User talk:Jéské Couriano/Archive 5

Thank you

Thank you for removing User:I think 2 + 2 = 22.'s account. Gh5046 (talk) 02:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I was having trouble because the database got locked. Contact Thatcher. NOW. I'm doing cleanup and can't ask him to ferret out the sleepers. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

That was fast work. I'm impressed. Gh5046 (talk) 02:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I had help from East718. I didn't do all of it - in fact, I kept getting "Database Locked" messages. That twat picked the right time. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Prompting

Waiting for response at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Kender#Conditions. :) BOZ (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any more to add at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Kender#Additional questions? :) BOZ (talk) 14:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Batter up! :) BOZ (talk) 18:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The talk has shifted to the Kender article, which I really am not too familiar with. Sorry. Besides, the mediator requested the tags not be brought up, and at this point,the tags (or, at least, the editors who have been removing them without fixing the articles) are the problem. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 18:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Your Issue with me

I agree to hold removing more of Gavin.collins tags until they are done moderating. However, once it is established that he did nothing more then cut and paste a block of tags into every RPG article he could find. I'm going right back to preventing the removal of the hard and honest work people have done. --Cozret (talk) 19:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied at AN/I. Please restrict the discussion to there. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

My prot of 169.'s user talk

Is there some reason that it matters? KnightLago (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Full-protection is overkill and keeps non-admins from fixing or updating tags as necessary. Semi-protection keeps away the IP, whom is the intended target, as well as any other anons that would vandalize his user page. Also, there's no evidence that a registered user is posting abusive material on that talk page, making the full-prot seem preemptive. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Good points. I will watch that in the future. Thanks. KnightLago (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Null persp, chummer. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 20:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

jimbo's sockpuppet acct-creation blocking

Have you seen the last note on User_talk:Jimbo's_vandalism_sock_puppet? If that is a shared IP, you may not want to block new account creation. 18.85.46.159 (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have absolutely no way of knowing what the IP is. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Further, his requests were made on the 19th of April. Any autoblock has long expired by now. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Not autoblocking; blocking new account creation. If you update the current indef block so that new accounts can be created, other people at that library could make their own acounts in order to edit. Having to email someone in order to make small edits tends to drive people away and keep them from editing -- the whole point behind supporting anon edits in the first place. You should probably allow new anon editing from that IP as well, since it wasn't a repeat offense and seems to have been hijinks by a young student. 18.85.46.159 (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The autoblock also includes the lock on account creation, which ends after 24 hours (same as the autoblock). This is a moot issue by now; they are free to create accounts again. The only way they'd be unable to make accounts at this point is if their IP was directly blocked w/o account creation. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Look at recent edit

Would you mind looking under the recent edit that I did under Wikipedia:Changing username, and let me know if you approve it.--JoeCool950 (talk) 07:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Usernames

I've got one more question, I thought I'd ask you on your talk page instead, if I do have two accounts and like the other better, is there a way to cancel the other account? Not now, but just wondering? --Joey Kaminski (talk) 03:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No. Technical restrictions keep us from deleting accounts, and even if we could, per the GFDL we couldn't delete them anyhow. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 07:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Theme song

It has a theme song at the beginning of each show. What do you mean by multiple the songs?--Angel David ^{Commune with Heaven} My Angelic Gifts 20:01, 10 May,2008 (User Talker Contributor)

There are no less than six theme songs used at the beginning of the show (by my count); each theme song is unique to a particular part of the animé series. Thus, Pokémon has no one theme song. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 20:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• Then care to explain this--Angel David (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

That is the first season's (Kanto) theme song. The second season (Orange Islands) had a completely different theme song, and so on (Johto), and so forth (Master Quest). Thus, the animé has no one theme song. Just watch the later episodes instead of relying on YouTube, and you'll see what I mean. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 04:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Administrative aid requested

Please remove vandals' slanderous editing comments from the editing history of Heath Ledger; please see previous requests at WP:ANI (c. April 28 and earlier) and related Page Protection Request: diffs.. Thank you. (I'll be offline.) --NYScholar (talk) 05:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Please understand that you're best off asking for oversight on these edits if the edit summaries are slanderous/libelous (and, indeed, such edits are oversightable). I am incredibly leery of doing anything that will remove the protection on his favorite target. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 06:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Please read the previous archived discussions of the problem: [I'm adding a link to a now-archived post from April 11, 2008, but there are many more referring administrators to the problem and considerable archived discussion about how to proceed and how best to remove the slander from Wikipedia space (policy): Diffs.. I do not use e-mail in Wikipedia, and Oversight requires e-mailing with Wikipedia. I have already brought these problems to the attention of other administrators and several of them have removed the slander from the editing history; to remove slanderous comments (about people living or dead) is policy in Wikipedia; the only question is which administrator is going to do that and how: any administrator can bring this continuously ongoing problem to the attention of Oversight. I am sorry that I cannot do so, but I cannot. Thanks for looking further into this problem. It is an administrative matter which has a long history in WP:ANI archives and elsewhere. --NYScholar (talk) 00:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC) [Added a link (above) to Diffs. for convenience of finding archived April 11, 2008 posting about problem at WP:ANI. --NYScholar (talk) 00:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)]

