User talk:Theresa knott/archive21

archive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Welcome to my talk page. If you've come to complain, whine, moan, question my judgment, my intelligence, my sanity, or tell me off in any way, that's fine. I'm a big girl who can take it. If you've come to chat, compliment me, have a laugh, or discuss articles that's even better.

What are you talking about?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by John121212 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hiya[edit]

like i have said i'm really am sorry please forgive me i'll delete that one i promise so how long you been a teacher i always wanted to teach Photography

nice profile emm so we are allowed to make a artical about him when the world knows him for real i'm really am confused cause the world does know him cause he is like one off the bigest scene kid photograhpers

i'm not jayjuvenile hes 14 and irish im over 30 and german —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famousfinder (talk • contribs) 21:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When the world knows him well enough to have multiple, independent, high quality sources that back up his claim to faim, that's when we can have an article. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i love working with kids i just dont like screaming ones —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famousfinder (talk • contribs) 21:34, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it. I've been a teacher for around 5 years. I love it. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! When he (we both know it's you really) gets famous then we'll be happy to host an article. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i got a promble with writing stuff i can't remember what it is called but i promise i won't writ a artical about juvenile —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famousfinder (talk • contribs) 21:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:SLJCOAAATR 1 is following me around[edit]

Since his block ended: he has posted nearly everywhere I have. I remove a tiny bit of information from an article, he reverts it in a matter of minutes. I post on a talk page: he posts nearly right away with an arguement. I feel he is just trying to stir up trouble, and needs to leave me alone. In the case of the reverts: I see it as a bit of ownership, because he thinks his view on notability is the way to go. I shouldn't have to be stalked by this user, just because he has a clear grudge against me. He doesn't agree with my edits, and decides to lash out on me in talk page posts. Perhaps I'm being a bit paranoid, but I feel he doesn't need to instantly reply to each and every comment of mine, just to argue with me. I clearly know he wont agree with much on me, I don't need to see a new post about it. RobJ1981 (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

big shocker!!! rob is acusing some person of stalking him (AGAIN!), and yet one more person is told to stay away from rob. rob is always the victim. i think thats now 50 people that have to syat away from rob. must be nice to have admin to cry to every five mintes. rob should be renamed doesnotplaywellwithoters1981! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.199.145.21 (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are posting on pages in which he is clearly interested and almost certainly has on his watchlist so talking of stalking is OTT in my opinion. Never the less I have asked him to stay clear of you for a few days to calm things down a little. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So now, I can't work on the articles that I normally work on?... -.- Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 16:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say that. I asked you to steer clear of RobJ1981 for a few days that's all. There is no need to immediately reply to his posts on a talk page for example. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, I'm on like, 10 hours a day, and I get pretty bored, so, whenever I see that someone is on, I reply right away, I'm not the type person to be all "Oh, look, someone repled, I'll a week..." lol. Y'know what I'm saying? Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 17:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do and I'm telling you not to do it to him! He has accused you of stalking him for crying out loud. So don't do it. He's not your mate. Leave him alone. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, though, I don't get why he keeps saying I'm trying to fight him...I told him to calm down, and out of that he gets "He's stalking me." and "He's trying to fight me." I mean, I replyed to both of you cmments here rather fast, does that mean I'm stalking you? No. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 18:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rob is such a peach!! please see his disruptive behavior vs skeletal, he has a long history of poor behavior and as been talkt to many time by admin. Not assuming good faith

accusing skeletal of own (not to mention stalking)

undoing others edits with no reason in edit summary

but please donnt tell rob to behave. he only has several rfc's, wikiquette alerts and ANI's and a ban against him. but somehow it is always other guy!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.198.252.151 (talk) 14:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop following Rob around SLJCOAAATR. I've reverted your edit at his talkpage. I'm pretty sure this IP is yours. D.M.N. (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this 3RR violation?[edit]

Since we (I and Sennen goroshi) can not leave a message to each other's talk page or edit article at the same time, how could we warn 3RR if one is engaging in a edit warring with others? Sennen picked up a similar article with which I edited.2008-08-06T20:55:28 my edit on dog meat. Sennen goroshi's edit warring on Bosintang (dog meat soup) I'm not sure whether it is a 3RR violation because I consider adding something first without a consensus is "reverting". There is no discussion on this at the talk page of bosintang. Why do I bother to report this because I feel he still select similar articles that I previously edit before like these.Comfort women Prostitution in South Korea Prostitution in South Korea--Caspian blue (talk) 13:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"how could we warn 3RR if one is engaging in a edit warring with others?" You don't. You stay away from him not getting involved in any way. He is entitled to edit similar articles to you. If he edit wars on them, that is none of your business. Others will deal with it. No need for you to get involved. Please do not check his contributions. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you did still tell me that these diffs are a 3RR violation or not. That is what I want to know. 3RR reports are often filed by uninvolved parties as he did to me as well. The above diffs prove that he is "checking on my contribution history first". Besides, you will see that the articles he edits recently have time stamps of me some times ago. Therefore, I automatically get to know his activities on articles on my "watchlist". So that is MY business. In order to avoid meeting him at the same time, I have to carefully check my watchlist and article history.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT FILE A 3RR report on him. What is it about leave each other alone that you find so difficult to comprehend? Stay away from him. Watchlist stuff is really easy. if he edits and it comes up on your watchlist, then obviosly you should not for 5 days. Easy. Stay away from him. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I have an intention to file a 3RR report on him, I would not bring this up to you. He knows 3RR rule quite well and 3RR warning is actually up for newbies. I just want you to warn him not to make disruptive edit wars and still checking on me and following me. Nevertheless, I believe he violated 3RR on the article similar to dog meat that I edited. However if I were in a similar situation, I'm pretty sure that he would file on me per our long history.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If he is editing disruptively then other admins can deal with that. Although no one is likely to agree with your interpretation of the 3RR. A first edit isn't a revert. I am confining my self to making sure that he doesn't stalk you. But you make this very hard if you don't steer clear of him. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank you for clarifying the notion of 3RR. That helps me. However, every time I edit some article, I have to check to see if I miss his edit on it within 5 days, so you make me have imperative ideas (of course, you think both are responsible for that probaton)--Caspian blue (talk) 15:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know that you archived the talk page, well, I think we're done on this conversation.--Caspian blue (talk) 16:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Still try your best not to even think of him. Before you know it things will have calmed down and you won't even need it. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tucker Max[edit]

