. (I realise that we cannot work like this, but...) In all likelihood it will sadly be confirmed soon, ending this problem (to an extent). TalkIslander 16:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


thats not the point. You wanted a picture of Mark Speight (Bless his soul), you got a picture of mark speight. Why take it off? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manadude2 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean my edit was vandalism - i posted that he was dead - and he is! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ammera (talk • contribs) 20:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your most recent comment on the talk page: Heh, I think I beat you on that one :P. I have coursework due in on Tuesday, and although I've done a lot of it, I haven't finished, 'cause I've been spending so much time here... I really do think I spend just a tad too much time on Wikipedia... TalkIslander 20:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I do that most of the time anyway :P TalkIslander 20:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

James Stewart (actor)[edit]

Rod, if I can be so bold, can you look over the James Stewart (actor) article. It appears to be undergoing an attack by Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/HarveyCarter (6th) under the guise of various anons. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

RFA Thanks[edit]

Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 20:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re talkpage protection[edit]

I don't appreciate it that you protected my talkpage with a "soapboxing" accusation/rationale--if you look above, Herostratus unprotected it specifically because he wanted to have a "teachable" conversation with me, and I replied to him in good faith. I didn't just start randomly posting on my talkpage out of nowhere; I was encouraged to engage in dialogue. (It's unfortunate that Hero and I were not able to have a good conversation--but I was actually trying.) I hope that you and I will have good relations in the future, but I would also appreciate an apology for your protection rationale, because I think it was not AGF. Thanks, -PetraSchelm (talk) 07:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving Wikipedia for a few weeks as a result of PetraSchelm's methods -- see here, for example: Talk:List_of_books_portraying_sexual_attraction_to_children_or_adolescents. She has massively disrupted the entry, unilaterally. She mischaracterizes that page's history, and other editor's comments. She implies that anyone who disagrees with her is pro-pedophile and disruptive. She refuses to acknowledge genuine controversy (over the meaning of "pedophilia"). And ironically, in view of the above, she now accuses others of "soapboxing". )

If you decide to block her again, I won't come to her defense. Thanks for reacting firmly to her previous unpleasant behavior. Subsequent events suggest that you were clearly right to do so. SocJan (talk) 06:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship[edit]

Hi i was considering looking into this, are there any links i could follow, it might be worth a shot 1 day, i spend so much time here. Realist2 (talk) 11:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Speight[edit]

Please see talk page for latest development. Computerjoe's talk 14:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again[edit]

I need some advise about the newest michael jackson picture, it was taken at his trial, i can provide reliable evidence that at the time of the picture Jackson's health had declined dramatically. It grossly distorts him. Realist2 (talk) 21:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i have suspicitions that he is motivated by racial issues, his edits at African American and the same talk page make it a possibility. Obviously im not getting involved with racial stuff right now im still recovering from the last incident. I dont care for his motives i just want to make sure the picture is respectable. Im not Familiar with pictures, i had no idea he fixed that one up. I will take note of your advise regarding adminship.Realist2 (talk) 22:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally im concerned about my block history. Ive been blocked 3 times and also had one extention but all but the very first were removed whem it was viewed it was a poor decision.

  • My first block was 24 hours for 3rr which i accepted.
  • My second block was 72 hours for the same incident on the same issue but i was unblocked after 12 hours when the admins realised they had got it wrong (I really didn't explain my defence properly to start off with).
  • Then there was yesterday's block and extention for "incivility" but both were reverted because they were poor decisions.

Only my first ever block was fair, the others were "c*ck ups" parden my french. Realist2 (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey regarding that picture, ive seen it many times before, i dont believe he is in a car. He is clearly standing up and there is a man holding up an umbrella behind him. The name of the picture needs changing. Why would he say that its a car shoot when its not? Are there photography laws he's trying to get around? Realist2 (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, ive noticed something really wierd on the michael Jackson talk page. It has 2 sets of archives. Not only that, one set has 15 archives the other 16. What on earth do i do about that? I believe it is archived by a BOT. Maybe the BOT did something wrong? On top of that i would like to start archiving manually again now that i know how to do it. Realist2 (talk) 19:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok, i see what you did, ill remember that for if/when it occures again, Cheers. Realist2 (talk) 19:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Speight[edit]

