User talk:Kingboyk/Archive 7

2 3 4 5 6 Archive 7 8 9 10 11 12 20 30 Atticus This Atticus vandal is getting on my nerves, by god. Madangry 20:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Hahaha....it's ok. No problem. I went back and my editing capabilities worked. I guess we'll see if he reverts it again. Thanks. You rule. Madangry 20:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC) wow, great list of bands you've seen live! thanks again! Madangry 21:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Badfinger albums Stephen, I know you are a busy man these days, but when you get the opportunity I am hoping you can review a couple of my article creations. I added articles on Magic Christian Music and theBadfinger (album). They are still in progress, but I have a tendency to drift in POV when left unchecked. Thanks. ZincOrbie 23:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Hi Kent! Sure, I'll try to remember to take a look tommorow. --kingboyk 23:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC) what? who are you and why did you delete my article on "Timothy Palmer" before I even finished writing it on him? It was barely a project for 5 minutes?! —This unsigned comment was added by Seraphim7210 (talk • contribs) . Who are you to decide which articles stay and which go on the "encyclopedia anyone can edit"? you're just some random UK guy...—This unsigned comment was added by Seraphim7210 (talk • contribs) . Unlike some random American teacher who wants a Wikipedia article, of course. That's the difference, I know I'm non notable and I haven't started an article about myself :) (A more detailed and serious explanation of why some folks are entrusted to delete articles is on his talk page). --kingboyk 18:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Gloucestershire v South Glos. I note you've been changing a lot of references from Glos to South Glos. Might be worth checking here, but I recollect Wiki policy is to use traditional/ceremonial counties, not the present admin districts. (Please revert your changes if I'm right.) Bob aka linuxlad. The thing is, Bristol just isn't Gloucestershire (with the exception of the cricket team). It's culturally different, we have a different accent, and it's a city whereas Glos. is mostly rural. I certainly won't be putting Bristol back into Gloucestershire categories, but I can create a South Gloucestershire category tree if necesary. --kingboyk 12:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Taken to Category talk:South Gloucestershire. --kingboyk 12:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC) I've also now created an extensive subcategory tree for South Gloucestershire, and have linked it into Category:Gloucestershire so that our friends and neighbours in the south don't get upset :-) I'm sure it's logically much better; we don't now have little Cotswold villages (*) in the same categories as Bristol suburbs, we have more manageable stub and villages categories, and it's mostly very navigable. --kingboyk 18:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC) I may agree with you,in part, but you're on thin ice! 1) It's a policy so we should respect it (as everyone else has to date)2) It's too absolute - (eg I live in Thornbury, work in Gloucester, used to work in Berkeley - Tytherington (nearby) has a W-u-E postcode, just up the way in the GL13 (Berkeley) area) - I've known Stroud council officers who wanted to put the RFoD in with Wales. We all have different ideas of where our area and allegiances lie and someone else's more distanced view is probably the best compromise! Bob aka linuxlad Well first you told me it was guidelines, which I checked - and they say admin counties have it. So why is my change against policy?! The fact is that it was not long ago the county of Avon, and now it (or most of it) is called South Gloucestershire. There's a clear, official border, and South Gloucetershire has been seperate by one name or another for decades. Bristol City hasn't been part of Gloucestershire for over 500 years! There's 104 articles in Glos villages and 87 in South Glos, so it's not even as if South Gloucestershire is too small to care about. Bottom line - we don't categorise by ceremonial county, and South Gloucestershire is functionally a county since it is a unitary authority. Granted, if the government changed their minds tommorow and we were merged into one it would have to change but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. There's recategorisation bots to take care of that kind of thing should it ever happen. --kingboyk 19:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC) You're conflating your timescales somewhat to make a point. Most people around me remember when they had to go up to Glo'ster to sort out County Council matters ! And you haven't come at it with much pretence at objectivity. But have it your way - lets see what others think. Just don't drag (your perception of) parochial allegiances (*) into the argument - that way madness lies. Bob aka I think the unitary authority area of South Gloucestershire formerly Avon does not equal Gloucestershire, because they are seperate and have been for a long time. I didn't say they should be seperate because it isn't a personal issue at all, it's a matter of fact. (If you do want my opinion, Bristol and suburbs should be one authority, and the rest should probably be combined, which is rather different to how it is and indeed how I've categorised the articles.) Please take any further comments to the category talk page primarily for reasons of threading but also because this isn't a personal issue, it's an issue about categorising articles(**). --kingboyk 19:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Well no it isn't - that just my point - you've brought in a new reclassification, apparently on the subjective basis that you seem to think than Winchcombe is prettier than Charfield! (And, sorry, 30 years is pretty recent in my book! I'm done, thanks, it's past my bedtime) Bob. Nothing to do with prettiness Bob. It was a case of trawling through Glos villages and finding actual city sububrbs of Bristol! They were in the wrong category. Never heard of Charfield, no idea what it's like, sorry. And hey I don't live in one those villages, I live in a below average farming village next to the motorway! --kingboyk 11:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Its about time! .. that you stuck your Barnstar on your user page. :) --Mal 19:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Thanks. As you can see I've had a bit of an earbashing today (see also Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 March 30) so it's nice to have something shiny to at least give the suggestion to myself that I'm not an evil POV warrior/unilaterist/insert label of your choice :) Honestly, I try and clean up the categories for my home town and end up having to tidy a neighbouring county and the schools of the nation too, moan grumble :) --kingboyk 20:02, 30 March 2006 (UTC) The schools debate? Personally I've not really any idea what a 'public school' is. In NI, when I was at school anyway, there were basically four types of schools: Grammar Schools and Secondary Schools, and Roman Catholic Schools and Society of Friends Schools (Quaker). I have no idea whether the RC and Quaker schools were also divided into Secondary and Grammar though. Seems as though you resolved the problem after more research. Sometimes its hard (to be a woman?!?).. the categories seem to be in a right royal mess tbh. --Mal 20:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Well basically someone decided that as I nominated the public schools in Gloucestershire category for deletion they would nominate schools in Cheltenham for deletion (they felt it should be renamed but decided - and stated - to ask for deletion instead because of my other manouvre which is a breach of WP:POINT in fact). Now, it turns out that having both is the norm so it meant having each school in more than one category. I also had to fix the top level categories, so that there are now some supercategories at the top (and not just for private schools!) with the articles mostly being in subcats - see e.g. Category:Schools in the United Kingdom plus Category:Schools in the United Kingdom by type and subcats - this latter one is a bit lacking for Northern Ireland, by the way). So, anyway, I withdrew my nomination but there's still the prospect of Category:Schools and colleges in Cheltenham being deleted, which would serve no good at all as far as I'm concerned. The other issue is the English counties. Should South Gloucestershire be seperate? It's a unitary authority, it used to be called Avon and hasn't been in Gloucestershire proper for decades, and most of its population live in suburbs of Bristol which has been seperate from the county for well over 500 years. Seems like commonsense to categorise it seperately to me and the paltry guidelines I've been able to find seem to confirm that. It's logically better too, as the two areas between them have 150 village articles already, and that's with a few still being redlinked. Anyway! I'm nearing wiki overload for the day and am thinking of having a curry (if I can get any money out of the ATM lol). --kingboyk 20:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC) lol