Hi Theresa. I don't object if you wish to shorten Aharon42's block. My main concern is that he was edit-warring to include material that seems to violate WP:BLP. Aharon42 needs to be willing to follow our high standards for WP:BLP articles. EdJohnston (talk) 14:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ringo Star[edit]

Be advised that I have reverted your changing of this article to a redirect to Ringo Starr. AFD procedings are still underway, and such an article cannot be moved or deleted in this way until a consensus is reached. If consensus results in a decision to delete the content and make it a redirect, then this can be done afterwards. But in order for an AFD to be viable, the article in question needs to remain accessible. 23skidoo (talk) 14:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'm fine with that. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Out of line[edit]

No, I'm not. I posted a welcome message because he didn't have one, he responded in a rude and aggressive manner, so I will treat him with the same level of respect I recieved, and will continue to do so, everytime he makes contact with me. Chafford (talk) 15:58, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:59, 9 August 2008

(UTC)

In your own words Theresa: There is no nice way of saying this, so I'm going to be blunt, you're wrong, I saw the case on ani, I posted a welcome on his talkpage, he hadn't recieved one, and I thought it would help by outlining policies and making him feel less stressed through seeing a freindly addition to his talkpage, instead, I recieve a paragraph of accusations and personal attacks, so I will treat him with the same level of courtesy. None.

I requested talkpage protection so he would be forced to sit his block through and not spew out further accusations. Chafford (talk) 16:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't like what he was saying you could have simply stopped going to his talk page. Newbies are allowed to spew out accusations, he wasn't a vandal, he wasn't ranting, He was angry. Instead of trying to calm him down you got angry too! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either way, I don't accept being treated like a peice of shit by a new user, there was no need for his anger to be directed towards me, I did nothing wrong. Chafford (talk) 16:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know. But being angry and being rude to you isn't treating you like a piece of shit. Like I said, you know he was angry when you went to the page. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm angry now, I'm not spewing out abuse at you, so what exactly gives Aharon the right to be abusive? Chafford (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I not saying that he has a right to be abusive. I'm saying cut him some slack and don't make things worse. You went to his talk page after all. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note. Please don't go after people just because you see them on my talkpage. Even if I have angered you. S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. is far from perfect but he has done nothing to you so templating his talk page and reporting his username serves which purpose exactly. Note that none of the people who work on the articles he edits have found his username confusing, so why do you? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Theressa, for helping to try to make him a better user. I admit that I am far from perfect, but, there's no need to threaten me, and my friends because we talk to each other on our user talk pages. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 19:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your help in blockin' 'dem vandals, I award you this barnstar. Thanks for all your help! Happy editing! eric (mailbox) 18:37, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The thing is, I had many a disagreement with RickK over how to deal with vandals :-( Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Skeletal's use of WP as MySpace[edit]

Hi Theresa. I had a run in with User talk:SLJCOAAATR 1 and posted the following: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#WP_seemingly_used_as_a_social_network. I thought you might like to comment as you have dealt with them recently. Thanks for you insight and opinions. -- Alexf⁴² 20:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Audio links - I don't understand[edit]

Hello. I've noticed that you've removed the links I'd made to a free source of audio texts in French. I'd like to understand : those links add something to these articles, to my mind. Not only for the blind, but for those who want to have an access to the original versions, or who want to improve their French instructively. Moreover, litteratureaudio is the librivox of France : in all his aspects, it's a similar project. You seemed to approve the links to the latter, so I thought you approve it to the former... for french texts... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaiffelet (talk • contribs) 20:58, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest i was highly suspicious of you adding so many all at once. You have no other contributions to wikipedia and I suspect that you are involved in litteratureaudio and are here to promote it. That's why I reverted you. You might find the the French Wikipedia will accept the links but for the English one a recording of the french text has little value for the majority of our readers. Having said that I am but one person's opinion. Why not try suggesting the link on the article's talk pages and see if the editors of those articles agree to add them in. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a french wikipedian, and I've done a lot of contributions there. The links are presents there, and very well accepted. I've participated at the wikisonore project (on wikisource), but it failed - we were a few implied in it in France. But we success with litteratureaudio, and we have so many foreigners interested that I believe it a good idea to make them know that resource exists. Gaiffelet (talk) 21:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think important to add that litteratureaudio is an association without any lucrative purpose. Gaiffelet (talk) 21:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK fair enough. If you readd i will not revert although someone else might so i still think it would be a good idea to take it to the article talk pages. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"to take it"... You mean : each link I proposed ? Gaiffelet (talk) 21:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I mean go to the talk page of each article and suggest adding the link you want for that page. See what people say. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. That's a good idea. I'll do this later. It wasn't my way of doing on the french wikipedia, because I knew the moderators in the philosophical district. But that's not the case here... I'm new :-) Good night !Gaiffelet (talk) 22:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please help me?[edit]

Today I've been blocked for using Wikipedia as a MySpace, then I got unblocked and all the userboxes I've made got deleted (including the pictures that came with them) for routine clean. Which, to me, doesn't seem like a good reason to delete someone's userboxes. Come to my home page and you'll see. Unknown the Hedgehog 20:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She's aware of the fiasco. Here's two of Unknown's. I'll get the others.

This user hopes there's a Super Mushroom inside.

This user thinks that Shadow the Hedgehog is the greatest Sonic Character.

Think you could do all of mine as well, Theresa? Be warned, there's a good 30+ of them. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. Soul 20:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ill keep my answer short. No. Instead of worrying about stupid userboxes, you should concentrate on writing an encylopedia. I will take no part in helping restore things that i have always considered a huge waste of time. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

K then. We'll ask soemone else. Bye. Regards! Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. Soul 22:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abelian group[edit]

I want to use an equals sign in the lead summary but it breaks the template. I'm not brilliant with templates. Can that be fixed? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

James F. (talk) 22:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an accident[edit]

I do realise that there is a 5 day period which caspian and myself should wait before editing an article, edited by the other. Today caspian edited an article about 1 minute after I did, and in all fairness, I imagine that it was a mistake on his part, due to my name not being on the edit history when he started his edit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Korea_under_Japanese_rule&action=history

I know he and I have had history, but I am not so petty as to wish to see him blocked from editing, from what I assume was an innocent mistake on his part.

