User talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/31

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

thanks[edit]

ok, thank you--Fine-estate7 (talk) 11:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please help again[edit]

I removed the false infomration after calling the Wikipedia office, and thank you for your help also, but some other user by the name of Delicious carbuncle placed it back[[1]], and I removed it again. The other user even threatened me on wikipedia.

As you or anyone else can see the information is not only false, not about Marilyn Monroe, but only an attack on me and others. Please help...--Fine-estate7 (talk) 07:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your block review comment on User:The cows want their milk back[edit]

"Initially, I felt the allegation of sockpuppetry to be thin, but deeper investigation shows it more than likely that it has been substantiated, as shown by the comments of multiple other editors."

Can you elaborate on this comment, as I made the initial charge of sockpuppetry? What you saw as thin, I saw as quacking. In fact I de-requested a checkuser due to what I saw as a no-brainer socking case. Also, what comments from other users substantiated the case in your mind? The only thing I saw on his talk page that substantiated the case IMO was the editor's claim he knew the other alleged sock had a different IP. If my judgment is really that bad, please tell enlighten me. Auntie E. (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not blaming you, but one editor stopping editing a certain set of articles and another starting up is suspicious, but not necessarily conclusive. However, all that followed seemed to confirm that initial suspicion, and I concluded that it was a WP:DUCK situation. A checkuser might have been more informative, but I'm happy with the outcome. Rodhullandemu 21:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If that was all I went on, yah, I agree, that would be thin. Maybe it wasn't clear, but my evidence was actually the fact that the old user came back from a month break only after the new user was blocked with the first edit being to AN/I to complain about the block of the newbie. That was the tipoff. I don't see a reasonable reason why FootballPhil would come out of inaction and make their very first post in wikispace defending someone they have no record of interacting with here. Quack, thy name is duck. Not sure what you mean by "all that followed." Auntie E. (talk) 22:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't aware of that bit about the old user complaining, hence, a perfectly valid WP:PLAXICO. "All that followed" were the various protestations and refactoring of talk page comments. I am even more certain that User should stay blocked. Rodhullandemu 22:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's cool. I figured as much. Now, could I request you to block the sockpuppeteer or should I just wait for the process at SPI? Auntie E. (talk) 03:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Taken care of by muZemike Auntie E. (talk) 20:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For Kristen's Wikipedia's picture.[edit]

That would be awesome if you or someone could change the old picture to new picture of Kristen. Thanks. Mmsnapplez (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmsnapplez (talk • contribs) 01:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not going to happen. Please see comments at File:Sundance Festival 2010.jpg. Rodhullandemu 01:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Found this on Bono[edit]

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bono-Name-Love-Mick-Wall/dp/0233001778 Gives the Rotunda which makes sense as it is a maternity hospital whereas Glasnevin is a suburb and as such made no sense. 12:54, 24 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.110.186 (talk)

Hope this has helped in ending confusion. I would not make the change myself as I believe it would have violating no original research --86.43.110.186 (talk) 16:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Other note. It seems you need two -- before the four tildes to sign. Hence why sinebot had to sign first post. If this is so could you tell the change to others? --86.43.110.186 (talk) 17:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Source seems reliable enough, and I'll put it in using {{cite book}}. As for the sig, ~~~~ should be enough to insert one. Rodhullandemu 17:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Back to an orignal wikipedia problem edit wars. Wall calls Glasnevin Ballymun in his book. Christy Dignam of Aslan took a music journalist out to the house that Bono grew up in and it is definetly in Glasnevin. T'Internet might provide a reliable source of this. There was a link once at the end of the article which took you to google maps and you could see this so it might be in the wikipedia history 86.43.110.186 (talk) 19:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. Looking at Cedarwood Road in Google Earth suggests that it is closer to Finglas than anywhere, and not really close to Glasnevin. It's probably easier just to omit a suburb, use the road, and insert a {{coords}} to pin it down- readers can the make up their own minds. Is that OK? Rodhullandemu 19:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another wikipedian has solved this problem by using the Mick Wall and another book as references. 86.43.110.186 (talk) 12:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Hislop's status[edit]

Hi, Rodhullandemu

Just read your message regarding Ian Hislop. I understand about your comment made on the edition; however, during his 20 years on Have I Got News for You, I'd say that he has worked on the show as a comedian as well as a satirist as he frequently makes funny comments on the show. Just want clarification as to why you have made the comment.