I just bought myself a Chicken Tikka Masala (only its one of those frozen microwaveable ones unfortunately!). Oh - it just binged at me! My thoughts are that if it exists as a separate authoritative region, then it deserves to be categorised as such. I'm not familiar enough with the counties in the region to be of more help but, as you live there, I'd certainly trust what ever decision you made. Perhaps its not a county in its own right (as in 'traditional' county), so maybe it should be categorised under whatever categories exist for administrative regions in England (or administrative regions within Gloucestershire?). --Mal 20:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC) BTW - feel free to comment on the post I made just below yours in the UK Wikipedians' talk page. ;) --Mal 21:00, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Thanks. I have made sure it links well into the Gloucestershire category and in many instances the categories for South Gloucestershire are subcategories of the Gloucestershire versions, so the reader is left in no doubt that there's a connection between the two. I will however check and ensure that Category:South Gloucestershire has its proper place in the ceremonial county of Gloucestershire, if there is such a category. Good call! I've got microwave curries too, might have to go with them as it's getting a bit late to trapse to the ATM and then call for a delivery :( --kingboyk 21:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Well it all looks OK now, including references to the ceremoninal and traditional county. I hope I don't get any more disagreement or discover an obscure policy I didn't know about, as it'll be a bot job to undo it all! (rolls eyes). Microwave calls! --kingboyk 21:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Heh! Just as the USA would be great if is weren't for the Americans(!), Wikipedia would be great if it weren't for the Wikipedians! lol I created a few cats for Northern Irish schools, under the Schools in the UK by type super-cat. I don't know if you know anything about the RC education system, but as far as I remember, they're basically private schools.. so I included them in the relevant cat. I haven't noticed any other RC school cats listed though, as yet. --Mal 21:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Hehe. Well I guess I could just get the latest database dumps and create my own private mirror? (Of I actually do have a Wikipedia mirror on my Linux box, for programming and bot testing purposes, but it's waaaay out of date... and so far I prefer the community model :) ). --kingboyk 21:39, 30 March 2006 (UTC) OK well I've done all I intend to in the schools categories. They're not too bad but there's a few levels too many, and an unhealthy obsession with private schools - it's easy to find all the private schools in the country but not all the schools in any one region. I've fixed a few of those, and added categories for other types of schools such as comprehensives. Now most of the schools I found are categorised by both type and location... but there's a lot of em and I'm sure I've only gone skin deep :) --kingboyk 18:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Did you find or add any schools in Northern Ireland by any chance? lol That link you left me regarding the sarcasm didn't work out btw - I've no idea where to go to find it, but I'll have a wee look later for it. --Mal 20:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC) I think I fixed one or two NI schools, yes. You'll have to wikistalk through my contribs if you want to know more :-) Link fixed, now read it (and reply on my page below) is definitely quite funny. --kingboyk 20:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Apple to sue Apple? Thought you might be interested in this story, if its not already been added to the Paul McCartney or Apple or current events articles... Beatles sue Apple over trademark Staff and agencies Wednesday March 29, 2006 The Beatles` record company Apple Corps today accused Apple Computer of breaching a trademark agreement by selling music online. The charge was levelled as the latest round of a 25-year dispute between the two companies over the brand name and fruit logo got underway in the high court. The argument centres on Apple Computer`s iTunes service, which allows users to download and save pre-recorded songs through the internet. There have been more than 1bn downloads through the iTunes Music Store, with 3.7m tracks available worldwide. London-based Apple Corps, owned by Sir Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the widows of John Lennon and George Harrison, is suing over alleged breach of a 1991 agreement between the two firms. The agreement forbids Apple Computer from using the trademark for any application "whose principal content is music." Geoffrey Vos QC, representing Apple Corps, told the court that Apple Computer had violated that agreement by selling music online. He said the computer company`s argument that it uses the fruit logo only in connection with a delivery system was "plainly wrong." He said Apple Computer founder Steve Jobs had said that downloading music from the internet was exactly the same as buying an LP. The Beatles, through Apple Corps, have so far refused to license any of their recordings for sale through online music services. Their record company is seeking court orders to stop Apple Computer using the apple logo in connection with the iTunes Music Store. It is also seeking damages after an investigation into the computer firm`s profits. Apple Computer has transformed the way people listen to music, through iTunes and the sale of some 14m iPods around the world. Mr Justice Mann, who is hearing the case, confessed in a preliminary hearing that he owns an iPod. The high court case will centre on the meaning of a 15-year-old agreement arguably designed to cover only CDs and tapes, but not envisaging ground-breaking developments such as iTunes. The legal wrangle between the two firms goes back to 1981, when an original agreement allowed the Californian company to use the name only for the sale of computers. But Apple Computer later used the logo for computers to edit and record music, prompting the Beatles` company to file its first lawsuit against the hardware giant in 1989. The companies settled their dispute in 1991 following a high court trial lasting more than 100 days. Apple Computer is believed to have paid out around £16.3m and the two sides also signed a new trademark agreement replacing the earlier contracts. The contract stipulated Apple Computer could use the logo for computers, data processing and telecommunications, while the Beatles could retain it for music. But in September 2003 Apple Corps said Apple Computer had entered the entertainment business with iTunes and breached their trademark agreement. At the time, Apple Computer responded: "Unfortunately, Apple and Apple Corps now have differing interpretations of this agreement." The Guardian --Mal 03:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Fascinating stuff! There's gotta be an article in there? Legal History of Apple Corp or the like? ++Lar: t/c 14:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Notable_litigation_of_Apple_Computer#Trademark_dispute_with_Apple_Corps :-) Fascinating certainly, and I believe the original case was regarded as quite notable in trademark law. If the case were to end with some amazing conclusion like the Beatles owning part of Apple Computer, it would probably justify a seperate article. For now it's part of a spiffing Apple Computer litigation page with a brief summary in Apple Corps. Thanks for the post Mal, any others that crop up too would be appreciated! --kingboyk 15:29, 31 March 2006 (UTC) I sympathize with Apple Computers. If Apple Computers can't proceed with ipod, then it is at a marketplace disadvantage with its computer competitors. Besides, Apple Corps has only two (profitable) music interests anymore; The Beatles and Badfinger. The Beatles make money hand-over-fist, and Apple Corps' indifference to Badfinger displays a lack of interest that facet of their music business anyway. I see this as nothing more than extorting money from the computer company on a weak and meaningless premise. OK, I'll get off my soapbox now. ZincOrbie 21:09, 31 March 2006 (UTC) It does seem to be a lot of fuss over nothing (an innocent word like 'Apple'), but as you know Apple Corps long ago lost any "hippy" identity and is now just a business machine (and I'd agree with you, a not terribly effective one at that when it comes to packaging and selling the material they own to the satisfaction of the fans). All I know is that if I had the chance to take a big company for a few 10s of millions I'd be doing it too. Doesn't necessarily make it right, but Apple Computer have known all along about this problem and maybe should have changed their name 20+ years ago :) My personal take on this is that they should be doing a deal - the Beatles music in a (green) Apple branded store on Itunes, with Beatle endorsements all over the shop and hefty profits for all concerned. But what do I know? :) --kingboyk 21:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Big in Japan dunno if you read webcomics or not... Heres a homage and I thought of you for some reason... ++Lar: t/c 14:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC) KLF Photo Is your KLF photo copyrighted, because I was pasting a bunch of photo's of cool groups (yours included), and this administrator told me it's a fair use image. Does that mean its copywritten. It seems like every picture is off limits. Please tell me what you know. By the way if you haven't noticed; I'm new...Bryce 17:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Did you copywrite it?