Sennen goroshi (talk) 12:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fair enough. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 23:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, I did not realized it until I got a message from Sennen goroshi on my talk page.[1] Well, first of all, I was surprised to get this message because we can't leave a message at each other's talk page that would cause a block to a person who violated the rule. Secondly, when I edited the article, I surely checked on the history to see if his name there and could not find him. He was 1 minute fast before me during my editing the article. Technically, we both broke the rule accidentally, but I don't know how you would deal with this.--Caspian blue (talk) 12:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sennen goroshi please don't post on Caspian blue's talk page. Even for something like this. Caspian blue, please don't edit the article for now.That's the only action that I think needs to be taken this time Theresa Knott | The otter sank 23:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abusive user[edit]

Theresa, I have a complaint against User:Straight_Edge_PXK. First at this post he calls anyone who disagrees with him "f*ing idiots." Secondly, In the section below that I provided sources (third party reviews) for the alternative-rock claims that other people were unable to provide. Based off of this, I made the appropriate changes in the article, and he is now edit-warring and reverting any change I make. Will you please have a look? Thanks! Wikiwikikid (talk) 15:12, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa, I see Tan is already talking to him about his post (after I made this complaint) so I'm going to post this on his talk instead. Please disregard or handle as you see fit, and thanks for your time. Wikiwikikid (talk) 15:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dropped a warning, as it looks like TK has been offline for a bit. don't bother with my talk page if you haven't already, I watchlist this page. Tan ǀ 39 15:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely worded warning. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 23:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I added to your page before seeing this... Wikiwikikid (talk) 15:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian/Myself[edit]

After seeing the results of your attempts to calm things down between Caspian and myself, I have come to the conclusion that threatening both of us with a block if we edit the same article within a 5 day period, is counterproductive.

All that has happened is that we both currently prevent each other from editing certain articles, and due to human nature, we both make an edit on those respective articles about every 4.5 days in order to maintain our right to continue editing those articles.

I would suggest/request that the threat of blocking either of us is removed, we are two editors who make constructive edits, and are able to use wikipedia and all of its dispute resolution procedures to resolve any content issues we may have. Neither of us have any history of major abuse, lengthy blocks, or sock-puppet history.

Without getting too personal, I am a little offended by having the sort of punishment inflicted on me, that I would give to one of my 10yr old students at school.

I do appreciate the work you are doing, and understand the logic behind the action you took, however it isn't working and might benefit from being looked at again. Sennen goroshi (talk) 13:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at it now. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 18:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sennen goroshi's continued vandalism[edit]

I think you take a proper action to Sennen goroshi's continued vandalism on Korean related articles. It appears that the probation just gives him have more chances to game your probation. He only picks articles that I previously edited but he did not or my turf (Korean cuisine, culture, history). His vandalism on hoe (dish), Korean independence movements, Empress Myeongseong, Korean Strait are very disruptive and he also shadowing my steps, selecting similar subject after I edit some article. After I edited gui (Korean grilled dishes), he suddenly began editing bulgogi, Korean barbecue. Similar cases can be found on on many articles. Right after I edited South Korea, he edited information regarding comfort women at Korea. His inserted citation is from Comfort women article and I confirmed that he distorted the information. Of course, his disruptive editing conflicts with other editors who have been editing such articles and very funnily, he accuses others "wiki-stalkers". He also tried to insert unfit category to Sakuradamon Incident which I got DYK this month, of course, he found out it to check my contributions. I think you would better change your probation to prevent such disruption by Sennen goroshi. I have not seen any constructive edits by him. --Caspian blue (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Empress Myeongseong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hoe (dish) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

My last edit2008-04-10T11:37:58
Sennen goroshi's edit warring with Badagnani (talk · contribs) as inserting false info.[2][3][4]
My notice at the talk page - I showed him a picture as an opposite evidence which has been already attached on the article
After my notice at talk, he self-reverted.[5]

Korea Strait (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

My last edit on the article [6]
Sennen broke the WP:NC-KO established agreement by both Korean and Japanese editors for 3 years as stating that some SPA's edit as "good faith edit".[7]
The talk page
his self-revert

Korean independence movement (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Blanking the lead without reason.[8]