KAWyton —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.29.24 (talk) 22:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the lead of an article, we set out the principal reasons why the subject is notable. In Hislop's case, making funny comments is something he does more as a satirist than as a comedian (in the sense, for example, that Lenny Henry is a comedian but not a satirist). I don't see anyone else describing him as such, which would be helpful. That's why I think it's an inappropriate description, but you are welcome to solicit further opinion on the Talk page. Rodhullandemu 23:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

For taking care of this bit of blanking. I'm guessing it's a waste of time attempting to determine that user's motivation. Can't say I'm not curious, though. See ya 'round Tiderolls 01:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cunt[edit]

Cunt, you reverted my edit. Is urban dictionary a good enough source to say that men are often called dicks? (more in some cultures than others) Or can arsehole be used? Just seems bias to not compare the word cunt, and those quotes, to other words. IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 03:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Urban dictionary, like ourselves, is self-contributed and for that reason, we don't regard it as a reliable source since anyone could (I'm not saying they do) make up any old nonsense. As for making comparisons, that is out of our remit, and we would again require a reliable source to do it for us. Rodhullandemu 15:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed[edit]

Could you have a look at User talk:86.9.20.203 recent edits and comments on his talk page. I do not feel further input from me at this time is appropriate. Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Had a look. I'm not sure non-charting singles are worth mentioning in any case, but he has had a last warning, so can be blocked if he changes it again. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 15:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And again.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gone for 31 hours. Let's hope that will concentrate his mind on the need for sources. Rodhullandemu 21:08, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing/need for assistance[edit]

This editor[2] continues to changed "Entente victory" to Serb-xxxx- victory[3][4]. This article's[5] result portion of the template was discussed and agreed upon by Gligan and myself. Serbia123 was invited twice[6][7] to discussion which was ignored. Serbia123 has a history of changing edits to Serb this or that(including edit-warring), blantantly ignoring the factual evidence concerning these battles. Can you help? --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All I can do is to direct him to the Talk page, on pain of blocking, since locking the article does not currently seem to be an option. I've watchlisted the article. Rodhullandemu 21:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crime in the UK[edit]

Your thoughts, if you can spare the time. We have the problem of scope, in that history of the legal system, laws, or punishments might be better covered in articles under those main ideas. Saying that, obviously the scope of the article wasn't sufficient to justify its existence then, but I hope it is now. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 21:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still unsure what this article is trying to achieve; scope is the major issue. Criminal law in Great Britain might be a plausible topic, but it would have to rely strongly upon common law, and would have to deal with feudal law, Roman law, and myriad other topics to present a coherent picture to the reader. As it is, I don't think a recent snapshot of crimstats adequately reflects the title, because crimstats are a very recent addition (less than 100 years, IIRC). If this article was Criminal statistics in the United Kingdom, it really should be a description of how crimes have been recorded since their inception, including a reference to the British Crime Survey, and also various criticisms of the reporting and analytical methods used. A recitation of the statistics of recorded crimes over the years maybe belongs somewhere, with appropriate commentary, but I'm currently short of ideas as to how this could be achieved. Suffice it to say that sorting all this out to produce an intellectually valid collection of interrelated articles is currently something I am neither willing nor physically able to contend with. Sorry about that, but maybe I'll take a look at it later. Meanwhile, more specific points, I could help with. Rodhullandemu 02:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I might move the statistics and BCS summary sections to Crime statistics in the United Kingdom, and augment with collection details, for example, on the basis that there's no deadline. A summary could then be on the Crime... page, and we'll look forward from that as to scope. (Only one other significant, and not completely statistical article exists for another country, Crime in Russia.) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would work, because there is plenty of critical literature in criminology on the adequacy or otherwise of the crimstats. It would leave the current article a bit thin, but it could be stubbified, and it occurs to me that this article would be strongly linked to a History of criminal law in the United Kingdom. I'm not really up to dealing with large projects at present, but I'll dig out my books in preparation! Rodhullandemu 18:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Error[edit]

Sorry for doing this, what happens is that I thought I was on wikipedia in Spanish (I am translating from this wiki). Forgiveness and greetings. --Beat 768 (talk) 01:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Rodhullandemu 02:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help?[edit]

Sorry to bother you again, but this guy wrote more lies about me and they blocked my other user ID because I tried to defend myself and claim I am sombody else. I have done nothing wrong, and this is getting out of hand. If you can't help here, I will be forced to hire a lawyer because of this guy. Thank you