--Let me see the lightuh...Lightuh! 17:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC) Me again, I'm having a prob with my user page, it seems like you've been around along time so maybe you can tell me what I'm doing wrong. How come I have a space between two of my userboxes in the music column? I know for sure I'm doing something wrong but everything looks I guess perfect. Mail me back please...--Let me see the lightuh...Lightuh! 17:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC) mad propz 4 tha support thanx 4 lettin a brutha know he ain't alone. piece out. --Ghetteaux 17:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC) RfA Results and Thanks Kingboyk/Archive 7, thank you for your constructive neutral comments in my recent RfA. Although it did not succeed as no consensus was declared (final: 65/29/7), I know that there is always an opportunity to request adminship again. In the meantime, I will do my best to address your concerns in the hope that when the opportunity for adminship arises once again, you will reconsider your position. If at any time I make any mistakes or if you would like to comment on my contributions to Wikipedia, you are more than welcome to do so. Regardless of your religious, cultural, and personal beliefs, I pray that whatever and whoever motivates you in life continues to guide you on the most righteous path. --- joturner 05:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Northern Irish people Hey mate. Please take a look at my comment on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 April 1#Category:Northern Ireland people to Category:People of Northern Ireland and let me know if you think my comment makes sense enough for you to change your mind. Cheers. --Mal 20:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC) I'll fix it. gimme a sec. ++Lar: t/c 23:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Stuff n things... I'd been thinking about your suggestion of putting the Giant's Causeway article in the Northern Ireland Portal so that there weren't two bios there. I only recently got around to thinking about this again, so I took a look at the Giant's Causeway article, and I think its nowhere near good article status. What do you think? BTW - I plan on getting back to the redlinks for the Beatles soon. I hope we can get that finished so I can move on to some other aspect of the project. In the meantime though, I'm waiting to see if Jenson Button can finaly get his first race win in Australia!! (starts at 4am, ITV) --Mal 01:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC) I think the merger should be performed (or rejected) and the pictures increased in size. That will take care of the visuals. The article is decent starting point but could use some expert input I guess, to give more info on the physical geography of the place. Bugger, I missed that race too - and Button didn't win! You think he ever will? :) --kingboyk 12:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks for the advice regarding the Giant's Causeway. I think the proposal has been suggested for quite a while now, and I haven't seen any objections to it. I'll get on with that soon then. As for Button... bloody hell - how unlucky can a guy get?!? lol OK a few other drivers have been unlucky in the past.. Kimi, Irvine, Villi.. even Sato getting lumped with another crap car after having done so well.. and Rubens too this year (although maybe he'd got too used to the plush Ferrari!). Button will have his day I'm sure. Thankfully, he's young yet. I felt really bad for him. DC is having a tough time of it too. I'm sure he'd have been in the top 6 if it wasn't for the restarts and somebody having bumped him. Same with Button - he'd have had a real chance at the win if it wasn't for the restarts (and of course the engine giving up on him!). Three weeks till the next race .. we can watch it at a more respectable time too! --Mal 15:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Bibliography project I noticed that you removed my handy dandy template - don't worry about it, your reasoning is totally valid. Yes, every article should have a great, extensive bibliography. I'm mostly trying to figure out the best way to spread the word about the project I want to start. Because for whatever reason, every article doesn't have a great bibliography. As I was saying to Lar on my own talk page, I was very impressed by the extent and potential usefulness of the bibliography at Meister Eckhart, and I want to find a way to make all articles look like that. I think a project is the best way because, in the same way that you need to remind people to coordinate their efforts in improving articles in Random Category X, we're going to need to have people make a conscious change in the way they think about sources. If a few of us get together and start working on a few relatively high-profile articles, other people will get the idea and *avalanche*! Cantara 02:05, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Yes, sorry about that I did give it some thought before doing it and I knew it might appear a little rude so agan sorry. The thing is, the talk page at the top of that article is bursting with templates already, and the new Beatles WikiProject has kinda claimed responsibility for that turf :P I'm sure we can work together and if you're going to manage bibliographies for us you could get a mention in our project template or on out project page? --kingboyk 11:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC) User:toysoy Thank you. Yes I can see how it looks that way, and I would never usually take that tone but before putting any warnings on his talk page I had "Please do not remove the {{db-bio}} tag." and "Deletion tag: Do not remove it please." on the talk page of the article (which he ignored). Then if you check my user page and talkpage you'll see he added rubbish to my page (using a warning template) which shows much more experience than a new user. Granted you are correct, guess I got a little flustered for which I apologise. Glen 13:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Just got your message - funny I was writing to you about that exact thing! ĢĿ€Ñ §τοĿĿ€ŖγŤč 13:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC) I have just commented on the incidents page. Thanks again. ĢĿ€Ñ §τοĿĿ€ŖγŤč 13:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Re: Live at the Star Club: 1962 OK, I'll buy that one for a quarter. The back of one of the zillion re-releases cited a couple different sources, but I don't want to post a ref without knowing the names. The same with Roy Carr and Tony Tyler's review in The Beatles: An Illustrated Record; I have the book, but not handy. The other one I know of is Nicholas Schaffner's The Beatles Forever, but I don't own a copy. Seems like each praised the historical value of the record, and marginally the cleanup job done (classic case of "If it looks bad now, you shoulda seen it before we started!"), but of course I want to recheck those sources before trying to wing it. ... Pedantic? Remains to be seen; you coulda given me five seconds to finish up me catching my missing the Son of Dracula date? ;-) Zephyrad 21:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC) BTW To my knowledge, the Philips recorder used (which wasn't necessarily Taylor's, according to one online article I read; it supposedly was a house setup) was the same kind Eleanor Bron uses to dupe the Kaili cultists in Help!, when the Beatles do their session on Salisbury Plain. I found one at a swap meet in the early 80s, still working; they weren't great, but shoulda done a slightly better job than all that? Zephyrad 21:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Unprotection Hi, Kingoboyk. You don't have your e-mail enabled. Can you please send me an e-mail about the protection of the licking AfD? That editor has numerous sockpuppets and IPs, and posts threats, personal information, and sexually suggestive stuff about several editors, and about Jimbo's five-year-old daughter. Jimbo has said to block on sight and to revert on sight. It would have been better if you had contacted me before unprotecting. In If you have a problem with leaving it semi-protected (which only excludes brand-new editors and anons, neither of whom can vote), could you please e-mail me privately, or contact Jimbo or a member of the ArbCom. Thanks. AnnH ♫ 15:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC) It's being discussed on the noticeboard, and I announced my intention to unprotect it there, to which nobody has objected. I have the page on my watchlist and I see other admins are watching the situation too. I don't see how semi-protecting helps, and it sends out a bad signal if we protect out debates. Indeed, having it editable might flush out the sockpuppets and we can then block them on sight. I