If you have access to Microsoft Overlook or the email address of the oversight-en-I list, you do not need to use Wikipedia's email system to do it. In any circumstance, I am not going to do anything that will result in unprotection of that article (including deleting and selective restoring) because Grawp attacks that article so heavily that the effort would be pointless. Sorry. If you link me to the diffs with the slanderous edit summaries, however, I'll contact Oversight and we'll see if we can't remove these. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind. I checked and grabbed the edit; contacting Oversight now. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

To clarify again: I do not use e-mail in dealing with anything relating to Wikipedia (for obvious reasons); that includes any e-mail utility program. The offensive slanderous editing summaries still remain in the editing history of Heath Ledger and they still need removal from it (as has been done by earlier administrators dealing with the same problem); here is the link to your own edit which did not remove these remarks (scroll throughout and you will see that the others were previously removed): Diffs.. Once they are removed, they will not show up in your edit or the one that you reversed. (The archived discussions by others explain how they removed the material before.) Thanks again for your efforts to keep the article free from such blight. --NYScholar (talk) 09:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

What part of "I will not delete an article that Grawp frequently hits" do you not understand? I will contact Oversight for those as well, and I'll be damned if they ignore me. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 18:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Edits oversighted. I understand why you don't want to use your email address in re Wikipedia; if you see anything else that needs oversighting contact me with the diffs to the edits and I'll contact oversight. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for your efforts, which did result in removal of the offensive material. (I did not intend for you to do anything to the article other than to seek help with removing that material from the editing history summaries; I understood what you were saying, but, as I am not an administrator and you are, I thought that you would be able to know better than I how best to deal with this situation, and it appears that you did. So, again, thanks.) --NYScholar (talk) 20:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Related: Is there anyway that an administrator can clean up the protection log, where the same blights remain: Protection log? Such material is not permitted anywhere in Wikipedia space. --NYScholar (talk) 03:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

That's not the protection log; that's the page log, and oversight is needed again. Unfortunately, I do not think Oversight will work with log actions. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

(Sorry; I did mean to type "page log"; I know it's not the protection log; that was a typographical error.) I don't know what can be done, if anything, but I thought I'd bring it to your attn. so that you can consult with other admins. re: it. --NYScholar (talk) 03:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest asking at WP:VPT if something like this is possible; I have it watchlisted so that if something is indeed possible, I'll know. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 04:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for the assistance. (I'll be offline.) --NYScholar (talk) 04:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Redirects

Thank you for adding a redirect to Morag Bellingham as per my request. I am trying to clean up the Home and Away page and because there has been several deletions of character pages there are a few dead links. I'm trying to redirect these pages to the list of character page because there is relevant information about the characters there but there are a few pages that have been salted, so i was wondering if you could add the redirects to them for me, of if i have to make a request as i did at WP:RPP. I need redirects on the following pages.

Page links removed

If you can add those for me i would appreciate it, if i need to formally request it let me know. Ive tried to format it so you can just copy and paste the redirect code. Any issues just let me know. Thanks Printer222 (talk) 04:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Done; all pages redirect to that one now. I've removed the links due to concerns; they remain in the history. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 05:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

i have been looking at the page history of a Grawp account here and saw that on Feb 2 of 08 you tagged the account as such with the comment of bust. I am a little confused because either the timing is wrong or i as not an admin cant see the deleted contributions but if you tagged it back then why didn't you block it? I am a little confused and hopefully you can help. Thanks Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 07:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

It's possible that that one was unearthed in the Grawp CU when Grawp was harassing WP:D&D members and that we failed to notice it wasn't blocked. Until now, I thought it had been blocked. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 08:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

We can add this user to that list plus another one here and another here Um, can you check to see that all the tagged users have been blocked please:) Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 07:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm doing that right now; I've contacted WP:RFCU/IP; any more Grawps you see send there. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 07:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) here looks like this past 24 hrs hes going all out. Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 07:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

At this point, he's running out of options. We caught him on TOR a few weeks back, and he's running out of reserve accounts and IPs because Alison and Thatcher are hardblocking them as they find them. As I said, post it to WP:RFCU/IP, in the Ten-HUT! section. Alison or Thatcher will run the check pretty quickly. I'm still sifting through the CU-confirmed accounts. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 07:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

there has been an incident

[1]--xgmx (T | C | D | R | DR)

Is there anything more recent, Xgmx? -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 18:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I've Taken a Page from You

Jéské, I've now taken your stance and will not sprotect my talk page. I see how when those channers do the whole talk page flood out of pure frustration :D. I'm sitting back and letting it come.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Even though I never sprot my talk page, I add a subpage that is semi'd where I can move legitimate discourse without it being disrupted. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 04:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Pokémon Platinum protection