Here is the fake user again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Aslpt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheared58783 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI and FWIW, see Sockpuppet investigation, 2009-01-21. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Murray[edit]

Silly, considering that this is almost entirely what you do. Please read WP:DTTR and make sure your next edit is not your last here. Rodhullandemu 20:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the semiblock on Andy Murray. Highly necessary and much appreciated! Wikipeterproject (talk) 17:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

For protecting my talk page while I was busy Educating the Youth. One vandalism edit is funny; that many is just irritating. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. I know you've a particularly strong constitution, but I am just not going to accept crap like that here. Rodhullandemu 20:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RV/V issue on Leonardo DiCaprio[edit]

I'm trying to revert all the vandalism and removed content on this article by the various IP editors, back to the last good version of 12:50, 27 January 2010 EST by Nymf. I think I keep getting edit conflicts, as none of my four tries to restore the old version have worked. Please take a crack at it. Thanks, --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 18:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had to go out, but locked it before doing so. I'll now look at some blocks... Rodhullandemu 18:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Housekeeping, duplicated redirects[edit]

Hi, I saw you were online and was looking for an admin who would sort a little duplication out for me, on this page AFD at the top it looks like there have been 5 previous but two are duplicates, could you get rid of the duplicated two for me, I was going to nominate them for speedy then I though I might make the wheels drop off, thanks. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sexuality_of_Robert_Baden-Powell Off2riorob (talk) 21:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fixed now, I just went to Betacommand's tool & refreshed it. Shouldn't recur. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 21:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for that, Avraham had a look too, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 21:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Lee (entertainer)[edit]

Hi Rodhullandemu - from its history, this article seems to be on your watchlist. It still seems to be rife with unsourced remarks; I've reverted the most recent (others remain, I think) and sent the editor BNP2 a note - his first. Previous similar contributions seem to have a strong anti-gay theme. Not too sure what to do here; I've my own watchlist but not a long one and lack experience in the more complex vandal-related issues. The username might be ominous. I thought you might wish to take a look? Regards Haploidavey (talk) 02:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's gone, more on the BLP violations than the name, but even so, I doubt many people are actually that stupid. Rodhullandemu 02:16, 29

January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I doubt he'll off to build a better world. Haploidavey (talk) 02:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Explain Yourself[edit]

Could you tell me why you reverted this edit on Liam Ridgewell? It isn't personal opinion, it isn't even popular consensus; it's a FACT. You clearly know sod all about football so instead of stomping all over my edits with your size 12 jackboots, keep your pecker out of topics you aren't familiar with. King of Mercia (talk) 07:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read about neutrality, and in relation to "superlative", this. Rodhullandemu 15:22, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Murray again[edit]

I'd be grateful if you could take a look at the Andy Murray page. With all the interest in the Tennis GS final, editing on the page has gone ballistic in the past few days with vandalism, reverts, different claims as to birthplace, nationality etc. now happening all the time. My own view is that it might require some degree of protection just for the short term. Thanks, as always. David T Tokyo (talk) 14:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected until after the Final. Rodhullandemu 15:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks David T Tokyo (talk) 16:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for leaping in so quickly again, but can I ask you to look at user 194.179.120.4, please. I've tried to reason with them twice but I'm getting nowhere. He/she is claiming that the edit they're making is in line with consensus, but they cannot point to it and I've searched high and low and cannot find it. Now they're citing sock etc. - something here isn't right. Thanks David T Tokyo (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism on David Carradine article[edit]

Hi, the person who has been vandalizing the the David Carradine and the "Airbender' articles has changed user names and continues to hamper the Carradine article. This person clearly has an agenda. I reworded a sentence that this person obviously objected to as written, and he/she continues to edit it. I'm trying to get the article upgraded and this person seems determined to, at least, make the wording ridiculous. If it is within your ability, can you take some action against this person, or lock down the article? Thanks--DorothyBrousseau (talk) 23:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look at it. Rodhullandemu 23:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This person has also been adding weird pointless edits on my user page, like changing the user name of someone that I have been conversing with. This person is CLEARLY the same anonymous person who added the new section to the article "Life after death" that you reverted earlier today. This person has also been vandalizing another article, using the same agenda.--DorothyBrousseau (talk) 23:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my edits were not vandalism. Noah Ringer

