User talk:Cactusjump/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2 →

Archive 3 →

Reply

Will do. =] T.W. (talk) 15:53, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

It's true that the article is missing a proper "cast" section, but removing the character bio section to replace it with a cast listing (which by the way includes some uncredited voices without any sort of reference or base) is not the way to go about it. T.W. (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree -- Ruth Buzzi was not in the film, and he wiped out a bunch of information in the process. Thanks. Cactusjump (talk) 18:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply to your message

Hi, I didn't have a chance to follow up on your message of yesterday, as I was a bit busy in real life; actually I was doing two things at once on Friday and I really should have followed it up then, but Will take a look at the situation later tonight. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

• Actually I think there is enough reason to take it to SSP. Doing that now.FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

• • (reply)No prob. Sorry again about leaving it for two days. (Sighing) I think Collectonian and a few others are on the lookout for him; I tend to accidentally run across him and have had a few encounters with Bambifan socks before, at this AFD for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Rescuers (2013 film), which turned out to be Bambifan. And I am fairly sure that it was BAmbifan that I had to revert a lot last year on the Disney's Magical Mirror Starring Mickey Mouse article (You can see the fun and games here here. I seem to remember either AFD'ing or nominating other articles as hoaxes that were probably his work as well, as I ran into him a few times while watching New pages. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 18:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

• • • Yeah, since I've been working on The Rescuers and The Fox and the Hound I've become all-too-familiar with his antics. It's almost become a full-time job cleaning up his messes. I've also seen similar activity with 98.225.100.59 but not enough to accuse of sockpuppetry. Maybe that'll be the next one to look out for... Cactusjump (talk) 18:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

• • • P.S. I say that about the IP because of his activity on similar pages; you can look at it here.

• • • • (edit conflict) Well, I know he hops IP addresses and the IP addresses are in different ranges. I don't normally do very much on Disney articles (I'm more of a Looney Tunes kinda guy :)), but if I recall correctly, the reason I was fixing the mess on the Disney's Magical Mirror article was that I was following up on an IP account that had edited a blatantly obvious hoax article created by someone who could well have been Bambifan. (not that I knew that, but it dawned on me when I read up on him this year. I'll take a look at the edit history and see if I can dig it up later, although as it was last year, it's more of academic interest than anything else. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 18:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
        • And Bernard the Brave is now blocked.... :) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

• • • • • • Well there you go! :) Cactusjump (talk) 19:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

No doubt.

It's Bambifan, no question. I tried to offer him a mentorship at the Simple English Wikipedia, but he blew the chance, so he's going to get blocked every time I see him. Thanks for alerting me. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:18, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem. His editing style is so familiar to me now, it's getting way too easy to identify him. Cactusjump (talk) 00:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You betcha. In fact, I'm going to start watching some of his most edited pages in hopes that I catch him before he gets out of hand worse than he does already. He can't say I didn't try, but like I said, he blew it. There's a message on my talk page which links to a rant he did earlier today via his IP. Sheesh. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I saw that. Whoa. Well, I watch a couple of his Disney-related faves (The Rescuers, The Fox and the Hound, among others), so I'll be sure to keep in contact with you if I see any other shenanigans. Cactusjump (talk) 00:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please do. I'm glad he decided to show his true colors now and not after I wasted time attempting to mentor him. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. I thought I'd try one last time over on this site and I got my face rubbed in it. No more for me, thanks. He shows up, we show him the door. I think my problem is that I see this from the POV of a rational, sane person. Apparently, this does not apply in Bambifan's case. Anyway, take care and thanks yet again for the encouragement. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Gee, more Bambifan fun.

Thanks for alerting me to that "Lackland, John" account. If that isn't Bambifan101, I'll eat my computer. I've blocked the account and reverted the edits. If you so much as think you smell that little monster, please let me know. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for deleting those pages. I think that'll help stop socks from reverting it using the history. Cactusjump (talk) 17:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

No sweat, pardner! Makes it worth being an administrator, y'all. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Ye haw? Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 17:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha. I take no responsibility for the reaction. The frustration being overcome by elation at booting another sock caused the reaction. Cactusjump (talk) 17:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Sterotypical shout associated with cowboys of the southwestern US. I have never heard it used outside of a cartoon.  :)) As for those other two links you sent...done and done. Hey, I can dig being a Disney fan. I helped bring Disneyland Railroad to very good status and I hope to make it a feature. But...why has this ding-dong glommed onto The Rescuers, for crying out loud? Cute movie, far from one of the studio's best and made during a period of decline which turned around when they released The Little Mermaid. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

PS: To paraphrase Toby Keith yet again, I put a boot in his ass. It's the American way! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Yeah, I went to help out The Rescuers because it needed a lot of TLC. If I had known what I stepped in to... But that and The Fox and the Hound seem to be his faves. Like you said, not the best of the Disney films at all, but now I feel like their sole protector against evil trolls. I've been asking for protection for The Rescuers page (BambiFan's others all have semi-protect), but to no avail. *sigh* Oh well... Cactusjump (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