He Jéské. Don't you think it's time to unprotect Platinum? Who knows, there might be more info about the game tomorrow. - Face 22:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I was on my way to do it. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 23:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. - Face 09:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Fresh Prince of Bel-Air

Sorry 'bout the 4chan talk page joke, but I couldn't resist. I did do it in 2 edits in case someone decided it needed to be reverted, which to my surprise, took less than 15 minutes. I noticed you were an admin and if I could trouble you for a quick favor, I'd appreciate it very much--could you look over Capitol View/Stifft's Station, it's an article I created and after rewriting it, I'd like it reassessed. I think it may be up to B class standards now, but for the sake of transparency, don't want to rate it that way myself. Broooooooce (talk) 15:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem is, assessments aren't something I do, and, indeed, any user can do an assessment. Further, I don't know what the governing WikiProject's criterion for classes are, and I fear I'd foul it up. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 15:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Right on. Thanks anyway. Broooooooce (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Reading over the article, however, it looks superb. You did one hell of a job on it. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 15:37, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Appreciate that man. I'm fairly new to all of this and wanted to try and make something decent, but low importance in case it turned out a mess, which thankfully it didn't. Broooooooce (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you do a favor?

IF you get a chance, could you possibly semi the articles of "Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood" & "Sonic Unleashed"? They've undergone CONSTANT vanadalizing. Thank you very much if you can. It'd be MUCH appreciated. Skeletal_SLJCOAAATR_Soul_Striker_of_Vengence (talk) 02:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd request at WP:RPP, if you haven't already. I'm leery about touching articles like that because people tend to follow me there. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Please don't revert my comment! I just wanted to say thank you for protecting the WWE Roster for us! I was begining to think no body would listen to our concerne :). #1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 18:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

So was I. RPP seems to have fallen fallow the past few days... -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Jeske! I'll ask there. Skeletal_SLJCOAAATR_Soul_Striker_of_Vengence (talk) 19:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Scurrilous attack against you

In case you didn't know, you were attacked in this spurious comment. Corvus cornix_talk 19:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

That was in the midst of an argument at the spam blacklist, we patched things up since. (Confession: I didn't knoe he was Xgmx at the time or I would have blocked him.) -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Help with Master Hand

There are three users that have claimed at Super Smash Bros. (series) that, basically, any white glove that has been in a video game prior to the release of SSB is Master Hand. A couple users and I have repeatedly tried to explain to them that their claims are original research, but they're being very stubborn. And honestly, I think it's the same person using two usernames and his IP.
Can you look into this and try to straighten them out? And if I were to keep reverting his/their additions to the article, would 3RR still apply? Satoryu (talk) 19:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait. But to answer your questions:

1. If you have evidence of a person using usernames disruptively, post a request for checkuser at WP:RFCU. I do not have the CU tool, so I can't help here if they're being disruptive.
2. Reverting their OR is, unfortunately, not 3RR-exempt; it is, at best, a content dispute. I'll look into it. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Reading over it, I noticed that the whole thing just devolved into a fight between cavemen armed with cattails. Thread there archived as an unsalvageable train wreck. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

One of the users is contesting your decision. They keep removing the archive notice. -Sukecchi (talk) 01:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I was just going to say this but you edit blocked me :P Anyhow I don't think this user is going to take no for an answer and I think this is going to spill into 3RR. The Light6 (talk) 01:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The thread should remain archived. When I archived it, it was turning disruptive and was producing more smoke than fire. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

{{u}}

I upgraded your protection to full-protection. I don't see a need for this template to be edited at all, and the most malicious of vandals will just register an account and wait until they can vandalize again. -- tariqabjotu 07:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank'ee. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

IAC/InterActiveCorp and others

I don't know anything about the above article but, note you had some input on the talk page. An article called Ballard Designs has recently been created and at present looks like advertising but, has a internal link to IAC so I had a look at IAC. Was wondering if you had any further input on improving IAC as it hasn't been touched in a very long time and is still in desperate need of help. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Businesses aren't really my forte. So, apologies, I know of no ways to help the article, at least offhand. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for responding anyway. Jasynnash2 (talk) 07:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Semi'd

Thanks. Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The person's back again, so can you semi my talk page again for a longer period? Maybe two weeks? Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for the tardy response, but I don't usually have Net access late Saturday/eearly Sunday. Ramped it up to indefinite. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks again. Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 06:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

(trolling removed by Jéské ^{(v^_^v Trump XXI)}; content remains in history)

Thank you, IDS, contacting oversight. Weevilcatcher (I know that's who you are), I WILL not stay out of it if you continue to harass Imperial Star Destroyer, including (but not limited to) attempting to "out" his real life identity as you have been doing. And who's the vandal you're referring to? Claims require evidence on Wikipedia, friend. By the by, ' Oversight contacted'. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Trump XXI)} 19:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Erm, Adidasnike619. Newbie. So he was trying to out my real name? Oh. Well, thanks for everything. Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 19:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

It's Weevilcatcher, according to Alison. He's just been logging out. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Trump XXI)} 21:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Question II

Could you have a look at this user page and related talk discussion? I think you may have better luck. 199.74.101.189 (talk) 02:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I've told him to change it, and if he doesn't, I'm prodding it. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

"Wikipedia talk pages are not forums."