won't wheel war though, so if you feel it needs to be semi-protected go ahead. I'll fix my email now, just a moment. --kingboyk 15:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Northern Irish cats Moggies in Northern Ireland should be called Northern Irish moggies!!! lol Sorry ermm... If you look at that CfD nom for renaming, it seems as though everyone who posted on it supports the nomination for renaming. On top of that, there seem to be a huge majority in favour of renaming in the format of "Fooian Fooers". So I've got a question for you: is this strong enough support that I should perhaps start work on renaming ALL the "Northern Ireland" cats to "Northern Irish" (and merging several also)? Or should create a separate nomination on the WP:CfD page, listing a few of the cats as examples? --Mal 16:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC) I think they have a bot to do it, so you're best to go through the official channels even if only for technical reasons? Create a seperate nom, listing all of them I would have thought. Are there any cons to that approach? (Not a rhetorical question). --kingboyk 16:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC) I don't honestly know. I've never been involved in renaming that many cats in one go. Who should I approach? Who has the use of such a bot? By the way - more US-centric stuff I thought you might be interested in - see my comments regarding the nom for List of fictional Republicans (TV series) on the Wikipedia:Requested moves#2 April 2006 page! --Mal 16:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC) When a category has been approved for renaming on CFD, somebody actions it with a bot. I know this because I had a category renaming approved once and I didn't have to do a thing. Best do it that way I think. --kingboyk 16:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC) OK, so you advise me to list all the cats on that same page ... the CfD one then? --Mal 17:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Yeah. Is there any reason why not? --kingboyk 17:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Just the amount of work involved! lol I'll be getting on it shortly though. Then I'll maybe take a look at the Giant's Causeway.. and, if people let me, I'll move on to the redlinks for the Beatles Proj!! --Mal 17:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Mate I've created the list here: User:Setanta747/NI cats list. Can I just then add my reasoning and paste it into the WP:CFD page..? --Mal 21:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC) Blimey! That's a herculean effort. I don't see why not, but maybe best to ask someone who's been round longer? (e.g. User:JzG). I'd be for just pasting that into CFD myself though. --kingboyk 21:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC) I listed them all in CfD now... seem to have some support for the proposal already. :) --Mal 00:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Well call me stupid but I can't find it, nor can I see it in your contribs - where is it? --kingboyk 12:50, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Hmmm... 3rd of April should get you there. :) --Mal 20:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Blimey! Did you compile that list by hand? --kingboyk 20:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Yes lol! Was there an easier way to do it..? --Mal 20:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Yes, the easiest way would have to be ignore the problem and let somebody else sort it! :-) --kingboyk 23:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC) What can I say .. it was buggin' me! --Mal 02:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC) IP blocking review Those sorts of blocks are ambiguous and require judgement calls. I think you did the right thing. Sometimes, these spurious edits occur due to someone moving to a different IP address and continuing their vandalism. It's difficult to say what is best to do in these situations, but it shows you thought it out - your edit summary was great! It says you are willing to listen to suggestions, and invite others to help you out. In the long run, it's those little things that make helping out here worthwhile. Sometimes if I am in the mood for extra patience, I only block for 5 minutes and then wait and see what happens. In the meantime, I check if the IP is an open proxy or not. If you go for the more controversial blocks, you might find that others might disagree with you. Sometimes, that's okay too - it just means you can move on to other things, while others worry about what is important to them. They might know something more about the situation that you may not be aware of. Anyway, keep up the good work! Great to see a Wikipedian like you around - bonuses for that edit summary :-) --HappyCamper 23:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC) Beatles FBI File Hello, I noticed you took off my addition to the Beatles page about their FBI file. This is a rarely known fact, and I followed the rules when I posted? Why was it removed? Please let me know, I am very interested on why. --Blackvault 22:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC) The link was not promotion. I could have easily have masked my identity, but didn't. I was openly trying to contribute to a page, wrote part of the article, and sourced the file with a link. That is not spam, or self promotion. --Blackvault 23:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC) I truly followed the rules, I wrote parts of the articles (not just adding links) and added things that were not known to only a few pages (not like others who spam many pages). I added links to back up what I said (like the John wilkes Booth allegation he lived for many years after the assassination) and you deleted all of that. I could have easily masked who I was, and I didn't. If I was someone else, who added the link, you would've let it go. (Just because I added a link to my own archive - which is almost 10 years old, and the largest archive in the world, outside of the U.S. Government) You offered no constructive criticism of my work, you simply deleted it. You make this place no fun to contribute to. Like I said - I never just added a link/spam. I added to the CONTENT OF THE ARTICLE. My research has been known worldwide, and some of the information I receive came directly from the U.S. Government to me, and has not been received by any other researcher. I can prove this by the U.S. Government's own documents. Like this comment will change anything, but I had to leave it. You edited my work only because you could. —This unsigned comment was added by Blackvault (talk • contribs) . Good luck with your 'patrols,' and have fun. It is rediculous that I can not offer content that really no one else can (in SOME cases) We don't publish original research either! I've tried to be polite and explain it to you. The particular edit I rolled back was because it followed the same pattern, just seemed to be aimed at getting a link to your website. I followed the link and I couldn't even decipher the writing - it's not even been transcribed! If you have worthy content, post it here, don't post links. --kingboyk 00:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Furthermore, no, I edited "your work" because I came aware that every single edit you made involved a link to your website. That suggests spam and, as an administrator here it's not so much my right as my duty to clean it up. --kingboyk 00:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC) You don't publish original research? It isn't my opinion, it is documented FACT - that's why I referenced it with the OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS! Your tactics and explanations are a total let down to how this site is run. --Blackvault 00:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC) I gave you an answer to why I changed your Beatles edit. I then saw you'd added your site to many other articles, and had been warned about it. I rolled the changes back and pointed you to some of our policies. (You're right about the original research thing, I was being facetious). I don't understand why you're arguing me! Just get on and edit, but please read the rules first. I've no desire to stop you and you're wasting not only my time but yours. --kingboyk 00:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Editing Hi there - I did some detective work, and you might find these two edits useful to you: [1] and [2]. In particular, take a look at User:71.139.169.121. --HappyCamper 00:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks for the headsup, and the nice message above. Cheers. --kingboyk 12:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC) No problem. I learned something new today too. See you around! --HappyCamper 15:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC) A thank you. Hello, I wanted to say thank you for taking the time to reconsider my addition. Although I did apparently (due to inexperience) do it the wrong way, I felt it was important, and I see you agree - at least to the point of adding the link/reference. I wanted to say thank you for your kind message, and I apologize for getting a bit miffed over the initial posts. It was simply a minor bumb in the road to learning this site. Again, I