And, I did no such thing as change the user name of someone she has been conversing with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noah Ringer (talk • contribs) 23:43, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block of Tavin623[edit]

Should the block not be indefinite for a vandal-only account? Please excuse me if I haven been mistaken. Connormah (talk) 23:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His edits from 2007, although not of the best, weren't vandalism. I can't rule out that this is a compromised account, and will wait to see what sort of edits emerge when his block expires. Rodhullandemu 23:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Carradine[edit]

Edits are edits - their validity and accuracy are often debated, and mine were not vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noah Ringer (talk • contribs) 23:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, but if they are reverted by another editor you should discuss them - without insulting other editors. Get a clue, please. Rodhullandemu 23:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the phrase "get a clue" kind of rude? I think so. You should also stay cool, given your authority. Lead by example and don't be a hothead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noah Ringer (talk • contribs) 23:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please point out which of my 70,000+ edits do not constitute "a good example". Also, as an Admin, I am duty-bound, and empowered, to enforce editing policies and standards of behaviour. If that means knocking heads together, I'll knock heads together, even if there is only one head to knock. Rodhullandemu 23:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This one. Prodego talk 00:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was a rhetorical question. If you've got a problem with my record as an admin, you know where to take it. Twelve hours a day here fighting vandalism, detracting from my content work, is more than enough, but somehow, I keep on doing it. Rodhullandemu 00:06, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And in case you've missed it, this. Rodhullandemu 00:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you should take a break from it then, in all honestly. Working with vandals all the time, one can sometimes forget that new editors don't know what they are doing, and sometimes Hanlon's razor comes in to play. Usually not, but helping one good editor easily outweighs hundreds of vandals. Don't feel that you have an obligation to enforce the rules - you don't, you aren't being paid, and it isn't expected of you. Wikipedia will survive if you step away from anti-vandal patrol to write a longer note to a potentially problematic editor - and will win out if that editor ends up becoming a long term member. Is this the case where that will happen - probably not. But there will be one at some point, and you want to be a positive part of the Wikipedia experience for whoever that is. Prodego talk 00:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If I had somewhere else to go, I would, in all probability. But I don't. I want to spend my last short remaining time on this planet doing some good. Editors who don't get it, even when told, are expensive in terms of hand-holding, but I am not a nanny- I am, if you like, an enforcer. Maybe you're so lucky to be young enough not to be too concerned about your mortality, but I am only too aware of mine. You're welcome to take over my 3,500+ watchlist, if you like, and leave me to deal with my overfull wallchart of pending projects. O, the irony! Rodhullandemu 00:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you were to, I'm sure your watchlist would be managed just fine without you. No one editor is the lynchpin that holds everything together. Its all about having a fun and welcoming environment - that's worth more than you or I will ever be. Prodego talk 00:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Rodhullandemu and User:raseaC - New user experience Prodego talk 01:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

76.91.152.248 returns as 72.129.62.0[edit]

Rodhullandemu, you blocked 76.91.152.248 (talk · contribs) the other day for returning post-block and making the same disruptive edits for which he was repeatedly blocked before. He's used a variety of other IPs, starting with 76.172.176.4 (talk · contribs)76.172.176.45 (talk · contribs). Now he's back as 72.129.62.0 (talk · contribs). The main markers of his activity are (1) editing Beatle and Moddy Blues articles, and editing against consensus without discussion. He likes to add "from album" parameters to a set of Beatle singles that were not initially associated with an album. In general, he edits against consensus, never adds edit summary comments, and never responding to talk page requests to discuss the issues.

Can you please take a look? When I go through the usual channels I have to spend a lot of time documenting something that's dead-obvious to me because I have been repairing articles in his wake for at least 6 months. — John Cardinal (talk) 23:36, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Annoying but it seems he can shift IPs more or less at will; neither seems to be a proxy so all we can do is block on sight. The first IP above doesn't seem to have any contribs, but the other I'll block as a sock of 76.91.152.248. All we can do is play whack-a-mole when they resurface. Rodhullandemu 23:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I got the old IP wrong; missed the last digit when I copied/pasted. (Sorry!) I understand we'll just have to stamp him out when he appears somewhere else, but I appreciate the quick response this time. — John Cardinal (talk) 23:54, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, that new IP is way to old to block now but I have most of the Beatles articles on watchlist, so I'll just sit and wait. Rodhullandemu 23:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreee that the old IP doesn't need to be blocked. it's only useful to see the pattern. — John Cardinal (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