No, but my request is ultimately related to Wikipedia. I'd like to use that magazine as a source in an article. I figured I'd leave a message at the Pokemon project, because it seemed plausible that a project member would have a copy of the magazine sitting around. Zagalejo^^^ 07:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I just left a post explaining myself at your talk page about the same time you posted here. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 07:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just noticed your message. It's true that that source wouldn't have been used in a Pokemon article, but I figured a Pokemon project member might have the issue laying around, since it had a few substantial articles on the Pokemon cartoon. I left a message at WikiProject Comics because the magazine was a Wizard publication, and there might be a few Wizard collectors among that project's members.

Is it really such a big deal for me to ask? Zagalejo^^^ 07:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not, but posting to multiple talk pages requesting a source (two of which wouldn't be likely to have it) smacks a tad of canvassing. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 07:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, the animation talk page seemed pretty deserted, so I wasn't really expecting to get much help there. But because of the nature of that paricular magazine, I think it's very likely that someone in the Pokemon project or the Comics project might have a copy available. (Are you at all familar with Toons?)

And I wouldn't describe this as "canvassing". I'm not soliciting opinions for AFD or RFC. I'm just looking for help tracking down a source. My requests are totally inocuous. If people don't want to read them, they don't have to. Zagalejo^^^ 07:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

It's actually not as likely as you think for members of the Pokémon WikiProject to have it - Pokémon is a manga/videogame/anime metaseries, and more emphasis has been placed on the videogames than anything else, especially recently. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 07:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Still, I'm sure at least a few project members were fans of the TV show, so it's at least plausible that someone can help. That issue featured Pikachu on the cover, and had several substantial articles on Pokemon -- one of which might have been the first print article to discuss the "censored Pokemon episodes". Actually, it would be quite beneficial for the Pokemon project to dig out a copy of that issue, since Pokémon episodes removed from rotation could use some more reliable sources. (The page has Dennō Senshi Porygon covered, but the other episode sections are sourced to fansites.)

Will you reconsider? To be blunt, I think you're being too stubborn here. I'm just trying to improve a Wikipedia page by finding a reference, and I think someone in the Pokemon project can help. Zagalejo^^^ 08:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The PCP is dead, dude. Very dead. Utterly inactive, other than the few compalints taht the 25 list articles are uninformative, lack pictures; the occasional game debate (mergers); etc. Nobody even cared when Cassandra requested help on possibly recreating the speices articles on the Simple English Wikipedia; nobody has signed her SEWP Wikiproject Pokemon page. hbdragon88 (talk) 08:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong

I'm not the one harassing Imperial Star Destroyer, and don't remove my questions just because. --Cronobacter (talk) 21:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I *can* remove questions from my talk page for any reason. And if you aren't the 86. IP, why are you involving yourself, with your very first edit, in this? Either you're 86. under a new mask or an amnesiac V-Dash, and I'm leaning strongly towards the former. In any case, I have filed a request for checkuser on you; if you are innocent the CUs will note so but be aware that if you are found to be socking the block will not be overturned. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 22:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

CU came back unrelated. Apologies. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

You have my apologies too. --Cronobacter (talk) 02:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Reffering Adidasnike619

He's not the guy who's harrassing me. He's one my distant friends at school. Imperial Star Destroyer (talk) 18:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies. However, if you haven't revealed your real name on Wikipedia, I will inform him in no uncertain terms to keep your real name off - ED is unforgiving. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Trump XXI)} 22:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you read the WR? They have and will redact personal information. Not all the time (Katefan0 is one example), but they kept Newyorkbrad's real name off of WR, and they also edited out info when someone posted Daniel Brandt's personal details. Herschelkrustofsky claimed that someone posted Will Bebeck's real name and they removed it when they demanded it. I am unaware of the criteria used to plaster names on ED, however. hbdragon88 (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies, hb, but I don't read the Wikipedia Review. Redacted the WR thing, and apologies to them. As for ED, I can't say, because I already have two strikes against me there for being a Wikipedian and an AGNPH user. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Trump XXI)} 00:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

T.O.S. (Terminate on Sight)

Hi you protected the page T.O.S. (Terminate on Sight) - however user User:The-G-Unit-Boss has edited the section which was part of the editing war and removed a review with legitimate source and also added a review which is not a notable source - neither is it a link its an image uploaded via imageshack, thats the Smooth magazine review - and it's also breaking copyrigh procedures by scanning a magazine without having permisson. Could you please revert his edit to the page you first protected the site too. Youngbyrd (talk) 22:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely not. I have to be impartial in regards to protection; you're asking me to become involved in a content dispute that resulted in the edit-war that protected the page in the first place. Talk it out on the Talk Page, both of you. Take it up to AN/I if you must (as it involves an administrator), but note that I don't look at external links when determining protection; I only examine the edit history. You might also want to have diffs ready to support your accusations, or else your complain will be laughed at. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Damn spy sappin' mah sentry!)} 23:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Then what was the point of protecting the page, if users are still changing the section which caused the edit war? Theres no need for it to be protected if certain users can do that. Youngbyrd (talk) 13:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Only administrators can bypass full-protection; it's considered bad form for an administrator to continue editing an article in dispute. Take it up to AN/I; I will not act further except to extend the protection if the edit-war restarts. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Damn spy sappin' mah sentry!)} 03:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Full protection