am learning about the rules and procedures here, so if my method went against these policies, I do sincerely apologize. I look forward to contributing more to articles, although must say am extremely apprehensive. Maybe I'll resort to the talk page and see if someone might find my addition useful. That would thwart any spam warnings :) I hope you understand my motives... and it certainly was not to spam. Very Sincerely, John Greenewald, Jr. --Blackvault 20:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks for the nice message. I had a think about it overnight and a good sleep and decided we'd both wound each up the other way and this seemed the best way to repair the damage :) If you need any help or advice about procedures just let me know, I'm happy to help. I don't usually bite! :) --kingboyk 23:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Shared pages http://tools.wikimedia.de/~robchurch/spweb.php , ... in particular http://tools.wikimedia.de/~robchurch/spweb.php?a=Kingboyk&b=Lar ... I think you may be the highest partnercount I could find for me... Thought that's pretty cool! We do good work! ++Lar: t/c 03:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC) That's a neat tool. It would be cool if could just type in one person's handle and get results showing who they've most worked with (or against, of course, as the edits could be an all-out edit war :)) --kingboyk 13:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Image:Jim Rodgers.jpg You've provided the wiki source for this image and tagged is as GFDL. However, at http://nigov.tmtm.com/wiki/Image:Jim_Rodgers.jpg there are no source or licencing details. Just because someone has uploaded it to this Wiki (without properly sourcing or licensing it) doesn't make it legitimately licensed under GNU Free Documentation - I'm therefore removing these details from the Wikipedia image page. Regards, CLW 08:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC) You can discuss this on Mal's page, I have it on watch. --kingboyk 13:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC) What Time Is Love? Be my guest - I agree, there's just too much happening down that RHS of the screen! --Vinoir 17:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC) PS, there'll be a little link-fixing to be done after the split - I'm happy to do that. By the way, according to Lazlo's discography, the "Neon" version appeared on an album by that artist. In a separate WTILS article it might be worth briefly mentioning such facts to balance against claim that KLF were responsible for all the versions. --Vinoir 17:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Aye, definitely. Take a look, I've left the inuse tags on for now. Let me know if you prefer it as 2 articles or one. --kingboyk 17:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC) There is a method involved The advice I left for Prasi90 was not specifically directed at you alone. The idea in making that suggestion to Prasi90 is that he shouldn't feel obligiged to respond to any and all comments left on his talk page. He can simply ignore any or all, especially inflammatory comments. Indeed a closer reading shows that I suggest that he should weigh the benefit of answering your question against not doing so. And if you would please direct me to the appropriate policy that tells editors that they must respond to comments made by any other editor/administrator, I would appreciate it. My comment on Prasi90's talk page was not meant to suggest disrespect, but merely that he has options to do or not do as he sees fit. As I suggested to him, the only time an editor really must respond is when there are questions posed during an Arbitration, and even then, response only ensures that their views will be expressed in the context of the arbitration process. They are under no obligation to do so even in that forum. Prasi90 could simply answer in response to your query, "I have no idea what I will edit. Whatever strikes my fancy" but he has indicated through his agreement with me that he will not edit contentious material at least during the period of his mentorship. Remember Kingboyk, I am not you, and what I may give as advice may not be what you might have offered as advice. And, as it was me and not you who offered to mentor this user, I will mentor in the best way that I can. In the present this means asking Prasi90 to ignore most comments directed to him, especially ones that seem acusatory and reactionary, in hopes that he will learn to retain a cool, even handed approach to editing. Believe me, if the hand I have offered to him in the spirit of helpfulness is slapped away, or bitten, I will not extend any sympathy towards him in the least. Regards, Hamster Sandwich 19:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Perhaps, then, you might have addressed me directly and said something along the lines of "don't worry I have the matter in hand". To be bitten by the admin requesting the unblock is not something I would have anticipated. Of course nobody is obliged to interract with others, but some common courtesy and mutual respect amongst admins would be nice. You requested review, I requested information on what his plans are and I maintain it's a reasonable question. Please address any further replies to the noticeboard as I don't consider this to be a personal issue that requires my undivided attention. --kingboyk 19:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC) I apologise for posting here once again, but I can't see how this is material in any way relating to the noticeboard. This is a issue between two users (you and I) who are having a very slight difference of opinion, about a very minor subject. I appreciate your advice! I do, sincerely! So allow me to utilize it..."Don't worry about Prasi90's edits for the period of his mentorship, I think I have the matter in hand." If he stumbles, there are many administrators who will be all over him within minutes, if not seconds. If he egregiously vandalizes, I will be amongst them. I have no love for vandals, bigots or racists of any stripe. I believe Prasi90's comments in that vein were rash and youthful stupidity. I think he can be helped, turned around. If the mentorship is scuccesful, great, if not, well he'll just get indefinately banned. Wheres the harm in trying to help, when weighed against these factors? If you choose to reply here, fine, or on my own talk page, but this really isn't a problem for WP:AN or WP:AN/I IMO. Hamster Sandwich 20:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Fine, thanks. That's what I wanted to hear :-) An idea of his plans direct from him would have been nice, but I'm happy to settle for that assurance and have amended my opinion on the noticeboard accordingly. Cheers! (Oh and - assuming you get agreement for the unblock - "good luck" too: I think you might need it but hope that you won't). --kingboyk 20:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC) User:Morton devonshire Kingboyk, would you mind taking a look at the above user? I have no involvement or prior contact with this chap, but it appears that his talk page is a pretty blatant POV-pushing attack discussion. There's a "weasel list" and some other questionable material (fair use images & whatnot). His user page, which he seems to feel that he can do anything with, is a checklist of things that a user page should not be. If you could look into this and take some action I'd much appreciate it. Isopropyl 20:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC) I had originally asked ESkog to investigate, but I don't think he saw my message. A second look at this Morton fellow's talk page shows an attack against you, Kingboyk, for some reason or another. Might be another reason to check it out. Isopropyl 20:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC) I'll take a look, certainly, but if there's anything fishy I'll probably recommend passing it onto the admins noticeboard or one of my more experienced colleagues :-) It's not that I'm lazy, it's just that I'm still learning the ropes and dealing with troublesome users is probably the hardest task we face. (They ought to send on us a people management of course, I vote for Tahiti!). --kingboyk 22:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC) OK, he's not going to be working for Enyclopedia Britannica any time soon, but I don't see anything terribly bad there. The images are all "clean" (none that remain are 'fair use'). I see he has a "weasel list" that I happen to be on, which is in actuality a list of people who voted to delete an article that he created. It doesn't offend me, and I'm on the list. From what I can see he's something of a Wikipedia critic - which is fair enough - and he'd probably get out a kick out of an admin going over there and arguing with him. I think it's best to let him be. (If I've missed something blatantly offensive then please let me know - I couldn't be bothered to read all of it in detail, as it's just ranting mostly). --kingboyk 23:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia Cabal Hi Kingboyk. Sorry for the question, but what is Wikipedia Cabal??