There are too many such cases.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the articles that I used to edit are now restricted, I have moved on to other articles, which may not be of such interest to myself. I have a long history of editing articles relating to Korea, Japan and food - its just that I am restricted from editing many of those articles at the moment, as is Caspian - I don't wish this to be a tit for tat argument, however it seems clear that Caspian is playing this just as much as I am, making minor edits after 4.5 days, not I imagine to prevent me from editing, but more to prevent his right to edit that article being taken away. Well, I will rise above the insults and accusations, this is not the time or the place, however this restriction needs to be removed. Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, you had never edited bulgogi, Korean barbecue, Sakuradamon Incident, hoe (dish), The Chosun Ilbo before. Unlike you, on our overlapped articles, you will notice that my name recently. Theresa, please take a proper action to his disruptions. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, due to me being prevented from editing my normal articles, I have had to choose different articles to edit. This was caused by the sanctions imposed on us. Under the sanctions imposed I am allowed to edit any article I wish, as long as your edit is at least 5 days old. This is highly counterproductive and has just resulted in annoying both of us and restricting the articles we are able to contribute on. The restriction should be removed, and we should both be free to edit any article we wish, it seems wrong that you are unable to edit an article such as "hoe" that you obviously know far more about that I do - it also seems wrong that I am unable to edit certain articles merely because you edit them every four days. The fact that we are here (because we cannot use our talk pages to communicate) demonstrates that the restrictions on our editing is not working. Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But Caspian, thank you for pointing out that I self reverted many of the articles, when you pointed out that my edit was incorrect, it is nice to see that you don't try to hide my attempts at compromise. Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I did not point out on your mistakes, or had take a wiki-break, others or readers may not notice your disruptions. Besides, I'm not in service of fixing your mistakes all the time. You still have not restored blanked info and fix false info at Korea and Korean independence movement.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will have a look at those two articles, I am not promising to change them, but I will look at them and see if I think a new edit would be a good thing or not. Again this highlights the problems we are having, due to the restrictions in place, you have to make me aware, on another user's talk page, about problems you consider certain articles to have. If there were no restrictions, you could use revert my edits, rather than going through all of this. I imagine it is stressful for both of us. Sennen goroshi (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that i put the restrictions in place was to force you two to stay away from one another. It is pretty clear that that has failed so far. Never the less It'as too soon to give up yet. Yes the restrictions mean it's difficult for you to revert one another, that's a good not a bad thing IMO. I don't want you two editing the same articles for the time being. I've been kinda busy recently so I've not looked at your contributions in detail, but I'm off to do that now. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more reason why this is not working is that while I am not attempting to edit any articles, that I am currently prohibited from editing, the other user involved is requesting that other editors act as his meatpuppet and make edits on his behalf. Sennen goroshi (talk) 03:18, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meatpuppet? What a nice accusation. I don't want you to get a credit of my hard working and you inserted the info as if you solely do. This restriction is just unfair to me. I filed his wiki-stalking to ANI and why I have to clean his mess on Korean related articles? Theresa, you set the rule, so you're fully responsible for supervising us. You only give me hard time to upgrade articles. --Caspian blue (talk) 03:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian, perhaps this could be solved if you calmed down a little. Why don't you stop making ANI reports, stop putting essays with 25 diffs to show that another editor is in the wrong, stop taking offence to every edit and every editor that does not agree with your POV 100% I get annoyed with the fact that about 10% of my time on wikipedia is spent dealing with your complaints about me. I have had content disputes with many many editors, these disputes were so minor, that I have forgotten their names already - even disputes I had that got onto ANI, we dealt with using about 10 lines of text, not 100. Just edit some articles and if there is a dispute wait for consensus. hmmm let me guess, the response you are dying to type to this will include phrases such as "harsh accusations" and another 48 diffs designed to prove your point? well don't bother - just calm down and edit some articles - I wish to do the same. Sennen goroshi (talk) 03:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sennen, why have you followed me and then made personal/racist attacks? I would not forget your comment on Comfort women as "Chon prostitutes" and rape is a kind of "surprise sex". That is your view, and you falsified info on comfort women at the article of Korea. I wonder why you're still editing Wikipedia. Wikpedia is not your blog or playground. Would you stop such things her? What you're doing here unhelpful to anyone and to improve content. You also inserted false information so many times like the above.--Caspian blue (talk) 03:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am flattered that you take such an interest in me and my edits (well I would be flattered if it wasn't so creepy) - but it might be a good idea if you concentrated on editing wikipedia, rather than obsessing over edits that I made a long,long time ago. You should learn a little about content dispute, you go to ANI every time anyone makes a suggestion that some obscure Korean item might have actually come from China or Japan. Don't try to make me out as the number one arsehole of wikipedia, as opposed to you being wikipedia's white knight - one click on your block history shows that your background is just as messed up as mine..(actually you have been blocked more than I have) What is unhelpful is the time wasted by me, you, other editors, and other admins, who have to deal with constant bullshit complaints in ANI, rather than spending their time editing articles. I don't wish to waste any more of my time - I am happy to edit the same articles as you, and where there is an issue, I will happily wait to see who's opinion gains consensus. Sennen goroshi (talk) 04:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you are one time less blocked than me. My first block was the result of your wikistalking, and I was naively trapped by you. Your above edits are the same attempt to repeat your scheme. You really enjoy playing the same game, but you were always wonderfully saved by WP:AFG. Besides, unlike you, the people who got me blocked are indef. blocked for socking in turn. How nice. I can't prevent sockpuppeter's tactics. The reason why I remember your racist/sexist/comments is that whenever I visited your talk page, your talk page filled with same complaints. Thanks to you, I have been getting to know very dirty languages in English day by day. I do not wish you to vandalise Korean-related articles with your tilted POV. Why don't you create an articles? You have not done before. Trying a new thing is very good for a new start. --Caspian blue (talk) 04:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa, if you can keep tracks of your probation, that sanction is only disadvantageous for me. Therefore, I can't prevent his disruption on articles above. You have not commented on the evidences yet. You might be very busy, but this restriction only serve to feed Sennen's bad behaviors.--Caspian blue (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the current situation was only restricting you, then why was it me who requested for it to be changed? I didn't make this request in order to accuse you of anything, but as usual you take things to a personal level, and here we are again reading another 1000 word essay. Why don't we both just agree that these editing restrictions are not working, and request that they are removed? Things can be very simple, if you let them. Sennen goroshi (talk) 06:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa, the above cases are all his typical wrongdoings but I could not do anything because he is gaming your probation. This is not a personal level thing. He really deserves at least "topic-ban on Korean related articles" or another short block for his erroneous edits/ disruptive provocations. He takes credit of my hard working regardless of my polite asking on hoe (dish).[9] I had to ask another editor who just got off from his block because I wanted to prevent Sennen's continued vandalism on the article and end dispute as showing evidences. However the other user just took advantage of my expansion to create his desired article and demanded me to search info that he wants to know. Then, Sennen nicely followed me to the user's page and accused that I'm doing meatpuppeting.[10]. He checks out my contributions all the time and shadows my edit to provoke me. Why are you so calm on this and please don't say that I have to assume good faith on Sennen's long-time disruption. For another example is Kim Ki-duk his edit today 2007-09-10T 2007-10-03T 2007-11-03T [11][12][13][14][15][16] This new edit on Kim Ki-duk is nothing but a clear evidence of his intention to continue gaming your rule because he too knows well that I care the director per Talk:Kim_Ki-duk#Animal_Cruelty (I changed my screen name) and can't edit the article. WP:AFG should not be abused any more.--Caspian blue (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems strange that you should mention the Kim Ki-duk article as an example of gaming, I first edited that article in September 2007, while your first edit on that article was November 2007. oh and regarding your "polite request" - I didn't consider this to be that polite http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Badagnani&diff=prev&oldid=233835372

Because I don't want the editor take the credit for my hard working on expanding the history section of Hoe (dish).