Hi you fully protected the user page of User:Marnifrances some months back. It seems a little accessive, would you remove the full protection or at least reduce it to semi protection. Cheers. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Reduced to semi; I full-protected it because registered sockpuppets were harassing him/her. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Damn spy sappin' mah sentry!)} 03:44, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh

I was just about to tell you about those odd IPs. :P Sure we can't all simply guard that page 24/7? The meme annoys me (well HERE it annoys me) but I don't mind keeping an eye on it. -WarthogDemon 02:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

An indefinite semi-protection on a talk page is a slap in anons' faces. Also, bear in mind we have had some constructive anons on there. As such, I'm not going to issue protections over one month in length on a talk page, ever, even if that talk page attracts cranks. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 03:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

That's what I meant. Us guarding the page 24/7 infinitely as opposed to an indef-protect. Sorry for the ambiguous wording. -WarthogDemon 03:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Unless you're a robot, that's impossible :P I know I'm not, or else I wouldn't suck so badly as a Pyro on TF2. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 03:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of bots, I wish I could have a useful bot here to help Wikipedia named User:WartBot. :P And hey, where I lack in robotics, I make up with persistence. :) -WarthogDemon 03:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for the revert on my talk page...you might want to be aware of this: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Wikzilla. AKRadecki^Speaketh 19:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I also blocked him AO ACE NEM and informed Alison; you were one of the three people he hit. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 19:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that you had when I went to do the same thing. He's been away a long time, too bad it wasn't longer. Again, thanks! AKRadecki^Speaketh 22:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Question III

I was curious how I could have violated a "neutral point of view" condition by merely adjusting an article's syntax to be less awkward. I have been contributing for a long time anonymously and am well aware of neutrality requirements. The only possibly non-neutral edit I made was my note that Diablo II ladder seasons have had inconsistent lengths, which is a fact, and I included no commentary on whether or not that was a bad thing. The previous version included the same information in a syntactically odd structure. I merely re-worded.

I don't understand why you reverted all my edits to their previously odd wordings, e.g. my change of "The exact real number of patches is impossible to determine as Battle.net has the capability of making minor server-side patches to address immediate issues" to "The precise patch count is impossible to determine because Blizzard has the capability to make minor server-side patches to address urgent issues." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polkiousness (talk • contribs) 20:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

As to the first, you also added what looked to me to be your own personal opinion, and as to the second, note that I adopted some of your changes; I just removed the ones that were a tad too technical for a layman to be interested in (as Wikipedia is not a game guide. Note that this does not mean I think you are a vandal or anything; just that your edit was a tad too smoky for the size of the fire. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 22:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Very well. I suppose it was the initial inclusion of "this is your first warning" in a response to my first edit as registered user that riled me up a bit. Also, the line I quoted retains its bizarre wording and I remain at a loss why. -Polkiousness (talk) 06:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

So

I'm a little confused by your alias:

^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)}

Is this a kirby meme?68.148.164.166 (talk) 11:58, 13 July 200

It *isn't* a meme, and if it were a Kirby one I'd use angle brackets, not Vs. The second part is the sound of a Pyro calling for a Medic. And it's called a signature, not an alias. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 19:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Stupid Question

Hi there,

I was told in the past to bring IP blocking to the WP:RfP, but it seems it's wrong (based on your comments). Can you tell me where please? This IP has been vandalizing the same set of articles again and again, for the past week or so, I started asking to source the changes but recently the account is even changing already sourced data. I have posted several messages in the IP talk page with no help.

Also, I did not get the use of /* */, in my first days of using Wikipedia I was told this is the way to make comments, and have been using them sine then. What did you mean "unless ...".

Thanks,Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Whomever told you that was meaning that you should ask to get an article protected from IP edits. In any case, take vandalizing IPs to WP:AIV if it's recent (within 24 hours) and you have exhausted all four levels of warnings or to WP:AN/I if it's longterm for administrator attention. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 03:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You might missunderstood me, I wanted the IP blocked, not the article. So following your latest link will do, I hope. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 03:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't misunderstand you. WP:RFPP is for asking that a page be protected to prevent vandalism. It's WP:AIV that will block IPs.