The Resilient Barnstar
For diligence and wikipediance on Mark Speight, and grace under pressure on Talk:Mark Speight Jdcooper (talk) 21:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson[edit]

I re-upload that image as a small fair use image. Feel free to look at it. --Cooljuno411 (talk) 23:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox[edit]

Sorry about that, I'm cleaning out CAT:TEMP and the indef-block templates you have transcluded on your sandbox put it into the category. Mr.Z-man 04:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IRC[edit]

Here I am... --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HIStory[edit]

Someone just redirected a michael Jackson album with no warning what so ever. Realist2 (talk) 01:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Realist2 (talk) 01:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment at AV/I (Agenda Pushing)[edit]

Sorry, I haven't understood your comment at AV/I and was hoping you could clarify for me. You say you have reverted to the previous and protected something but, I'm unsure what that statement applies to. Maybe I just haven't had enough coffee yet. Thank you. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rational[edit]

Yeah i dont know how to do rationals tho so it must be deleted. Check an eye on that guy adding pictures. He will stop the article reaching FA and i swear ill have a fit. :-)Realist2 (talk) 22:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it needs an FUR whatever that is. Realist2 (talk) 22:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hum, can you take a look at the MJ FA. They are telling me something else all together. One reviewer failed it because it had not included his biography as a source. Lol i had to pull them back in to inform them that actually his biography is used 26 times in article. Realist2 (talk) 22:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hi Rod, would you take a look at the Afghanistan talk page and its archives. I've landed on the admin noticeboard again, and I am engaged in a fight with an anon user on a page that has been subjected to a lot of socks and pov-pushing. Have I been wrong in insisting that his wording of the poll is poll pushing? I'd appreciate the opinion of an admin. Thanks. Carl.bunderson (talk) 05:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.[edit]

Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 15 7 April 2008 About the Signpost
April Fools' pranks result in temporary blocks for six admins WikiWorld: "Apples and oranges" 
News and notes: 100 x 5,000, milestones Wikipedia in the News 
Dispatches: Reviewers achieving excellence Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Volume 4, Issue 16 14 April 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor 
Interview with the team behind one of the 2,000th featured articles Image placeholders debated 
WikiWorld: "Pet skunk" News and notes: Board meeting, milestones 
Wikipedia in the News Dispatches: Featured article milestone 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Law reviews[edit]

Het i noticed you put up a large number of law related article for GA. Im studying law at university so i would like to think i know enough about the subject matter to review the articles. If you would like me to i can give some a look latter tonight?

If got a lot on my plate at the moment with MJ on FA, Thriller is about to go back on FA review in the next few days. Also i got Thriller 25 up to GA! But i have some time to give an article a review if you like. Let me know. Cheers. Realist2 (talk) 21:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that.[edit]

See my comments to Stifle here. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 22:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I would have felt awful if you'd left the project as a result of an unwise move on my part. On the other hand, I do think it's important for admins to follow the rules and be held accountable. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 23:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I understand. And experiencing personal attacks against yourself was part of it, too: in an ideal world, volunteers wouldn't be subjected to that. I hope your wiki-experience is kinder to you in future.
I was worried today, because I wasn't able to get online most of the day, and I was afraid you might have been blocked. I would have asked that you be unblocked; but by the time I got online maybe your block would have almost expired anyway. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 23:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it wasn't just the fact that you had stopped reverting. It was the fact that they were personal attacks. I certainly didn't want to support personal attacks; but by criticizing you for removing them it would seem that way, so that was inconsiderate of me and I'm sorry. I had started a separate 3RR report, rather than adding information to the existing one as has been my wont, in order to dissociate myself from an incivility in the report itself, but I didn't take that concept far enough.
Would it be OK with you if I quote you? The thing you said about a colander or a minefield would fit very nicely as the 3rd quote on my userpage. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 23:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smart move[edit]

That was a smart move with the Paw Paw redirect. Wonder why no one thought of it yesterday (excuse me, took you a day to figure that out, lol) --pete 00:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canplex[edit]

He emailed and talkpage'd me regarding the blanking. Please stop by his talk and see if my response is clear enough? ThuranX (talk) 03:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Crazy Boris with a red beard[edit]