£100[edit]

I'd like £100 please. You can donate this through my paypal account: "vexatiouslitigant@mailinator.com". Cheers, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.39.70 (talk) 00:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll do that when I win the lottery. Until then, don't get your hopes up. Rodhullandemu 00:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grease (film)[edit]

Your edit warrior is at it again on an IP range. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page has been semi-pp's but since one of the participants in this is autoconfirmed, I've upped it to full and advised the editor to take this to the Talk page. Rodhullandemu 22:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

{{Talkback|tide rolls}}

Sammy Lawhorn[edit]

Just a second opinion please. Do you think that Sammy Lawhorn passes the Wiki notability criteria ? I always feel sidemen are more difficult to assess - for example he played on many recordings, but always under other musician's titled work. If so, I will have a go at creating an article, and subsequently a DYK on him. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at WP:MUSICBIO, I think it's thin unless multiple sources describe his contributions to, e.g. Muddy Waters's music. Looking at other sidemen seems to suggest that notability is more likely to be established if they have played in multiple notable bands or have had successful solo careers, and I'm not sure about this guy. I don't think Allmusic alone is a criterion for inclusion. Hope that helps. Rodhullandemu 17:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and you are right. I pushed the boat out and you quickly pushed it back in again. Neither of us got our feet wet - good result. Listen, you have been good to me on Wiki, which I appreciate. I was horrified to hear of your recent injury; what with that, and the mindless idiots posting complete bollocks here, just to let you know that the good uns outnumber the fuckwits one million to none. Cheers,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 02:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. I yearn for a space when I can just get on with what you and I do here, but it is tricky at present. At least here I can block the fuckwits. In real life, Tasers are, sadly, illegal to have, although effective. But they'd save a lot of trouble in the face of a largely supine police force. Rodhullandemu 02:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion question[edit]

Yesterday I declined CSDG12 on Pencubitt House because the web page has a GFDL release on it. Perhaps I need to refresh my understanding, but would you mind telling me your rationale for deletion? All the different license terms are a bit confusing and, unless it's an obvious case, I'm going to leave G12's for someone else. Thanks! —DoRD (?) (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ha. I missed that, but saw it was previously G12'd. I'll restore it in that case. Thanks. Rodhullandemu 21:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I assumed that meant we could keep it, but then again, legalisms are about as clear as mud to me! But now that I dig a bit deeper, there is this to consider. —DoRD (?) (talk) 21:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that; I've left a note on that page; a bit overkill for a good-faith user, and the only remaining issues I would be concerned about are notability and COI. I'm taking no position on either until the article creator has seen and responded to those comments. Rodhullandemu 21:53, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010[edit]

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kidnapping of Jaycee Lee Dugard[edit]

Hello Rod. No doubt you've got a lot on your plate at the moment, but please could you keep an eye on Kidnapping of Jaycee Lee Dugard. Phillip and Nancy Garrido are expected back in court on 26 February [8], and there has been WP:BRD over naming the children allegedly fathered by Phillip Garrido.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've watchlisted it. Rodhullandemu 18:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, definite WP:BLPNAME issues here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User 194.179.120.4[edit]

Rod, I referred to this user above in Andy Murray (again). I noticed that he/she has just reverted another edit on the Andy Murray page. The revert was completely unnecessary, the ATP site confirms that Murray's career earnings were correctly posted without any need for a revert. I have major concerns over this editor, there seems to be trail of current and previous mischief. David T Tokyo (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pikey[edit]

I've made a few edits and citations to this article, FYI. Bearian (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw them; looks good. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 23:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

23.50[edit]

Hello Roddy, would you like to have a chat?86.145.201.38 (talk) 23:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Midnight on Friday, a difficult week, coming to the end of a 10,500 edit project before I may take a short break, and I see no reason to chat, since I don't know who you are, except I've seen your edit to LHvU's page. If you need company that much, and haven't found it in the pub, I don't see it happening here. Rodhullandemu 00:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
PS, since being punched in the face in my own home on New Year's Day, although the X-Ray of my zygoma was clear, I still can't see out of my left eye, but still manage to work here, and am waiting to see if this is going to be temporary or permanent, and my face remains swollen five weeks later. You don't know how lucky you are, but then your apparent desperation and importunate approaches maybe indicate that I'm not so badly off. Rodhullandemu 00:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I'm very sorry to hear that. I do hope you are ok. I assume you notified the appropriate authorities. I'm not that lucky, there wasn't much doing at the pub tonight. The samaritans were engaged I suppose.86.145.201.38 (talk) 00:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