And since I missed it earlier: the /* */ setup in a summary box is there to provide a direct link to the section being edited. It isn't to provide summaries of any sort or to make comments in an edit summary (you can do that without that set of characters around them). -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 08:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, already followed both of your suggestions. Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"...is there to provide a direct link to the section being edited..." I must say I learn something new everyday, this I did not know and it is very useful, thanks for the tip! Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Null persp, chummer. Good luck in your struggles; I'm off for the night (it's 2:31 here). -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 09:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Help in deleting Market_requirement page

I have listed this page for AFD, but it has not been deleted yet. Please help in speedy deleting this page or fix the AFD request if needed. Thanks.Spinacia (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD is not instantaneous. You want WP:CSD's guidance. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 06:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Problem solved. Thanks.Spinacia (talk) 09:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of User talk:Siuglobal

A tag has been placed on User talk:Siuglobal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:User talk:Siuglobal|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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. E Wing (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Peter J. Deperro

An article that you have been involved in editing, Peter J. Deperro, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter J. Deperro. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? CyberGhostface (talk) 17:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

accidental indefblock

Oops. Thanks for letting me know; I had meant to set it for 24 hours but I've made a number of indef username and VOA blocks lately so I'm out of the habit of setting shorter ones for IP vandalism. No need to go to AN/I. Daniel Case (talk) 02:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed now. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Danke; I was a bit confused at the indef. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 02:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You've got mail

:) - NawlinWiki (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Replied. Oh, and, do you mind if I forwarded it to someone else? -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 21:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank You So Much

I just wanted to thank you for deleting the page that User: Disneysuit had written to attack me. I am very hurt by his actions and have already apologized to him "in case I had hurt him in any way" and I'm glad that someone came around the corner to help me out in this situation. I just wanted to ask you one thing: now that he is unblocked, is there a way to keep him from personally attacking me of all people? I see he has a tendency to do so. Again, thanks so much. I feel better. Aparna^BlackPearl14 00:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Disneysuit wasn't unblocked - SirFozzie refused his request. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 00:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind :) I got it. Thanks. Aparna^BlackPearl14 00:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

However, there is still the possibility he'll crate sockpuppets; if that is the case I have the page on my watchlist and will re-delete and create-protect it to keep him from attacking you on that page. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 01:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I feel blessed to have you around :) Here's a barnstar (not sure how to put it in a box, so if you could do that for me):

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Aparna would like to give Jéské Couriano the following barnstar for helping her with preventing personal attacks :) AparnaBlackPearl14 01:03, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Again, thanks! Aparna^BlackPearl14 01:03, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I found the code here and fixed it up for you, hope you don't mind. :) -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 01:09, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

eh?

That one went over my head. –xeno (talk) 18:41, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Compare Grawp's article areas (back about the time of the first CU on him) to those here. NawlinWiki has put forth that Grawp is just another sock of him, and has some strong evidence showing a link. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 18:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

ah, I wasn't familiar with that case. p.s. you've got mail. –xeno (talk) 18:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Editorials

I am writing you because you removed the editorial cartoon about NCLB.

The section is a list of articles, news releases and cartoons that was heavily tilted in favor of the White House, the law and the President.

It seems to me to be an abuse of the administrator's role to remove a cartoon because you don't like it, thereby restoring the bias of the list. Political cartoons are often quite tough as are editorials.

Many folks think the President and the Ed Secretary have twisted facts in trying to sell this law and its results. That viewpoint deserves listing here along with all the White House information.

What if folks opposed to NCLB deleted the White House releases?

Would that be fair and balanced?

(Questiontveracity (talk) 00:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC))

I only removed the editorial cartoon; I left the list that was added. And saying "Many folks think" is a sure way to get edits reverted in articles as it appears you're attempting to insert original research. And remember, that whole section also includes press releases; ergo I do not count them in terms of external link balance. Finally, External links should be used only to expand one's knowledge of the subject beyond what the article states; the editorial toon does not do such. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 01:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Your action is the equivalent of censorship and I will file a complaint if you persist. It is not up to you to decide which editorials belong or which cartoons belong. That is a violation of basic Wikipedia balance precepts.

Cartoons and editorials are often quite strong. Who are you to decide what is OK?

This has nothing to do with original reseach. Editorials and cartoons are opinion by definition and since the heading lists "editorials" you have no grounds for deleting the cartoon other than personal preferences which are not part of your role here.

Your action violates balance and free speech.

(Questiontveracity (talk) 02:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC))

Well, you can hold off your complaint - someone else removed it this time for failing EL. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 02:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

But their argument made no sense, because this is a list of editorials, not independent research.

Your action is censorship and so is theirs. You and they are offended by the cartoon and have exceeded your proper role.

The complaint proceeds . . .