It's either the thrill of gaming the system or mental disease. And yes, The Rescuers wasn't the best... but like I have said, LOVED The Rescuers Down Under. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 17:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

If this is his idea of fun, then he definitely has some mental issues. Oh, and The Rescuers has been semi-protected for the next year. If he keeps on popping up, I am going to semi-protect everything he comes in contact with. I've had it with this little nincompoop. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Whoo! Thanks! (And I believe it's mental disease.) Cactusjump (talk)

Mmphankyoutasty!!!

Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

Ditto!

PMDrive1061 (talk) has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

NOW I WANT MILK BECASUE I HAVE TO WATCH TELETUBBIES!!!!1!!!

Can you...

Do more The Fox and the Hound work? I think you could do the novel too. 207.59.153.210 (talk) 01:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I read the novel when I was a child, so I don't know what good my contributions would be. As for the film, I'm still doing research on it, but my "real" job has been dominating my life lately! :) Cactusjump (talk) 16:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious, yes.

I do believe this latest IP passes the WP:DUCK test. He's going to be gone. I'm glad you caught me! I only logged on for a moment and was about to log off when I got your message. The IP isn't one of his usual IPs, so he's abusing a friend, relative or public terminal. Thanks for letting me know. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Quack.  :) I can't believe this kid's guile. He was sucking up in an attempt to get othe users to do his dirty work. I'm going to semi-protect all of those articles he tweaked for at least three months. Like I said, if you suspect him, either let me know or report it at WP:VIP or the admin noticeboard at WP:AN/I. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, quack. Two of the articles I've protected have been protected in the past as targets of Our Deer Little Bambi Boy. At this point, I'm not going to protect "Up" simply because the film is too new and a lot of legit users are working on it. All of these direct-to-video monstrosities are getting locked down, though. Saw the Little Mermaid sequel, which wasn't bad. Not even close to the original, though. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Something else you might be interested in before I sign off: The WHOIS on that sockpuppet account renders back to a Courtyard by Marriott hotel in South Carolina. He may be on vacation and will likely try to edit via hotel IPs, so keep those sharp eyes peeled. See ya! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Kronk's New Groove

Hi, I haven't seen this film, but it needs a lot of help. Can you help? I started some but I'm only working and still haven't seen it, so I may be wrong. 75.75.124.218 (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

This is on my To Do list to work on. Cactusjump (talk) 20:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Just as an afterthought...why are you working on an article for a film you're not familiar with? Cactusjump (talk) 21:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

It's simple: this article needed mucho amount of help. I like Disney but no nothing of "Bambifan101". In fact, my fav Disney film is Pinocchio, and I like Alice in Wonderland too. 75.75.124.218 (talk) 21:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you upload the DVD cover of the movie too? 75.75.124.218 (talk) 21:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll say this for him...

...he's a persistent little cuss. Another admin clobbered him and needless to say, the usual conflicting rant was placed on the talk page. You take good care of that "Spidey sense." It just clobbered another sock. If you count the Okapi7 and Deb2222 accounts, this has been going on for three years. Bambifan101 has been going on now for ten months. They say the true definition of an idiot is someone who does the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome every time. I'd say that shoe fits pretty well. I'm at work and my boss came in just now; he's kind of amused that I edit this site, but he thinks it's a good thing. Heck, I might be contributing to an online newsletter as a result. Who says Wikipedia is a waste of time?  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Got him yet again

I cannot believe this little idiot's brazenness. Just when I thought I'd protected all of his "pet" articles, he finds more. All of the articles he edited are now protected for the next three months against edits by new accounts. I also deleted and salted his new articles. Like I've said, if you even so much as think he's lurking about, let me know. Thanks again for all the good work. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, you know what they say. One of the best definitions of an idiot is one who repeatedly does the same pointless task while expecting a different outcome each time. I'd say that pretty much sums up the little doofus. Oh, and I believe you've more than earned the following:

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For continued diligence over maintaining integrity of articles which have been frequent targets of a persistent vandal, it is my honor to bestow this Anti-Vandalism barnstar upon you with all of the rights and privileges afforded therein. You'd have made my old buddy RickK proud. PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• i don't doubt it for a minute. Thanks. I may drop Jimbo an e-mail. He's busy as all get-out, but he does get back to me eventually. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! This little buggar is just making me a better editor. Haha. Cactusjump (talk) 20:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