I didn't follow you to user:Badagnani's talk page, I have had many interactions with that user and have left/read messages on his talk page many times in the past. You claim you were not trying to use a meatpuppet and that your request was to prevent vandalism, if that is true then why were you asking someone to add a history section? that does not seem like preventing vandalism, it just seems as if you would really hate for me to add something that could be considered to be constructive. I am a fair person, if you had not specifically mentioned my name, then I would have happily given you full credit for it, but seeing as you went out of your way to name me as someone who should get credit for an edit, I really cant be bothered to give you any credit for information provided - I did what was in the best interest of the article, I added the information, to give you credit would be a personal favour, and right now I don't see why I should go out of my way to do anything for you. Sennen goroshi (talk) 11:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And regarding me accusing you of trying to use meat puppets, I think that is pretty close to what you are doing. You are going to talk pages and asking people to make edits for you, on articles that you are restricted from editing. I am not the only editor who has come to this conclusion http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sjschen&diff=prev&oldid=233846448 Sennen goroshi (talk) 11:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might forget about why I asked the request to the user who just got out of his block for his disruption and has edit wars with you for two weeks (diffs are already provide above). Although I retracted my request from the user because he tried to use me and he altered my comment, he has accused so. So there is no merit on your accusation. Tell me why did you follow me to Korean Wikipedia as visiting my talk page. That is your another blockable breach. I had not reported it because I still tried to rely on good faith, but you fail to refrain yourself. Now it's time you earn what you deserve.--Caspian blue (talk) 12:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asking someone else to add content for you on a page that I have told you not to edit is definitely not constructive, and I will block you if you do it again. The purpose of the 5 day thing is for you two to stay away from one another. Asking others to edit for your does not help you tp stay away from him. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded the section to prevent him from adding false information from good faith. The user whom I asked did not add my addition and your threat is really a good one.

The fact that hechose not to add it does not negate your attempt to get him to meatpuppet for you. Please don't ever do that again.

You're just letting him doing disruptively. You read that he followed me to Korean Wikipedia and then falsely accused me of following him?

How can i possibly know wqhat he did on the Korean Wikipedia? But i can see you watching his edits here. Please stay away from him. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because his following me to even Korean Wikipedia is not your turf? This is nonsense.

I don't read Korean. if you have problems there speak to the local admins.

So your logic says that any article that I missed to edit within five days and then he made erroneous edits, and if I pointed out on it, that is my following him?

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!! Now you are getting it. Stay away from him. Do not even look at his edits to see if they correct or not. Stay away from him. Stay away.

Ha! You're only encouraging to check his history on articles that I put on my watchlist and edited before. Because I have to be very careful that he edited the article before me. Sometimes, bot hides recent updates on articles. He takes any opportunity to report me here (he first came to you, did you forget it already?) Wikipedia is a serious place to provide information, so your saying is nothing but any erroneous is okay to stay here. --Caspian blue (talk) 13:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're really no interested in meditating anything.

Yess!!!!!! I told you I'm not interested in mediating. I am enforcing a sepeartion of two warring editors. I don't want to be your (or his) pal. I don't want to help you two to get along i want you two stay away from each other. Stay away from him.

You just encourage us to continue this absurd competition until one of us will be blocked by your probation.--Caspian blue (talk) 13:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well then why not foil my evil game plan by simply staying away from him. That way i can't block you. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I be blocked instead of getting a credit of expanding the article to settle down the old disute (absurd POV claim that Korean Hoe originated from Japanase Sashimi without source) Sennen left his comment in English, didn't you see it? Oh well, you just don't want to see it because you're condoning his disruption. That's why you can't block Sennen.--Caspian blue (talk) 13:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sennen goroshi's another breach to your rule.[edit]

We can not leave any message to each other's talk page per your rule. However, Sennen goroshi begged me to email him to get out of this sanction together after his erroneous edit was pointed by me at Korea Strait [17] I had not answered to his request, because his wrongdoings were clear and I have no trust that his attempt is sincere, and I don't give my personal information to anyone especially him, given his long-time wiki-stalking. Then he follow me to "Korea Wikipedia".[18] The IP user, 203.165.124.61 (talk · contribs) is you.

I cannot police the Korean Wikipedia. Incidentally please do not email me. Keep everything on Wiki. This is probably going to end up at the the arbcom. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is another breach of Sennen goroshi because we can not talk to each other's talk page, and Sennen appeared to my user page at Korean Wikipedia to avoid Theresa's eye on this.

Well it's not a breech because I cannot possibly enforce a probabtion on another wiki. If you do not wish to talk to him simply don't reply. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only said what Sennen has done to articles. Besides, Sennen, you're the first one to come to Theresa for lifting our sanction because your several repeated wrongdoings were pointed out by me, so you visited here before I reported your disruption.

I'm sorry but i can see editing not isruption here. You need to read our policy on WP:AGF and stop accusing him of vandalising when he clearly isn't. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His blaking info of Korean independence movement and adding false information to hoe (dish) not a vandalism? Thank you for your comment. I do not wish you meditate this any more. You just condone things getting worse. --Caspian blue (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not mediating, and you do not have a choice here. Stop accusing him of vandalism, stop following hs edits, stay away from him! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're not meditating, why are we wasting our time here? You have to take responsibility for your decision. Do not say things that I have not done. I presented that he's shadowing my edit and following me and making false info!!!!!! Sakuradamon Incident is clear evidence of his wikistalking. I'm again very disappointed at you.--Caspian blue (talk) 13:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are shadowing his edits too. As I said before you enjoy the drama. I don't care if you find me disappointing. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide diffs that I shadowed him? Such false accusation is not tolerable and your another mockery that I enjoy the drama is really a "bad-faith" comment. You're an admin who should show a higher ethic to editors. I think you really enjoy watching dramas because you encourage us to make more disputes instead of proper meditation. If you can't take your responsibility, please defer to another admin. --Caspian blue (talk) 13:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

“

As much as I think An was a terrorist and deserved to be executed for his evil crime, it is against wikipedia's policy to use the word terrorist. However the term assassin should be added, as he assassinated someone. He is known for being an assassin - in his life he did nothing of note apart from kill someone. But anyway, terrorist - no, due to wikipedia policy. Assassin - yes, it should be added. Sennen goroshi (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

”

This is another poor attempt to degrade Korean independence activist, and then you inserted Category:Korean criminals to Sakuradamon Incident with that, I got DYI. Your Kim Ki-duk edit several hours ago is against a consensus except you and attempt to provoke me. Well, it is too clear that your contributions are all nothing but disruptive. Justice should be regarded within Wikipedia. --Caspian blue (talk) 11:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chage your rule[edit]

I only replied to your returning answer. Just ignoring it or labeling a spam since ignoring is your only suggestion. You have no interest in meditating us, so your probation has many flaws. You have to change your unauthorized rule because you encourage unnecessary dramas and instead of calming the situation.