Did you block him by mistake? I've unblocked. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 11:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting the pagemove vandal. You thought I was doing the vandalism, right? :-p Crazy Boris with a RED beard 11:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I posted a few seconds after you did... Now I saw your post on my talk. No harm done. :-) Crazy Boris with a RED beard 11:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:WP:AWB[edit]

Thanks.--RyRy5 (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Private info.[edit]

Thanks for your speedy reply. The user is User:Bradley Tynecastle Driver 8145 30350. Qqqqqq (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've never done that before -- would you mind? I think I've deleted all the edits with the personal info. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help! Qqqqqq (talk) 18:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MJ FA and Law GA.[edit]

Hey the MJ article is on FA, ive resolved all issues made by the 3 edits who have contributed to the review so far and since then it has had two further copy edits. Would you mind, if you can spare the time today, taking a look and adding your thoughts at the FA review. Further advise if needed would be appreciated. On a different sibject i wanted to get on with that law review. Is there an agreement or consensus yet on how to review these articles. Cheers. Realist2 (talk) 17:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, as this is a new chapter for me, i has been given a facelift. --Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 21:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, ill look into a darker, yellow/ light orange. Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 21:39, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK this change should help. Look forward to hearing about MJ laters. Adios. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 21:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i favour it as well actually. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2 extra things, firstly, i would like to float the "2" on my name, so that its risen above realist, how does one do that, ive seen it on some other names. Secondly and more importantly this picture here is very very very useful to the michael jackson article. There is a physical apperance section and i believe this picture really helps the reader see how he changed. Notice that all pictures are taken at the same angle so comparisons are fair. The picture shows the changes to his skin colour, noise, lips and hair. Personally i believe it is impossible to talk about Jacksons changing appearance neutrally as it is based on opinion, its a matter of taste. These pictures will help stop a pov statement in part because the statement isnt needed, the reader can make up their own mind. Ive seen a few flickr pictures on wiki commons including that god terrible magazine cover that cooljuno411 put up. It is defo ok to put flickr pictures onto commons. I would really appreciate if you could get that one on. Cheers. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be able to upload it (i tried and didnt do it correctly at all), and we can see if it works, i believe its a very important picture, as im writting the article almost alone i dont want by own biases on his appearance to interfere, i will admit that im not particulary phased or shocked by any of his images anymore after seeing so many, im quite numb to any shock value. I not want it in words, i think this picture is one of the view instances where it improves an article. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you mean this? Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 23:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Im prepared to stick with a fair use rational yes, i think if you word it correctly people can clearly see its significants. Whats really clever about it is that all the pictures are taken at the same angle so comparisons are fair. I dont think i could ever find a more suitable picture. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 00:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, i think everyone has gone to bed, its just me and you, my watchlist hasnt moved in ages but i need an excuse to break 10,000 edits. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 03:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there i can tell your very busy, just reminding you about those MJ issues, things seem to be going quite well with the FA review too. Hopefully you can get around to some stuff later. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 19:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth is happening all of a sudden at the michael jackson article, im troubled, the article is days if not hours away from being FA and these vandals are threatening that. I thought both pages were semi protected. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AWB[edit]

Hello again, you recenly gave me the tool. I was wondering how to start using it. I think I downloaded it. I read WP:AWB but I don't see how you click "Make from Category". Can you help?--RyRy5 (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I use IE.--RyRy5 (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recommended administrators[edit]

Hello, i have created a section on my userpage for other users to find administrators recommended by me. I would like you to add yourself to the list so it can have your unique signature! Please use ~~~ to add yourself, as this will omit the date. If you do not wish to be on the list, thats okay! I respect the choice of every administrator/user on wikipedia. Have a nice day :-) TheProf - T / C 20:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal account[edit]

This user has carried on making purely disruptive edits. I have left evidence at his talk page. Cheers. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 01:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, i always keep an eye on them for a few hours, they either carry on vandalising and get blocked or never edit again. Either way we win. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 01:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

looks like another trouble maker Vandalism only account, he does occasionly revert his own vandalism, but none the less.... Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 13:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Julianna Rose Mauriello[edit]