And you are about to revert more than thrice on the NCLB article. One more revert, and you'll be the one reported. Also... where's the complaint you're talking about? -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 02:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

	Happy Birthday	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing Jéské Couriano/Archive 5 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

- Sorf^ane 16:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday. 12.20.35.99 (talk) 16:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Woohoo! Happy birthday Leo! Here, have some cake. Face 17:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Not to sound rude, Face, but given it appears to be Devil's-Food cake, why not in a phallic shape? -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Mrrph-mph!)} 17:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Huh?! You want to eat a dick shaped cake?! Oh well, if you want to. It's your party. (I'm sorry if I missed the joke here, but I'm not really into American black humour stand-up comedians) - Face 17:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC

Dear Jéské Couriano , If you have time and are willing to share your point of view. Can you give your comment arguments about the current discussion in the bates method article. Paragraph : The American acadamy of opthalmology link listed in the external link section ? appreciate your comment, Seeyou (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I will not participate in your witchhunts. I stopped editing Bates Method because you were using MedCab as your own personal artillery; leave me alone. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 21:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Nicole Wray

Thanks for the protection on the discography. It may not have been clear from my formatting, but I was requesting protection for Nicole Wray as well.
Kww (talk) 01:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't. However, Semi-protected indef as well. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 01:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Re

Interesting. May I ask which user told you that? Cheers, Face 22:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes; NawlinWiki (talk · contribs). If you want, I could forward you the email he sent me. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 23:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes please, I would love to see it. My e-mail is enabled. Cheers, Face 08:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Check your inbox. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 08:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

ANI/Suicide threat

I have un-resolved the incident. I feel it is incumbent on us to do a RFCU and contact local authorities in cases like this. Toddst1 (talk) 20:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I was about to state that I would remove the resolved banner when an RFCU came in on Bambi as admins can't do anything until then. We edit-conflicted on that... -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 20:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Side note

Yeah, that got pointed out on IRC. Don't really care either way, though - if they're going to be dicks and copy you-know-who, they get the same as he does, IMO. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I've set my honeypot up in case there are more lusting for Nawlin's blood who see that I've just ripped down their sails and threw them into a shredder. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 04:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Aaand, they came. Most blocked 3 months. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 00:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Seeyou

We have an RfC/U for Seeyou, so I think we need to back off on confronting him on article talk pages concerning his problematic behavior. Eventually, we'll have to look at getting Seeyou banned or blocked. --Ronz (talk) 01:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The RFC/U is practically dead. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 01:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The RFC/U is there to document the problems Seeyou causes. I think it should be updated before we seek action against Seeyou. Other than using the talk page, I'm not sure what's appropriate for updating the RfC/U. --Ronz (talk) 01:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

You can also use the MedCab cases Seeyou has been throwing at the wall and hoping to stick. Practically all of them are demonstrably in retaliation for some sleight. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 01:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. I'm just not sure if it's appropriate to update the RfC/U, or how to do so properly. --Ronz (talk) 02:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to update the RFC/U. It might get fresher eyes if done. And as for how to update it properly, just put the recent developments in the area describing the history of the issues - there really isn't any way to cock it up. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 02:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

It'd be easier if you'd allow others to semi-protect your page.

But I suppose that your prerogitive. They seem awfully insistent, whoever they are, but then it doesn't seem to be hard to make enemies here. HalfShadow 03:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

They're 4channers, and if I allowed my talk page to be protected they'd just go off and harass somebody else. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 03:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Same concept as with all the Grawp stuff? HalfShadow 03:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, because the 4channers are Grawp's eunuchs. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 03:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Really? I thought they were a bunch of assho...Oh. That's a polite way of putting that, right? HalfShadow 03:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Eunuchs, wethers... Both are better ways of describing them than "Assholes". :P -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 03:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

POTC Vandalism

"Black Pearl" suggested I contact you. There is an ongoing edit war over the Elizabeth Swann and Will Turnder pages. An annoymous editor (70.106.102.56) continually reverts edits, even though the information he/she adds is incorrect or is just badly written (endlessly repeating the word "frock" throughout a paragraph). Others have complained directly to this person and warned him/her to explain or defend why the changes were made and have pointed out that his/her information is incorrect. Unfortunately, this person refuses to give any reason for reverting edits. I posted an explanation on the "Elizabeth" discussion page to present my side and invited this person to respond, but he/she only continues to revert edits w/o giving any reason.

It also appears this person uses other IP addresses to revert edits, apparently to make it look as if other "annonymous" editors are in agreement. Thanks for any help you can provide.PNW Raven (talk) 15:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ask an administrator to block on sight; this is pretty cut-and-dried sockpuppetry. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 04:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Royce Mathew is back

A little assistance would be greatly appreciated here: [2] as he is personally attacking myself and others once again. Thank you very much! BlackPearl14^{Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean} 20:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I've written this up, and although he's been blocked again in the last 24 hours for another 48. I don't want any more trouble with him as it really hurts! This is my "formal" compliant ;) Note the quotation marks around "formal" ;)

I'm complaining against 72.189.4.182 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log).