I don't see how it encourages drama. It may not be effective in reducing drama but I'm hoping that given time you will eventually learn to leave each other alone. As for "I'm only replying to your answer" how silly. A reply of "Please do not email me" is not an answer.

You're the director of drama. Your probation have failed as you see and do not have no intention to modify your illogical rule for reducing disputes. As for your email, you would not really need to send me such imperative replies. Ignoring is good solution for you.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was forced to send you imperative replies because you totally ignored my repeated casual ones. It is important to state clearly and definitely that email from you is unwelcome so that that if it comes to me having to make a complaint to you isp about it everything is clearly documented. But have no fear. Once having done that I have no intention of reply to you by email again except to state "don't email me". I may even set up a filter to do it automatically if it becomes necessary. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not say such threat. All my emails are very short, not exceeding 1 to 4 lines The first one is to inform you the recent update of your page and the second is your false accusation on me. So please do not make more silly dispute on this.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not making threats. The fact that you emails are short means nothing. I asked you not to mail, you kept mailing me. I had to assume that it might continue indefinitely so I acted accordingly. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Liancourt Rocks, people can only revert one time per day, and the probation is regarded strong. However your unofficial one is way much stronger than the official probation without clear rules. Your 5 days probation is completely blocking one side and condones disruption of false information. You have no right Wikipedia is filled with false info. Like above, I point out on the false info or blanking by him, you just falsely accused that I'm following him. If you can't change your rule, then just defer to ANI, or others. You accusation that my expanding with reliable sources is disruptive is really illogical. I really can't follow your rule.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My probation isn't one sided. It's completely fair on the both of you. Your trouble is that you want to be free to revert him but he not to be free to revert you. As I've said before to you. If he makes a problematic edit, someone else will deal with it. You have repeatedly accused him of stalking you yet you continue to monitor his edits and stalk him. Sorry no. You need to stay away from him. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't get the point or try not to get it. I don't want myself only free to revert edit. Please do not distort my statement. The above logical suggestion is for both of us and for you who do not bother to do anything. I already presented enough diffs. The stalking to my Korean page is a friendly gesture and good faith conduct? He visited my page, and then you rather falsely accused me without diffs. His comment written in English is also invisible to you. Other normal and authorized probation like the above is for meditating editors from both sides, and you simply misread what I'm saying. As much as I do not want to meet him, I really don't want to visit your page. --Caspian blue (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but the diffs you have presented so far look like editing not like vandalism which is how you described then. As for the korean wiki, no i do not bother going there. I'm sure they have admins there, so ask them to deal with any problems on that wiki. I'm sorry if i am missing what you are saying, I'll take another look tomorrow. Perhaps I'll see it differently then. As for not wanting to visit my page. I understand but I'm not comfortable about talking to you in private. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got an answer from admin there that I have to deal with the case within here, because his stalking is due to dispute with me here. His contribution is only one comment at my talk page, so they can't enforce anything. The email is only to inform you the recent update since you're absent. I don't want to even talk with you for such things, other than editing contents. Just why don't you change your rule from 5 day probation to one revert per day or two day.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't work. He edits, your revert, he reverts.Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why first edit is regarded "revert"? He edits, I revert. Or I edit, and he revert. Then take the dispute to the talk page. End of story. Like hoe (dish), you prevent me to expand the history section as the two (Sennen and someone I foolish believed that he can add the content) request to implement more content. However, they can't because sources are all from Korean sources, and they don't read Korean. --Caspian blue (talk) 15:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first edit isn't regarded as a revert. unless it is a revert. Plus you accused him of stalking you and a single revert rule would not stop that. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will refrain from editing the "hoe" article for the time being, it is not something I know so much about, and perhaps he would be able to offer more to the article than I can. I edited it today, so as I won't edit it again, Caspian will be able to edit it in five days time. I have no issues if the 5 day rule is relaxed on that particular article, as I have no plans to edit it in the near future, due to his obvious desire to improve the article.

Caspian in future if you have an strong desire to add something to an article that I am editing, please address me on the talk page of the article in question and perhaps I can help you out, I do not expect/desire the same from you - you may continue to make edits every 4.5 days if you wish, or perhaps we could co-exist and cooperate. The ball is in your court. Sennen goroshi (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Rolles[edit]

Well Rick is short for Richard, and the name COULD be "Rick Rolles", which is that well-known internet meme of being "Rick-rolled". Clever little twist I though, still blockable edits though of course. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh! Thank you. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miscalculation[edit]

While I don't agree with your rule because I and the other feel that your unofficial rule is not a good remedy to resolve anthing, I miscalculated my 5 day sanction. Therefore, I turn in myself before Sennen goroshi reported it (he has the right but that would be very displeasant). Although I self-reverted the article Korean barbecue (nothing to be controversial though. I just wanted to clean up too many images and inserted an image that I got a permission via OTRS in a condition that I promise to add an image to a photographer. I'm obliged to keep it and the person wants to know how his images are used in English Wikipedia). Well, I would not edit today from now, and the block is fully up to you. However, if you block me then, please don't leave a disdainful note like "gaming the rule" or "disruptive". This is a pure matter of my dumb math. You have been not kind to me (drama queen, love dramas etc), so I don't want to get further shocks by you since I'm reporting myself. However, I would ask other people on whether your probation has a validity in the future. Good day.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was blocked for a similar miscalculation, so a block would seem only fair - however you did report yourself and your edit was not disruptive, so as the other party involved, I can't see any constructive reasons for you to be blocked. To be honest, I couldn't care less if Caspian is blocked or not over this