I was on the film crew for A Fix, I met Julianna and her wife, I dont appreciate being called a liar, which I most certainly am not. I guess you are one of the "fans" I was talking about. Nothing like having blinders on eh? Sure, I can understand why you wouldn't call my inromation reliable, I just worked on set with her for 4 days about 9 hours a day, but I guess that's not enough. What would constitute verifiable for you? Do you need a picture of her swapping spit with her wife and holding up a card that says "Rodhullandemu Im gay quit having fantasies about me"? Honestly... thats very insulting... Serious, that really is outrageous and you certainly do not have much of a verifiable encyclopedia here. Up untill 3 days ago it still said e were in the middle of filming our movie, which we finished filming 3 months ago... Rediculous, thank god I can just leave this website and laugh to myself.

  • I'm sure you'll be sadly missed. At least that save me from physically preventing you from editing.--Rodhullandemu (Talk) 11:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually according to Wikipedia, you cannot block me just because you have a content dispute with me. THAT ALONE makes it so you cannot block me.

And STOP just deleting stuff I post, you have no right whatsoever to delete anything I post on a discussion page, that is what the discussion page is for.

Anything else you can just tell someone else, Im not interested.

Status Bot[edit]

Knowing you're an admin, could you delete Status Bot, a page that I inadvertently created while trying to send Chris G a message. If you look at his talk page, you'll notice a text box letting you put a message in. Funny thing is, when you put in anything (like I put "Status Bot" as my heading for my comment), it creates a Wikipedia article on it. I've informed him about it, but could you delete the accidental page I've created? Thanks. Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 14:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Verification[edit]

Rodhullandemu, it is policy that {{cn}} can and should be used to challenge specific statements. {{refimprove}} by itself is vague and thus likely to be ignored or removed prematurely. In the future, please don't remove such tags without good reason. Superm401 - Talk 22:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where in WP:V does it say that the summary section doesn't need to have references? All the claims in the summary should be cited; of course, the references are likely to be the same as those in the main articles. Superm401 - Talk 22:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point too. In general, I try to focus on the claims I think are most important. Superm401 - Talk 22:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Noticeboard[edit]

Yes, you are right, of course. Sorry about the mess. I posted one last message asking for expert opinion on whether there were problems with the report. I trust that was okay. The request includes yourself, if you are an expert and can be bothered. My apologies, again. I should have cut off earlier. -- Lonewolf BC (talk) 22:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heck, I'd be fine with it if you just nuked everything past the admin's decision. I would like to post that request somewhere, though. The last thing I want is to make invalid or flawed 3RR reports. Any ideas on a good place? -- Lonewolf BC (talk) 23:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:WP:AWB[edit]

Thank you for the notification. Could you give a precise indication on the length of time I am expected to wait, for a comfortable time is largely subjective. Thanks in advance.--Huaiwei (talk) 02:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the honest feedback. I know it is not within your responsibility or interest to check the reasons behind my long string of blocks, but I would just like to assure that the vast majority of them (the first 12 blocks) involved my edit wars with a perticular user who has since been banned permanantly from wikipedia. My remaining three recent periodic blocks involved my over-zealousness in undoing damage inflicted by particular wikipedians who are less familiar with this site, each of them being subject to multiple disciplinary actions themselves, namely User:Sparrowman980 and User:Coloane. My primary purpose for applying for this is to mass add missing templates in multiple aviation articles, amend formatting in multiple bus-related articles, and so forth. I have read and fully understand the terms and conditions of use of the AWB. It is unlikely that a wait of 1 week, 1 month or 1 year will really make any difference. I thank you in advance for your reconsideration.--Huaiwei (talk) 21:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks indeed for the approval and for placing the trust in me. I will endeavour not to let anyone down. Have a marvellous day ahead!--Huaiwei (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MJ[edit]

Hey, that guy isnt a vandal, sorry ive asked him for some help, im keeping an eye on all his edits dont worry, he's on our side. :-) Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 20:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, i havent checked exactly what he edited as i put faith in it, i was just gonna wait till he finished, he might have moved it to somewhere else in the article, etc. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 20:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, i know your busy, i really need you to help out with that picture if you can, someone opposes the article going to FA , in part because there is no critism of his surgery, i really need that picture on a fair use rational. Please help when you can. Cheers. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 07:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi i think there is something wrong with the michael jackson article. Take a look at that section i keep trying to add about his dancing. When i save it, it doesnt show uo on the screen and the 2 sub sections merge into 1. Advise? Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 11:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: User talk:212.219.115.245[edit]