The IP 72.189.4.182 [3] has continually harassed me, as well as others (including administrators who have blocked him). In addition, he has concocted false claims (look at links; e.g. that I work for Disney when I am clearly not old enough to) and is legally threatening us and others. There are several forms of proof, e.g. here [4]; [5]; [6]; [7]; [8]; [9]; [10]. This user is none other than Royce Mathew (the previously blocked User:Disneysuit, who is continually breaking several Wikipolicies. BlackPearl14^{Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean} 01:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll look into his contribs and see if I can't extend the block; we (as a general rule) won't block IPs indefinitely because of the chance they'll be transferred to someone else. (Apologies, BP14, but I have not had internet access for the past few days and thus couldn't look into it.)-Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 04:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem ;) and thank you very much for your contribution. I've left a message with a few admins who help with harassment, as that's what this guy's been doing, and I've gotten a couple of responses to which I'm acting further. Thanks so much for all your support, it's really helping me a lot ;) BlackPearl14^talkies! 23:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Tropic Thunder

Why the Tropic Thunder reverts? I don't feel that having more of the fictional links is that unreasonable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.70.15 (talk) 07:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a linkfarm, and according to the RFPP request they link to porn sites. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit} 07:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

They certainly don't (although I can see how "Booty Sweat" could cause confusion if one had not seen the film in question), and they are unarguably relevant to the online promotion of the movie. That said, I'll defer to your judgement. -Me 67.180.70.15 (talk) 07:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

User:A Link to the Past

Despite the agreement on Talk:Yoshi, this editor continues to remove the lead image. Can you block him or something? He is repeatedly edit-warring while being aware that none support him. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Um, yeah, silly me - I guess the fact that an administrator removed both images until a consensus can be reached is irrelevant. I'm not surprised that trolls such as yourself have no better ability than to get people blocked for enforcing an administrator action. You gonna get AMIB blocked too? And, I'm sorry, but either you have no idea what edit warring is or you think you have this magic ability to edit war all you want without any repercussions. You edit war constantly. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I reprotected the page. Both of you talk it out. Keep me out of your petty squabbles. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Call me Mr. Bonaparte!)} 07:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Locating a deleted article

The title of my article was called Travelonly. Thank you for your response and I will save it in my sandbox to work on it. Ftymchuk (talk) 04:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I have the text, but unfortunately I'd prefer to send if via email, which you either do not have or it is disabled. If disabled, enable it and tell me so I can send you the plaintext version of the article. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 05:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

You are now able to email the article. Thank you for your help. ftymchuk (talk) 15:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Done and done. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 19:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I have edited my deleted article in better compliance with wikipedia guidelines. It has been saved but when I go into Search the article does not come up when I type in Travelonly. Do I need to do something else? I really appreciate your help. Thank you. ftymchuk (talk) 15:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

First off, you should be editing it in your namespace first to fix it up instead of hoping other editors might. Second, database delays mean that the search is often not updated. Third, use a subpage (User:Ftymchuk/Travelonly) instead of your userpage - the userpage will be deleted as an attempt to stash an article; whereas a subpage won't. Finally, your article still sounds like spam. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 18:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

How do I improve?

I have changed a few things on my newly created user subpage. Are you able to access it? What else can I do to improve on this article? I did read the SPAM do's and don'ts. Thank you for your suggestions. ftymchuk (talk) 04:46, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Your talk page isn't a user subpage. A subpage is made like thus: [[User:Ftymchuk/<subpage name>]]. Now move it to an actual subpage; I imagine someone will want to use your user talk page to discuss things with you. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 09:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I have created the sub page. Are you able to access it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftymchuk (talk • contribs) 18:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I can see the link; unfortunately it's red, meaning the page is empty. Transfer the information you have on your talk page to the subpage, and it will turn blue. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 18:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

That works. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 20:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for helping me. I have created the sub page and have re read the spamming guidelines. Can you do me a huge favour and let me know what I can do differently? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftymchuk (talk • contribs) 21:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

First off, remove the external link in the first sentence - that screams "fluff piece". Second, get some reliable sources (such as newspapers, business journals, and the like) that can establish Travelonly's notability, otherwise the article will be speedied as blatant advertising. My recommendation is to run a Google search for "Travelonly" and see what comes up. Third, as Wikipedia is read around the world, use the worldwide, not the Canadian, website. The Canadian website is simply unnecessary. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 21:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I took all of your advice into consideration and feel much better about the article. Would you please take a look? Thank you in advance for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftymchuk (talk • contribs) 22:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Not to be rude, but I'm going to emphasize the parts you missed. I also was bold and implemented some of the fixes (I am busy elsewhere and thus don't have time at the moment to hunt for reliable sources; apologies). -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 22:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

So sorry. I was making all the editions on my User:Ftymchuk/Travelonly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftymchuk (talk • contribs) 22:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Null persp, and I'm sorry if I was snappish. I wasn't aware you were in the midst of editing the page. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 22:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I truly appreciate your patients. Can you see the revised article? I beleive it's in the right place now. --ftymchuk (talk) 17:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Travelonly still shows up as a redlink, and there's no change in your subpage (User:Ftymchuk/Travelonly) since the changes I made yesterday. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 17:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I feel that the relationship with MBNA and the travel rewards program which is unique to Travelonly very important and notable. Is there something I am missing? --ftymchuk (talk) 20:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there!  :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 15:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)