. Sennen goroshi (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm now I am in a bit of a pickle here. On the one hand, you told me about it yourself, self reverted and Sennen Goroshi states that he couldn't care less if you were blocked as he cannot see anything constructive reason for blocking you. On the other hand you have used my block of him as a weapon to make personal attacks against him "As for block, you was recently ("just two weeks ago") blocked for your trolling and wrongdoings". [19]. So what am I to do. Perhaps this will work, I'll not block you this time but if you ever try to use his block log against him again I will block you. Of course he should not use yours against you either! Does that seem fair? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the generosity. Also, I'm very surprised to see Sennen goroshi's opinion and I might retry good faith on him. If (unfortunately) a similar situation happens to him, I think he can have a same chance like this for equality. Of course, I promise not to say like that, and am wiling to remove the wording at the talk page. At that time, I was very upset at him, and I thought the current status of the article served well to content both Japan and Korean side, and the article has a history for tendentious arguing. Anyway, I will of course, follow your offer rather than getting a block and will not edit English Wikipedia today for de facto serving the time. However, could you change the stressful probation a bit or try to believe us to make a peace by ourselves? I'm getting paranoid with the 5 day sanction so does Sennen goroshi. If somebody intervenes in our dispute and we ourself present reliable sources for our claim, that could easily be resolved or calmed down so far like hoe (dish). Would you consider my "persistent" request one more time? I know in this situation, I'm saved by the generosity, but the probation is still very stressful. Thanks. --Caspian blue (talk) 21:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well since you've both asked for a lifting of the 5 days, then I am happy to do so provided that you both are willing to agree by the following:

1) Assume good faith ( I mean it!)

2) No revert warring, settle disputes on the talk page.

3) No personal attack, including referring to each other's editing history, block logs etc. Neither of you are angels here.

4) No deliberately winding each other up, and no accusations of stalking etc. You edit similar articles, you need to be able to collaborate.

5) Assume good faith. I know i said it before but it is important. We are all here to write an encyclopedia, and we all want it to be best the best encyclopedia the world has ever seen.

Is that acceptable? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good enough and I gladly accept your offer. I'm relieved to hear the news.--Caspian blue (talk) 21:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I have always had good faith regarding Caspian, I just think we have different opinions regarding content, he obviously cares a lot of his edits and has principals, and I know I have annoyed him in the past with edits that were not 100% constructive. I am looking forward to the day we contribute together on an article - that might not happen on a Korea/Japan dispute related article due to our locations, but on something less controversial, I see no reason for us not interacting in a constructive manner. Although going on a revert rampage is obviously a bad thing, I have no problem if he looks at the edits that I have made since the 5 day restriction started, and reverts what he thinks is necessary, if he does so and I do not agree with those reverts, I will address the issues via the article talk page, not by immediately undoing his edits. Sennen goroshi (talk) 04:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a note to your comment about Death Note[edit]

Hi, Theresa, I just added a note plus references to your earlier deletion of a reference from the Death Note entry. It's on the Death Note talk page, where I've asked for comments before I rewrite that portion of the article. Timothy Perper (talk) 19:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Degenerate-Y[edit]

I can't thank you enough! And to be honest, you were right. This morning there it was, a sockpuppet warning. I kept saying to myself, "Who Cares?" I didn't do anything wrong, I just wanted a clean slate, and to be taken seriously. If there was a barnstar for this, I'd give it to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 20:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm glad to have helped. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented at the SSP page. I also don't like the fact that he is parading his "victory" here, here and here. Please comment back. D.M.N. (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings about the winning thing Ok? I hate it when people hate me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 21:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one hates you. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one "hates" you, me and Darrenhusted just thought you're accounts violated WP:SOCK. And, sometimes it can be considered in bad taste to remove legitimate topics from your talkpage. Theresa, I've made a further comment on the SSP page as well. D.M.N. (talk) 21:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Topic Ban[edit]

Is that Mmbabies topic ban still in force? I need to know because it may affect any future RFAs, and I'm not really interested in the Mmbabies case much anymore anyway since it's (s)he is historical on Wikipedia. GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case no, the ban is not in force. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Endwits[edit]

Do you seriously think User:Endwits is a sockpuppet of me? I'm just wondering if you'll start a new case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 00:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, haven't made up my mind yet. If it is you I suggest you stop using it and just stick to the one account.There is no need to start a new case. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you I am not Endwits--Degenerate-Y (talk) 23:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't much care to be honest. I still haven't made up my mind, but so what? It doesn't matter. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 00:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to leave this user a note on his talkpage based on the recent edits. D.M.N. (talk) 21:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OmG he's so bad at this it's funny. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 23:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know what is going on here. I am new to wiki and do not know how to post to this board. I was not aware that you have to use the "~"x4 times to sign your post. I am Endwits and NO other user. I do not care in the least what Theresa thinks and I owe her no explanation, and she will not receive one beyond this response. Endwits (talk) 04:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa, I think your making a big mistake accusing Endwits. I looked at his contributions, and he said he might just contact another Admin. Don't be so sure that your gonna laugh at him.--Degenerate-Y (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd welcome that. I haven't accused him of anything, I asked a question of him because his editing looked suspicious and he went nuts. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The edit summary here might make you laugh... D.M.N. (talk) 21:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She/He? Bloody 'ell I didn't realise my picture looked that rough! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should be the one laughing to think a person like you is giving me orders. When will you get it through your head that I did not sign in under two user names???? I now have reported you to wiki admin. I did NOT sign in under two user names, and I will see this taken to the top. You trying to give me orders; I really do find that funny :) :); and I do believe that is in violation of wiki policy. Endwits (talk) 23:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you did. here. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 23:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editor requesting unblock[edit]

Hello Theresa. See User talk:Johnmccainisretarded for an unblock request. You might want to comment there. Not sure if you want him to change his user name, or if you feel he should be blocked from editing under any account. (Since account creation is blocked, he won't be able to create a new name without assistance). Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:05, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When i first asked him to change his name I had in mind softblocking the account so that he could create a new one. However he then went on to vandalise, hence the hardblock. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

afd[edit]

while from your description this guy has done himself no favours, i believe the general feeling these days is that referring to articles relating to living people as being vanity ones is unneccesary: unkind, potentially embarrassing and that type of stuff. 86.44.24.187 (talk) 05:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you make a valid point. I've removed the word, Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5 sentences in the body + 3 highlighting gravamen of excerpts[edit]