Final warning at 09:08. Continued vandalism 09:48, 10:34, and 10:36. Blocked at 10:36. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Taft[edit]

Would you please take the same action here as at Billy Preston. If you act fast, you can protect the opposite "wrong version" there from the one on Billy Preston. Both sides can be equally discomifitted. Thanks. David in DC (talk) 16:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I understand your reluctance and appreciate your actions. David in DC (talk) 18:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With regrets, please review this diff: [1] David in DC (talk) 20:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was imprecise. I hoped you'd review the page for protection, like Preston and Taft. Not for a block. But I understand your reluctance. Thanks again. David in DC (talk) 20:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So far, the only other one I know about with an active edit war is Billy Cannon. My reverts on Omar Gooding and Eugene Hasenfus seem not to have been provocative. One never knows. David in DC (talk) 20:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither has edited Billy Cannon since the 3RR warnings. However, an idea has occurred to me that Wikipedia:UNDUE#Undue_weight should perhaps apply to the use of this category, with necessary adaptation to meet the circumstances. Jimbo Wales seems to be setting out a useful guideline which might well be helpful. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The world is a circle. Please read the Peter Yarrow talk page. The article is currently in mediation and that's where this whole fustercluck has its origins. WP:WEIGHT. You make me so happy I want to cry. David in DC (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR[edit]

can you please look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Billy_Cannon&action=history there are numerous editors trying to deal with 1 editor's reversions.. --Jkp212 (talk) 00:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your terminology is wrong. The article has been in the category for a lengthy time, placed their by another user. While the issue has been under a RFC you have been the one reverting it without consensus. John celona (talk) 14:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank spam[edit]

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral.
Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations.
Thank you again, VanTucky

John celona[edit]

I understand you don't want to be seen as involved, but I think an immediate block is warranted. If you look at his contributions, he's had numerous violations of 3RR, and several of those were after warnings. I suppose the reason he hasn't been blocked is because no one bothered to file a report. I'm still amazed at all the contributions that are nothing but edit-warring. Enigma message Review 01:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have just been shot down and severly reprimanded at the 3RR board by Deacon for the patently false complaints you filed against me. I am NOT edit warring but protecting long standing articles from vandalising. I have not added even one article to the category since the matter was sent to a RFC. John celona (talk) 14:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify-the above paragraph is directed to user Enigma who filed a patently false 3RR against me and was aprropriately severly chastised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John celona (talk • contribs) 14:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image copyright problem with Image:MorrisOn.jpg[edit]

{{nonfree album cover}} added. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beth Rowley - Little Dreamer[edit]

Hi

I want to create a page for Beth Rowley's new album called 'Little Dreamer' but there is already an article for an album with the same title.

What is the best thing to do?

Thanks --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created the page but I've never done 'disambiguation pages' before and wouldn't want to mess anything up and looks a bit confusing for me. Could you create a disambiguation page for me? Thank you. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks for your help! --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 02:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:88.111.203.192[edit]

Hi. This guy has created numerous accounts to evade his original block, as well as using several IPs. He insists on having his own way with articles and will not discuss his edits. I aways recognise him instantly, so recognisable are his edits. He's a pest, and I suggest we can do without him. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 18:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just seeing whether a fresh approach from a different admin can lead to a less antagonistic response and hopefully some reform at the root cause of their original block before he/she hops back onto the sockpuppetry treadmill. But judging from this teenager's poor English skills so far, I'm starting to be very doubtful that they're even mature enough to be on Wikipedia. --  Netsnipe  ►  19:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your revision of "Battlestar Galactica"'s #6 refs "The Prisoner"'s #6[edit]

When you removed the recent addition of a statement that the current Battlestar Galactica's character "#6 is a nod to The Prisoner," between the citation footnotes and the "External links" list, you did the right thing for the wrong reason. It was already in the "References in other popular culture" section, with cite. Just FYI. Ted Watson (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Julianna Rose Mauriello[edit]

Just keeping you updated that the person that got blocked for editing JRM's page is now trying to get me to add her sexual orientation, claiming Myspace as a reference. Edit in question. I responded on the IP user's talk page.