.. as Basil Fawlty notably remarked. Rodhullandemu 00:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, well spotted. A fellow afficionado. What 10,500 edit programme are you you working on? Surely other editors can help you?86.145.201.38 (talk) 00:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category talk:United Kingdom articles missing geocoordinate data. Nearly finished, there's only a few left in Northern Ireland, but you do need Google Earth and sometimes a flair for detective work and combining disparate sources to make a defensible stab at a useful set of {{coords}}. Rodhullandemu 00:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, that seems like a thankless task. However, you are nearly finished, and that is an impressive number of edits. You must have a great deal of patience. Have you been editing here for long?86.145.201.38 (talk) 00:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Extraordinary Disrespect[edit]

Perhaps, as a provincial solicitor, you may be permitted to get away with pithy comments and receive from your audience a roughly split mixture of nervous mirth, boredom, and anger. But that isn't the case on wikipedia. I, L Phillips QC will not be standing for this kind of insult for much longer. It may be easiest if you write a blank cheque and I assess the damages. As you are no doubt aware professional courtesy would require I run them past you first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.111.98 (talk) 01:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Arkell v Pressdram. The only way in which you are possibly a "QC" is in "Queer Customer", and you are now blocked (again) for legal threats. Rodhullandemu 01:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poems[edit]

I am feeling very creative atm. I will bring you more poems later as I see fit to compose them. 79.75.185.208 (talk) 01:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't. I only appreciate Vogon poetry, and poor though it may be, it can't come close to yours. Rodhullandemu 01:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have a star:

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
To User:Rodhullandemu for watching my back Ishtar456 (talk) 22:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks muchly, but I'm just doing my job here. Rodhullandemu 22:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

86.177.218.3[edit]

Think there may be an excuse for an SPI? Clearly he's a sock of someone. HalfShadow 23:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's been around for a couple of weeks, on several IPs from that ISP, but I don't think he's ever used an account. I just revert, block and ignore. Rodhullandemu 23:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Yo, lookin' Gooood!"[edit]

I don't do "wikilove" fluffiness, but sometimes I like to startle people... LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure whether to be startled or flattered. "Flattled", perhaps, or "startered". BTW, thanks for dealing with the AIV report. Was too involved to do it myself. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 23:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hassan Nasrallah[edit]

this particular edit may not reach wikipedia's standards for constructivity (depending, of course, on what those standards are)> However, this was one of many changes which you reverted needlessly. Furthermore, I think it verges on racist to suggest that my ethnicity should mean you should keep an eye on my important work on this website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.8.81.50 (talk) 19:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That particular edit, especially as a reversion of an Admin's removal of vandalism, could be seen as vandalism in itself. Meanwhile, please sign your posts with ~~~~; it helps to avoid edit-conflicts with SineBot. Rodhullandemu 20:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rodhullandemu,

1. Thanks for your prompt reply 2. You didnt explain your vandalism in needlessly reverting around 30 changes that I made appropriately. I have accepted that it could be that the first change did not meet appropriate standards. 3. You have not apologized for your potentially racist statement. people in this reason are obviously entitled to post on topics connectd to this region. 4. i will not sign posts 213.8.81.50 (talk) 20:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC) as this is not my name, and I dont even know how to pronounce it[reply]

Question[edit]

Dear Sir,

Someone has posted my telephone number and contact details in a biographical article about me. Another editor has removed these, but they are still accessible in the 'edit history' area. Is there any way they can be removed from there as well? Many thanks.86.141.35.57 (talk) 23:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which article are we talking about here? Rodhullandemu 23:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't really wan't to say because the details are in fact valid. I've had a few funny calls of late and I wondered if that history could be removed. Would I need to tell an administrator or can it be done myself?86.141.35.57 (talk) 23:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am an Admin, but I can't do anything unless you give me some details. Meanwhile, if you feel you can't trust me, please see WP:OVERSIGHT, and you'll have to email them to get this sorted out. They are entirely trustworthy, although so am I. Rodhullandemu 23:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No no, don't get me wrong, I do trust you. It's just that everything seems to be so public on here, and I didn't want to draw attention to that particular information. I think I will contact those people to ask if it can be 'oversighted,' thanks for your help.86.141.35.57 (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/31&oldid=1140095467"