--Mr. Manu 22:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC) It's just a joke mate :-) Some people think there is a conspiracy and that a mysterious group (the Wikipedia Cabal) run this site for their own purposes. I jokingly claim to be part of it. There's no conspiracy (that I know of ) and if there is I'm certainly not part of it :) --kingboyk 22:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC) That's what ALL the cabal members say! ++Lar: t/c 02:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC) Hehe! Ssssh, don't tell everyone! --kingboyk 02:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC) I don't want to be in the cabal; I want my rouge admin award. I haven't ticked off enough vandals, apparently. KillerChihuahua?!? 02:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC) June Montana Hi. Just to let you know that another editor has tagged this article for speedy deletion on the basis that it redirects to a non-existant article. I wondered if the redirect was somehow incorrect or whether you are planning to create the article. Cheers TigerShark 15:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC) Ey oop, our steve... ...as we certainly don't say in our part of the world. Sorry I've not been around to chip in recently, but I'm on my Easter wiki-break. I have found time to add my view (whether it's useful or not is another matter) on the South Glos/Gloucestershire debate, which as far as I can tell in a rush, I seem to be in agreement with you on. Cheers for the birthday greetings. Hope all is well. Vanky 17:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC) AfD Would you mind if I added One-letter English words and List of two-letter English words to your AfD nom for List of three-letter English words? I think that we should make a group decision for these. savidan(talk) (e@) 09:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC) As you wish, but I didn't think the "quality gap" was the actual standard for deletion. savidan(talk) (e@) 07:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC) category move I addressed your concerns at the suggested move of the hip hop category.--Urthogie 16:51, 9 April 2006 (UTC) Replied.--Urthogie 16:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC) Replied with a suggested compromise.--Urthogie 09:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC) It appears as though we have reached a compromise. So why don't we close this CFD and start a new one that suggests merging both of them?--Urthogie 12:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC) I'm popping out now, but I can look into it later. Might be a good idea. --kingboyk 13:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC) KLF research Good idea regarding the Hansard reference, that'll look nice in It's Grim Up North. Cheers. --Vinoir 11:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC) AFDs Hi mate, If you're relisting an AFD please remove it from the old day's listing, if for no reason other than so as not to confuse MathBot (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old). No reply needed. Cheers. --kingboyk 01:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC) OK, make that a double pretty please, cos most of the outstanding old "unclosed" debates are actually your relistings :) --kingboyk 02:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks, I didn't actually know that that had to be done. I'll get to it, and check if there are any left. Stifle (talk) 14:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC) ProhibitOnions's RfA Thank you, Kingboyk/Archive 7! ...for voting in my RFA. It passed with a result of 58/2/0. If you have any comments, or for some reason need any new-admin help, please let me know here. Sorry about the boilerplate. Regards, ProhibitOnions 22:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC) A KISS Rfa Thanks Thank you, I've been promoted. pschemp | talk 01:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks Cheers for removing the nom template from Chill Out (KLF album) :-) Forgot that one! What with our KLF work, I'm learning a lot about handy templates and Wikithings from seeing how you work. Apologies for my missing some of these things now and again. --Vinoir 05:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Millwall F.C. page Wotcha kingie! This site has our 30th March version without it being credited to us - is this allowed? Cheers, Lion King 18:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Deleted Link, cannot remove my address from "leave comment" on their site. Lion King 02:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC) No, definitely not! They can use it but they must give credit, either by crediting Wikipedia and linking back to the article on this site or by listing the authors. Since you are presumably one of the authors you are also one of the copyright owners so you can contact them and politely inform of this (getting less polite if they ignore your request, perhaps). See Wikipedia:Copyright for the rundown on site copyright, Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License for the licence in full. --kingboyk 20:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Steve, they seem to be copying EVERY Wiki football article ver batim! Cheers, Lion King 22:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC) There's a page somewhere that lists off sites that are/are not in compliance with the GFDL and tracks how people are doing at asking them nicely to comply. I know it's out there, but I just can't recall the name of it right now. If you do contact this site, you may want to find that page first, see if someone else has, and if not, record your findings as you go, for the benefit of all. Hope that helps! ++Lar: t/c 23:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Yes there is, and I'll look for it tommorow. I think LionKing should have a gentle word first, and then we can list it on that page for further action. --kingboyk 23:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia:Sites_that_use_Wikipedia_as_a_source#Non-compliance_process --kingboyk 02:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Can you sort it please Steve? As of two hours from now I'll be working away. They are www.english-football.org.uk Lion King 02:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC) I went to list it, and it's already there (as of yesterday). Somebody has sent them a letter. --kingboyk 16:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Ashton, Gardner And Dyke I would appreciate your thoughts. I am undecided whether to simply create a page for the above one-hit wonders - about whom I would need to do a little research before writing the article (it won't be a long one!) OR whether to create three pages for each band member. These would then link into Family; Paice, Ashton & Lord; The Remo Four; Wonderwall Music; Medicine Head etc - but again I know little about each musician OR piss off down the pub for a beer. Oh, by the way, "KLF are gonna rock you". Sleep well. Derek R Bullamore 20:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC) I'd suggest going to the pub but failing that (if you're still here) one article. Read WP:MUSIC first, although I'd think they would qualify (I've heard of 'em anyway). --kingboyk 21:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Oh now I know where I've heard of 'em! :) The_KLF#Retirement Lol, well, it would be nice to be able to link to an article on them certainly. --kingboyk 20:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Free as a Bird Hi, you've changed[3] Free As A Bird to redirect to Free as a Bird (song). We previously had the Supertramp album at "Free As a Bird" and the song at "Free As A Bird", but I've already gone through and disambiguated all the links to both pages, so I think it would be more useful to redirect Free As A Bird to Free as a Bird. This would also mean that typing any variation of fRee aS a BIrd into the search box will lead to the disambig page and not the song, which would surely be more useful. (And I might as well say free as a bird one more time, before I finish :o) Flowerparty? 03:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Oh, I see you've made the song the main target instead. Probably makes sense since the LP only reached 101 on the Billboard chart. In that case I'll move the song page to where the dab page was. Flowerparty? 03:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Edit conflict. Yes, that's the rationale. The song won a Grammy too :) --kingboyk 03:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC) I know what I did, I don't need a diff :-) A 2 entry dab page is not necessary (WP:D). It's an album which didn't make the top 100 versus the comeback song by The Beatles (I'm a little biased being in the Beatles WikiProject, but like them or not it's hard to disagree that only Elvis Presley challenges them for notability in their field). Seems like a no brainer to me. I've made sure that there are no dab issues remaining and affixed the relevant template to Free as a Bird (song). --kingboyk 03:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Ok then. I guess I should really have put more thought into it before moving the pages. I've left some of your edits deleted because they're just way too confusing. Sorry for giving you a diff, by the way, it was out of an instinctual need to avoid linking directly to a disambiguation page - too much time repairing dab links. Flowerparty? 03:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Lol, no problem. Some good came of it, I've given Free as a Bird (song) a little tidyup and added mention of the Grammy for which some reason was missing. Don't worry about the deleted edits, I deleted the redirect edits too because they were way too messy (like you, it took me a while to work out the best way to do it :)). --kingboyk 03:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Welcome to VandalProof Thanks for your interest in VandalProof! You've been added to the list of authorized users, and feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page if you have any questions. - Glen T C 03:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Let It Be Hi Steve, do you think let it be is a live album?? > Mr. Manu23:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Not really mate, no. Some if it was live, some of it was in the studio, and even the live stuff had the Spector treatment. I'd say "no". Just my opinion! --kingboyk 00:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Moving stub templates In response to your moving some stub templates below categories and interwiki links (and your changes to articles that were already set up that way), I have posted a proposal at the Guide to Layout talk page. Just keeping you abreast. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 05:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Huh? That must have been with AWB. I'm not that anal that I would waste my time shuffling stuff like that round! (WP:AWB, a semi-automated page cleaning and editing tool). --kingboyk 17:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Agree with the logic of your proposal though! --kingboyk 17:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks Thanks for supporting me in my RfA. I really didn't think people appreciate my work here that much, but it's nice to see you do: my Request was closed with 66 supports and 4 opposes. I'll do my best not to turn your confidence down. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. --Dijxtra 11:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC) adminship Heya. I noticed you were an admin, and I was wondering if you thought I was ready for adminship yet? Thanks, --Urthogie 20:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC) I don't know you well enough to say. I was impressed by your reasoning here, but apart from these category naming issues I don't think we've had much interraction before? Do you know any admins well? If you do, the best thing to do is ask one of them. I'd also recommend that you read WP:RFA and take part in the discussions there, if you don't already. You'll soon find out what kind of standards people apply. --kingboyk 01:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Unkindness "he seemed to be the sort who would get a kick out of an admin going over there and giving him a talking to. (Something of a troll, in other words)." I would appreciate it if you would stop saying that. I have plenty of interactions with Wikipedians, mostly ones that I disagree with, because I patrol the conspiracy theory pages regularly, and get along fine with them -- I've had my tossles, and have learned to not take it so seriously, as I did when I joined the project. WP:AGF My purpose is not to add POV, but to tame it -- I'm shocked by the sheer amount of nonsense that makes it into this encyclopedia, just by brute force of will from those spreading bizarre ideas, such as those present on the conspiracy pages and around controversial political figures, such as Mumia, Zinn, Savage, Menchu et al. (and yes, the Bush haters). That's not to say that I have problems with left-leaning editors -- User:SkeenaR and I cross swords all of the time, yet we have become Wiki-friends. I save my rancor for people that use admin privileges to promote their own edits and slanted political messages and to quash contrary dissent -- unfortunately, that happens frequently on these pages, and other admins have been absolutely no help in resolving these disputes. That's why you see some of that frustration vented on my talk page. My purpose is to put a target on some of those abuses, because unfortunately there is no adequate police force on Wikipedia to help resolve these kinds of disputes. Sorry for the long answer, I just don't know what your beef is, since you and I have never conversed. To that end, I don't want to have a beef with anyone on Wikipedia, and hope that we can both edit Wikipedia cheerfully, even if we don't see eye-to-eye on politics. Thanks for listening. Cheers. Morton devonshire 00:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC) I don't have a beef (although I am listed on your "weasel list" so presumably you do). You'll note that I didn't take the complaint I received any further so your best advice would be to leave me alone. I have better things to do. --kingboyk 00:40, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Done. You've been deleted. Bye. Morton devonshire 00:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC) Hmm Yikes, I think it might be. Why not? Well, you know, if it is him, then one of the very best things that could happen in life is that he says, "music is free" and offers us complete KLF tracks to have on the Wikipedia pages :) --Vinoir 01:22, 14 April 2006 (UTC) User:WoWjUnKiE7290 Hey man, what's up. Could you consider blocking this user please. Self proclaimed sock puppet. OSU80 03:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC) WoWjUnKiE7290 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). It's best to post these requests to the incidents noticeboard. He has however already been blocked. Cheers. --kingboyk 21:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC) Actually, no, he was blocked then unblocked, and has now changed usernames. The "WoW" bit seems to be innocent. Were there any other reasons for thinking him to be a sockpuppet? --kingboyk 21:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC) Yeah I was looking at the previous revision as of 12:25, 5 April 2006. Thanks. OSU80 17:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC) Your vote is needed (again!) Dunno if you're aware of the disruption that was caused to the UK userbox recently. But it seems that an attempt by myself and a couple of others to clarify a certain ambiguity in the text was made into a very much more complex debate. Please have a look at my talk page debate with user ConDem User talk:Setanta747#UK userbox vote and see if you think my idea has any logical merit. For the other 'solutions' which are, in my opinion, needlessly complex.. and for the vote itself.. you can have a look at Template talk:User United Kingdom/usagepoll. Cheers. Oh - I've started up the redlinks part again, after having been well behind in my watchlist for ages and doing a few other ikkle bits and feces(!).. I hope I haven't missed out any. --Mal 11:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks for the redlink work, I'll take a look shortly. I'm not going to comment on the userbox debate because, well, you probably know why (trivial waste of time quite frankly! :P). --kingboyk 21:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC) What I think is a waste of time is having a vote to change the thing in the first place - it was perfectly adequate and just needed a tweak of the text to ensure no abiguity. But fair enough (bloody userboxes!) --Mal 14:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC) Boob Steve I made a boob - created a category but forgot to stick the colon in, so it has become an article. Could you delete it for me pleeease? Category Scots-Irish American actors --Mal 21:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC) With pleasure, but User:Dsmdgold got there first! --kingboyk 21:48, 15 April 2006 (UTC) VandalProof 1.1 is Now Available For Download Happy Easter to all of you, and I hope that this version may fix your current problems and perhaps provide you with a few useful new tools. You can download version 1.1 at User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof. Let me warn you, however, to please be extremely careful when using the new Rollback All Contributions feature, as, aside from the excessive server lag it would cause if everyone began using it at once, it could seriously aggitate several editors to have their contributions reverted. If you would like to experiment with it, though, I'd be more than happy to use my many sockpuppets to create some "vandalism" for you to revert. If you have any problems downloading, installing, or otherwise, please tell me about them at User:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs and I will do my best to help you. Thanks. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:47, 16 April 2006 (UTC) Happy Spring celebration / Easter (as your preferences and beliefs dictate) Here's hoping that if the bunny leaves you any beans they're this kind! ++Lar: t/c 14:52, 16 April 2006 (UTC) (Well that's probably rather better than wishing a Christian "Happy Good Friday" ... Linuxlad 15:38, 16 April 2006 (UTC)) Thank you both and the same to you. Unfortunately somebody beat me to the WP:BEANS joke! :( --kingboyk 07:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC) Yeah, about that Continued from here: Er, I did knew about the KLF. I was using that as an example of diversity in band template formatting, which I feel is the only good reason to make one of these templates in the first place. (Awesome work on the KLF articles, by the way. The most productive thing I ever thought of doing for one of those was making the list of places on It's Grim Up North.) –Unint 07:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC) Ah, so that was your work was it?! :) Good stuff, I really like that list. Well, anyway, sorry if I bit your head off - I thought you were slagging it off rather than celebrating diversity :) --kingboyk 07:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC) "Comunidad chilena" Hi again, Kingboyk. Do you know if a Chilean community in wikipedia exists? --Mr. Manu 01:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC) It looks like there is no such community on the English Wikipedia yet - see Wikipedia:Regional_notice_boards. Perhaps you could start one? --kingboyk 01:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC) Hi Again!!! First: Sorry! Second: Do you think the discography of billy preston can be part of The Beatles Wiki project? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mr. Manu (talk • contribs) . It's not yet been decided mate. Possibly, possibly not. He was on Apple and worked with the Beatles, but he did much else besides. So I think don't tag the talk page yet. Feel free to create the article or ask for help though! --kingboyk 22:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC) Sock Puppets Maybe you can help me with something on here, or at least guide me to someone that can. I have a user on here, that's fairly abrasive using a sockpuppet to argue his side of debates. Earlier this month, I added extensive history to the 24-7 Spyz article. Nine days after the last edit, Onlyslighted came along and started removing stuff that was relevant and making Wiki-links to non-existant articles. I don't mind the grammar corrections and some of the rewording at all. He's a new user though, so I went and made some corrections to his mistakes, of which there were quite a few, as well as reinserting the important facts that he had removed. He immediately switched over to 68.112.26.95, which you'll see is obviously him, and started making arguments in favor of Onlyslighted. When I pointed out that non-existant articles didn't need Wiki-links, he reverted and said that he was writing articles on all of them, which he hasn't done. He also told me that he hadn't removed any of the information that I had pointed out after he had just done so twice. When checking the two user accounts, they edit the exact same articles and apparantly he's been rubbing some of the contributors of thos articles the wrong way as well. I'm not looking to get the guy blocked, unless that's what an administrator calls for. He's actually made some decent contributions. However, he should get a warning that it's not cool to be arguing his own side in a debate. So please check out the history of the 24-7 Spyz article, for starters, and see if you, or another administrator, can help before it gets out of hand. I've looked at the sock puppet page and it doesn't seem to have any clear and cohesive way to handle this. All in all, I think it's better if an administrator handles it though. Thanks ahead of time, for any help you may be able to offer and I'll get that song out to you as soon as possible. JohnBWatt Hi John. I'll look at it later or in the morning. I might have to ask another admin for some advice if I find anything untoward, as I'm not really very battle hardened in this kind of dispute :) Anyway, as I'll say, I'll have a look. --kingboyk 05:16, 19 April 2006 (UTC) Sorry John, I was inactive for a couple of days and have been catching up on my editing. If this is still a live problem I will look into it. Sorry mate. (If you need some urgent action please take it to WP:ANI). --kingboyk 17:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC) At the moment, things are fine. That's only based on the article that I worked on though. Without going through every article he contributes to, I can't say he's not doing it to users in other articles though. JohnBWatt OK! Good to hear. I will still look at it then, but I'll leave it until I'm looking for something to do! (I'm currently quite busy working on articles related to The KLF; our main article is getting towards featured status now I think :-)) --kingboyk 17:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC) flattbush discussion? Cheerio from Los Angeles, what did they try to change this time? These guys vandalise the page so much that IP should be banned, ha, it's been well over 50 times now.Stabinator 07:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC) It had been replaced with a copy of the Flatbush article, which I quickly reverted. --kingboyk 07:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC) hip hop culture for cfm See Category:Hip_hop_culture. Peace, --Urthogie 08:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC) Invitations Have you considered inviting user:Lukobe? As a proof-reader he/she may be useful in speed checking vast quantities of text. Any queries regarding UK/US usage could easily be resolved.LessHeard vanU 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC) No, I hadn't considered it because I haven't seem him edit any Beatles articles - only a policy page :) However, if you think it's appropriate - go for it! We're all equal, just because the Project was my wretched idea doesn't mean I have any monopoly on handing out invites :) --kingboyk 04:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC) The Family Way Hi, how are you?. Look good The Family Way?? Mr. Manu 23:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC) Not bad thanks, and yourself? I've done some edits to the article, and commented at Talk:The Family Way (soundtrack). It's a very good start but (and it's a BIG but) you shouldn't copy text from other sites! --kingboyk 05:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC) 1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?) This article reached Good Article status on 24th April 2006 (my first so to do) :) --kingboyk 11:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Gratz! KillerChihuahua?!? 23:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks. Hey, would you be so kind as to take a look at the thread above from JohnBWatt? I was inactive for a couple of days and didn't look into it... I'll try to do it later if you can't but I'm currently not feeling too well. --kingboyk 02:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC) sister projects I can't claim credit for that you know. I was using another persons page as a template to start from, and they had the sister projects template already there, and I decided to keep it. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 04:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ClassicSciFi.com Quality work! lol! Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Service with a smile :) Thanks. --kingboyk 05:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Might as well ask you to close this keeper from the same date: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor Biblical figures. BDA will get his wish. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Done. --kingboyk 05:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Re : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 April 17 Oh! My apologies. I saw that the date disappeared at WP:AFD/Old, so I thought it was done. Should have checked. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 05:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Lol, no worries. --kingboyk 05:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Question Hi, I had a question for an administrator and i was wondering if you were around? Rogerman 06:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC)Rogerman Yes, what's up? --kingboyk 06:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzy Sticks Please restore the history of this article. I feel that it was improperly deleted. There were two delete votes, two merge to Goaltimate votes, and two redirect to Disc golf votes. This is clearly no consensus. One of the delete votes was in bad faith/based on personalized results. (The hit referred to is from myspace.) I'm taking the article to deletion review due to no consensus, but would like you to do an immediate history undeletion as it contained no copyright violations. You are allowed to do this under policy here. I want the history restored such that non-admins can see it. If you would rather userfy it to User:WAvegetarian/Suzy Sticks, that would be fine as well. —WAvegetarian•CONTRIBUTIONSTALK• EMAIL• 16:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Why was it improperly deleted? <--remove deletion commentary as you've run straight to DRV with guns a blazin'--> I was about to say: If you want to do a merge, for which you'll need the page history both for practical reasons and for GFDL compliance, I'm happy to restore the history and leave a redirect as the most recent edit. However, since you've already sent it to DRV I'll restore and protect which seems to be a fairly standard procedure for deleted articles on DRV. --kingboyk 16:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)