Spammer[edit]

this editer is spamming pages saying "this person supports hillary for president" its unsourced aswell, im gonna go cleaning up after her. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 20:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, the editer blanked their page lol. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 21:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, ok, the FA has gone really well for MJ, 6 support, 3 oppose. The ones who oppose are only opposing because of the need for a copy edit. They will change their votes if it has this copy edit. Could you help. While you do that im gonna get "A day in the life" up to GA. Its on hold but kodster hasnt been here in days to sort out the requirements. Can we help eachother out? Some of the michael jackson stuff has been copy edited. Everything before Thriller era has been done and so have the latter personal issues. We can have a GA and FA article within hours? Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, tomorrow, ill keep you to that ;-), im gonna do the on hold stuff before that week expires. Kodster aint been on in days, wonder whats up. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, i tried to revert him at the same time as you, why does it say you reverted me tho. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 00:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, lol as long as thats not on my record, the reason i came around was to tell you ive done the stuff for A day in the life. The reviewer said they will take a look tomorrow. Guess you can update the beatles project soon. Whats it now, like 30 GA articles, woo!!! :-) Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 01:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A day in the life is GA now. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 15:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Brand[edit]

There is a user MrIanMaclean who has vandalised the Russell Brand page with abusive language.

Any chance you can block them from editing the article? --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 02:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 17 21 April 2008 About the Signpost
BLP deletion rules discussed amidst controversial AFD Threat made against high school on Wikipedia, student arrested 
Global login, blocking features developed WikiWorld: "Disruptive technology" 
News and notes: Wikimania security, German print Wikipedia, milestones Wikipedia in the News 
Dispatches: Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes WikiProject Report: The Simpsons 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite IP block[edit]

Hey- just a quick heads-up. I altered your indefinite block of 92.12.245.126 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) to 6 months, as we usually don't block IP's indefinitely per Wikipedia:Blocking_IP_addresses. I know it's a static IP, but even those are sometimes reassigned, or people move, or so forth. If he starts acting up in 6 months it will be trivially easy to reblock the IP. I hope that's OK with you - I just wanted to give you a heads-up. MastCell Talk 18:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to have quickly switched to a new IP, 92.11.161.173, as his verbatim material began showing up this morning on the John Ford page, as well as familiar accusations of racism, homosexuality, intolerance, etc., on the pages of Marlon Brando, Dirk Bogarde, Stewart Granger, et al. He is an iteration of the HarveyCarter sockpuppet, banned in some 20 or 30 disguises for vandalism and aggressive derogatory editing on articles relating to popular Hollywood figures. Although blocked on 25 April, by 26 April at 0100, he was back under the new IP. FYI. Monkeyzpop (talk) 12:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:AWB[edit]

I work on the UK Transport Wiki and on there my username is Kentish121 and i forgot i was Dudleybus on wikipedia because i had flicked fron 1 wiki to another. i inteded to put MY name,

--Thanks - Dudleybus Spake 2 me 22:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks[edit]

Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 01:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello![edit]

Can you change the sockpuppet tag on User:19yearoldboyfromNY to suspected sockpuppet of Ron liebman? It's while following tracks... Thanks! --Creamy!Talk 02:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Big Fan[edit]

Seems like you've picked up a big fan somewhere along the way. Special:Contributions/92.11.161.173 spent last night undoing some of your work, I reverted some but I'm headed to bed. Good luck! Redrocket (talk) 08:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: Dirk Bogarde[edit]

Why do you keep deleting a comment in the Talk: Dirk Bogarde page? I thought comments there were never to be deleted, unless they were obvious vandalism or defamatory? -- SteveCrook (talk) 15:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, mass-reverting edits by sockpuppets of banned User:HarveyCarter. Since his edits are generally unworthy, it's easier just to nuke the lot. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 16:01, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

multiple issues.[edit]

[2], this ip adress vandalises, communicates in a foreighn language to hid some rather inflammatory remarks. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Music samples[edit]

[3], would i be able to use any of these music samples on the Michael Jackson article? Cheers . Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 17:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Cheers, yeah i would avoid using more than one, as all 4 songs are musically similar anyway. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 17:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wwwwwwhatsup[edit]