LOL! After all, that which does not kill us makes us stronger...although I can think of better ways to undergo strength training than to deal with an alleged 14-year-old with the apparent emotional depth of a five-year-old. Gotta hit the road if I want to get to work on time. Talk to ya soon. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I forgot to lock him off from editing the talk page and needless to say, he left yet another one of his totally schitzoid messages. I am simply going to block any and all future attempts and deny him talk page access if he tries again...but I'm leaving no message. No blocked Bambifan101 sock notice, no nothing. He's craving any and all sorts of attention and I am not going to give him one more iota under WP:DENY. It's worked well with other chronic vandals in the past and I think it'll work well here. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

It's tempting to set phasers on kill when encountering a troll like this, but yes, WP:DENY is probably the best pest control tactic. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 13:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

You know I was thinking about this last night -- is there really nothing better for a 13-year-old kid to do in Alabama during the summer than come here and create nonsense? Get some friends, go to the arcade, ride a bike, make a model airplane, collect toy trains...something. Sheesh. Cactusjump (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Back at 'cha.

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For extraordinary courage, diligence, patience and good humor in the face of one of the most bizarre vandals in Wikipedia history, the Barnstar of Diligence has hereby been awarded to Cactusjump with all the rights and privileges afforded therein. Long overdue, I might add. PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

THANKS! My first award. :) Cactusjump (talk)

Anytime, believe me. I did you one better, in fact. You now have rollback privileges. All it will take is one mouse click to revert vandalism, including multiple entries by the same vandal. Use it well. You deserve it. Gotta run, but stay in touch. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Whoa! Thanks again!! Cactusjump (talk)

If You Keep Giving Me Cookies...

...my belly AND ego will get big. :) Thanks!

Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

Ha! Cactusjump (talk) 19:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

your disney edits

Please do not mark all your edits as "minor", as many of your edits are editorial-related (yes, even changing a link is not a minor thing). 'preciate it. SpikeJones (talk) 20:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Confused...Which edit are you referring to? Cactusjump (talk) 20:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Pick one. You made a slew of Disney-related edits today, marking all of them as minor, when all the pages I was monitoring weren't minor edits at all. Makes it difficult to confirm what is or isn't editorial that needs to be followed up on. SpikeJones (talk) 21:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to be more conscious of it... I changed my prefs so "minor" isn't checked by default. Cactusjump (talk) 21:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thx. "minor" should be the exception, not the rule. Unless you are dedicated to correcting misspelled words, fixing level headers, replacing old tags with new versions, etc as your primary edit type... happy editing. SpikeJones (talk) 12:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Been quiet lately...

I think that finally, at long last, our pesky little user has finally gotten the message. I've been watching your edits and the new user log and I haven't seen a thing. Whew! I'm reminded of the Brad Paisley song, "I'm Still A Guy:" When you see a deer, you see Bambi. I see antlers up on the wall. If anyone comes up with a Barnstar with antlers, you'll be getting one.  :)) Have a great weekend! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. Spoke too soon. Sigh... --PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, looks as if you DID have a nice weekend!  :) Good news is the Wikimedia Foundation is aware of the problem. A regular user answered my e-mail; I won't post his username for fear of that little freak hassling him. Not much they can do per current policy, but we're doing the right thing by whacking him whenever he appears. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

It never ends, does it?

I swear, this kid just doesn't give up. I just blocked User:76.208.169.163 for typical BF101 edits and protected five more articles. Worse, I blocked a legit anon user because of him. I just unblocked the IP because of collateral damage. Damn this nonsense, anyway.  :( Let me know if you suspect another attempt on his part. My wall is rapidly filling with antlers... --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Carpet.jpg

If you wanted to add an illustration of the carpet for the film, it should be under another title like Magic Carpet Aladdin.jpg; Carpet.jpg was already in use for an unrelated solitare game article, so I reverted your image addition to the Magic Carpet article and reverted the image back to its previous state. It's not a problem (I've done the image title confusion thing before and ended up with something else I didn't intend on a page), but I just wanted to let you know why I reverted :). Thank you. Nate • (chatter) 07:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Thanks for the fix. Cactusjump (talk) 16:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Beauty and the Beast

Thanks for reverting the edit, but I think it was a bit strong to call it vandalism. It looks like it was made in good faith to me, even though it added non-NPOV emotion ("sadly"). Thanks for your help, either way. :) --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I realized the context too late, so I re-reverted. As you can see I then removed it, because I don't believe the sentence belongs there. Cactusjump (talk) 19:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I saw that after I saved my note above. Shows how this stuff works sometimes. :) It's all good; there's some good material out there about how Disney supported Ashman during the last few months of his life, as he wrote songs (literally) on his death-bed, as I recall. I wish I could remember the name of the book I saw that in, but I'll check some of my stuff and see if I had it all along. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. It feels like it should be in the Release section, but I couldn't figure out a way to word it so it fit. I have a couple books that discuss the animation of the movie; I could see how they discuss it. Cactusjump (talk) 19:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Mystery IP

So am I. I think a block is in order. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)