This user is back and doing only vandalism. He is also claiming to be an administrator by copying someone elses user page and talk page to his. I suggest you block him indefinitely. --Bduke (talk) 08:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He has been blocked indef. --Bduke (talk) 09:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theft[edit]

Thank you for protecting this page. Bearian (talk) 21:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Farnworth[edit]

Thanks for the heads-up aboout this. It's not a place I'm entirely familliar with, but I'll try to keep my eye on it. Denshaw-gate seems to have raised the profile of Wikipedia's good-gestured open nature and several articles about Greater Manchester localities have seen simillar kinds of additions. Thanks again, --Jza84 |  Talk  19:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB[edit]

Thanks mate. I was just going by what the rules said. Rgoodermote  20:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB approval[edit]

Thank you! Just curious, is there something that made you think that I would "go crazy" or is that just the standard warning for newbies? Paradoxsociety (talk) 00:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources for sales[edit]

Hi i have a person working with me on the Discipline (album), hes under the impression that reuters is an unreliable source for chart sales, as far is im concerned its fine, could you give your view at the talk page please. Cheers. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 13:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB Approval[edit]

As I said to the other admin who rudely declined my request. It clearly says that you should have 500 mainspace edits which I do. It says nothing about having a block of any kind in the guidlines and therfore I feel that this is very unfair. That is why I am requesting the access to AWB. If you feel the need to decline me again at least put on the page about having blocks as I dont think that this is really fair on any of the people who have had blocks put in place for various reasons. Chris19910 (talk) 14:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right I see i wondered what all of the other links were for. All I know is that I have over 500 because of the my preferences thing at the top of the browser. Anyway i await the out come of the other admin Chris19910 (talk) 14:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, remember the Curious George guy?[edit]

The one who ABSOLUTELY HAD to have "United Kingdom" included, either instead of or along with "Scotland" in one episode of Curious George (TV series)?

He/she/it is back. User:65.2.141.28 has now added this info twice--once I reverted good-faith, but added an edit summary directing him to look at the talk page, as we're not going through THIS again. The second time I warned him, but that now puts me at 2RR. Would you like to join the fray? Thanks in advance....Gladys J Cortez 01:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That was quick... you're awesome! Gladys J Cortez 01:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Aside from the fact that nothing on the page notes a reference is required. The references I have are in personal e-mails that aren't citable, although it will be appearing on SF Site's news page (of which I am the editor) tomorrow. Shsilver (talk) 01:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Vandalism[edit]

It's a quote. Natasha Bedingfield is known, and respected, for her "astonishingly lovely buttocks". Is this not something you've heard on that side of the pond? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.231.241.21 (talk) 06:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dates[edit]

I have no idea - they show up fine in my browser. All the cite templates use the standard YYYY-MM-DD format and this format is perfectly acceptable in article text, provided they are enclosed in square brackets, and will cause the date to be displayed according to user preferences, as highlighted in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 10:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deborah Jeane Palfrey[edit]

Could you please reduce the protection level of this article? We can reasonably handle edit warring. But it makes the project look very bad if someone just died and our response in long-term protection. JoshuaZ (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At minimum, reducing to semiprotection should deal with most of the edit warring disputes. And both CNN and the Washington Post say it was a suicide and the police are saying that as well. Semiprotection seems more than sufficient. JoshuaZ (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And please consider extending the semiprotection for longer than 24 hours. There are many who are just itchin' to add in conspiracy theories. Thanks. ∴ Therefore | talk 04:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There have been several negative edits by several IP accounts and it's late at night. Would it be possible to extend the semi-protection? Thanks! ∴ Therefore | talk 06:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Wealthiest families in history[edit]

I have considered as to the notion of deleting this arctile from wikipedia. However, after much consideration, I have decided rather the page be revised in part or entirely due to its standards, and the suggested deletion be put on hold. Thanks. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 23:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship part2[edit]

Hey im still into doing it, ive been reading around it, watching the admin noticeboard a lot. Is there some sort of couching program for adminship that i could take part in? Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 02:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Outing[edit]

Anderson Cooper, the article implies cooper is homosexual, yet to my knowledge he has not come out, is it wikipedias role to out people? Im sure this is potentially liable, its not something i want to get heated over unless i have some backing. Ive noticed it on a few articles, in my opinion unless the person involved has acknowledged openly their sexuality, we shouldnt be labelling people. Thoughts? Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 17:39, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, ive been granted rollback, which, while nothing major, is a step in the right direction. Ill look into your links , i like your username change, its very warm, have a good day. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 17:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dcmadam.ogg[edit]

Image:Dcmadam.ogg go re-uploaded, once again with no sourcing. Corvus cornixtalk 22:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Afd for wealthiest families in history[edit]

Thanks for the support. Part of me would like to see articles like that stick around, but there really just are too many pitfalls, even if the author's research was perfect. I think, in some ways, WP:OR/WP:SYN are the hardest guidelines to internalize and apply, partly because it is so tempting to question specific points in the methodology, ask whether or not all of the Habsburg holdings were included, and so forth. But we just have to realize that we shouldn't be asking those questions, even though we feel qualified. The page is right there, we could just type it and make it "good as true", so the temptation is hard to resist. But thanks for dropping by. :) Protonk (talk) 02:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zou[edit]

I want to move Zou to Zou (disambiguation), and want to redirect ZOU to Zimbabwe Open University. Can you please help. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The move does help. Thank you very much. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 21:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB[edit]

My contributions list when I clicked "articles" said I had more than 500, but now when I go to My Contributions, I don't. Oh well, I have almost 480, so I'll just fix some references in List of best-selling albums worldwide, and go back to WP:AWB later. Don't worry, I won't just make 10 edits and revert them all, though I don't think that will work anyway. :) Thanks. Cheers, Kodster (You talkin' to me?) (Stuff I messed up) 21:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cant believe you've only made that many edits, yet your already a complete pro!! Man your good.Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 21:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is that different tools give different counts. To be consistent, we use the one in the links. --Rodhullandemu 21:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On my talk page, you said "we use the ones in the links" to count my contributions. What are the links? Is it an admin thing, or is it accessible to me too, because I think it'd be pretty useful (instead of counting my contributions 100 by 100 by 50 by 50 etc., which is what I actually do). Cheers, Kodster (You talkin' to me?) (Stuff I messed up) 18:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yodelling in the Canyon[edit]

You claim no ref cited as reason to revert my edit of cunnilingus, yet the article gives "gelling the hair", "drinking from the furry cup", "dining at the Y", "licking out", "picking the daisies", "licking the peach", "going down" or "eating out", "smack clam", "munch rug", "dining at the pink taco stand", "muff-diving", "carpet-munching", "feasting", "harvesting the salmon", and "eating the flower". In lesbian culture several common slang terms used are "giving lip," "lip service," and "gamahuching" as known terms for the act - and not a single one has a reference or a cite required tag. The only reference is the section is for "tipping the velvet" on account of its modern usage stemming from the eponymous book and TV serial. As we both assume good faith I'll be putting the phrase back into the article, and for consistency's sake, without reference. For your information, the term is most famously known from the description of the sexual act given by George Melly in the 1971 Oz (magazine) obscenity trial.

  • When the publishers of the underground magazine Oz were prosecuted for obscenity in 1971, their lawyer, John Mortimer, did all he could to make the jury giggle. George Melly was called to define cunnilingus. "'Sucking' or 'blowing', your Lordship. Or 'going down' or 'gobbling' is another alternative. Another expression used in my naval days, your Lordship, was 'yodelling in the canyon'." [4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fanx (talk • contribs) 15:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad User[edit]

You are a very bad user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.115.34 (talk) 19:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you very much. It's not often I get complimented on the work I do here, and ypur comment has warmed my heart. --Rodhullandemu 19:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, this made me laugh. No one's called me a bad user before, but then again, I don't do the blocking. ;) Cheers, Kodster (You talkin' to me?) (Stuff I messed up) 21:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm[edit]

You may think you can get one over on the other users but not with me. I can win!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.115.34 (talk) 19:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

List of best-selling albums worldwide, we are trying to get this article reliably sourced for possible FA list in the future. As you can see from the talk page, we are having difficulty finding sales for a beatles album. If you have any reliable third party sources please let us know. cheers. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 22:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/09&oldid=1144709193"