1. Would an awareness of the following excerpts clarify what and why I have construed this complaint as on of using WP:NPA as naught but a gambit in a quite different game than one having to do with allegations bad behaviour which needs to be reprimanded? 2. In the hour before Caspian blue created the complaint thread at WP:AN/I, I tried to move relevant postings from my personal talk page to the Afd discussion thread so that the subject context could become the center of focus; and at the time, I thought the fact that they seemed to disappear was some systems glitch or that I was doing something wrong. 3. It didn't occur to me until some time later that there were Caspian blue's reverts; and when I figured it out, I tried to ask an administrator to restore these lost postings. 4. If the following do help clarify the thread at Wp:AN/I, please suggest a non-controversial way to introduce them. EXCERPT A. According to Caspian blue, my very first personal attack was on LordAmeth's talk page, e.g., "You were very sensitive at my choice of "against" to merge under "Korean mission to Edo" and then denounced it as "premature, unhelpful, discouraging" by your own definition.

deleted by Caspian blue

Do not pretend to know nothing. You did not realize what you're doing here? Look through your own wording again. You were very sensitive at my choice of "against" to merge under "Korean mission to Edo" and then denounced it as "premature, unhelpful, discouraging" by your own definition. Then your word choices and make drama is not even surprising. Don't make a play with me, you know what your poor analysis on my contribution history, editing habits, and intention for merging the three articles are referring to and going to be. That is called "personal attacks".--Caspian blue (talk) 23:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC) ==>23:37, 28 Aug[reply]
EXCERPT B: According to Caspian blue, the issue at hand is my alleged "bashing" and "anti-Korea sentiment," e.g., "It is quite obvious that your anti-Korean sentiment covers your eyes and your head to not think reasonably."
deleted by Caspian blue

--This thread was copied from User Talk:Tenmei#YOur Personal attacks.[20] ==>23:51, 28 Aug]

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseon tongsinsa. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. I have enough, what are you thinking? You would better retract your bashing comments against me. I'm not tolerable with your continued personal attacks. You pulled out irrelevant matters (comfort women, why are you using the non-English term on contrary to your claim for WP:ENGLISH?) Your personal attacks make yourself pathetic. Please do not resort to such behaviors. Think before saying vicious ad homimen attacks.--Caspian blue (talk) 23:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC) ==>23:51, 28 Aug[reply]
Be more specific. NO. We aren't going down this path. --Tenmei (talk) 23:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC) ==>23:51, 28 Aug[reply]
You ruin the whole AFD page with your rant and irrelevant matters (Liancourt Rock, Comfort women and my contribution histgory). It is quite obvious that your anti-Korean sentiment covers your eyes and your head to not think reasonably. If you can't remove such thing from the page and make a proper apology, well, I would seek normal procedures. --Caspian blue (talk) 23:21, 27 August 2008 ==>23:51, 28 Aug
EXCERPT C: According to Caspian blue, the issue at hand is my alleged "anti-Korea bashing," e.g., "Apology and removing your anti-Korean bashing craps from the page are strongly required."
deleted by Caspian blue

You pretend not to how vicious languages you have intentionally chosen. I quote the notable example.

“ The sum of Caspian blue's contributions affirm my dour pessimism. If Caspian blue is joined by other like-minded tag team editors who similarly feign wounded indignation, angered offense, and stumbling-block misunderstandings as a disruptive tactic, the success of that strategy is virtually assured. Any hopes for collaborative work on this article are dashed. In the face of what seems like adolescent nationalistic ardour, any scholarly collaboration becomes quickly pointless -- especially in light of the entirely ineffective dispute resolution processes now in place.
Wikipedia has been proven to be quite ill-equipped to deal with a concerted, agenda-driven attack of the sort which has been directed at Liancourt rocks. Without a strategy to avert the kind of failure which characterizes that article about an outcrop in the what the Koreans call the Eastern Sea and others call the Sea of Japan, this quickly becomes worse than a waste of time. The dignified and sober Taemyr asks "What is best?" Stifle thinks deletion is a better course of action. I myself don't know, but I would invite consideration of the following:
”

~~Apology and removing your anti-Korean bashing craps from the page are strongly required. --Caspian blue (talk) 23:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC) ==>23:57, 28 Aug[reply]~~

~~5. This message has five sentence in the body and three which emphasize the gravamen of the complaint in three excerpts. --Tenmei (talk) 15:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)~~[reply]

Try talking English not goobledegook, as I am not that fluent in the latter. I have no idea what you are trying to say in your first point.
Sigh and again! Are you trying to say he deleted your attempts to focus the discussion? Please provide links.
Ah point 3 is one i actually understand.
Likns to diffs not excerpts. Do you know how to do this? I rarely read excepts, I haven't read those above nor do I intend to. Most other people do not either. Diffs cannot be tampered with, they cannot be taken out of context and even better they take up only a tiny amount of space on the page. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you may recall, you suggested that I try to limit a message to five sentences. I thought to achieve three purposes with this message: (1) to find out if there were an reasonable or appropriate way to introduce this "new" information, (2) to find out if it might be perceived as helpful in the context, and (3) to demonstrate that I would try to modify my writing in line with a suggestion you made.

Instead, I'm simply asking how to restore some of what Caspian blue deleted from amongst my contributions to an AfD discussion thread which is now archived: [21] [22] and [23].

If presenting this request to you is somehow improper, where or to whom should I have applied for restoration of what I consider to have been wrongly deleted. --Tenmei (talk) 02:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's much better, thank you. My first instinct is to say don't bother. If the discussion is archived there seems to me to be very little point. But I haven't looked at the AFD debate yet, I'll take a look now. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK I've had a look and I still say don't bother. Part of his reason for deletion is that you never had his permission to copy and paste. Now this is bullshit, you do not need permission to copy and paste people's stuff here, however had you linked to the diff where he added it instead he would not have been able to feign indignation. I'd say chalk this one up to experience. No one reads archives anyway. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mariański Choir copyvio[edit]

Why have you rv the copyvio warning? It seems to me it is in fact a copyvio.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From where? What's the point in saying something is a copyvio if neither he no you states where it is supposed to be copied from? 19:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)Theresa Knott | The otter sank

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice[edit]

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help! I've been deleted![edit]

Dear Theresa, my user page was deleted by you in July. I think that you think I'm a sockpuppet, but really I'm not, I'm a real boy (even though I don't exist because I'm deleted!!) so if you could reinstate me, I'd be grateful, thank you! --Truthsayer62 (talk) 12:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstate what exactly? You have never edited your userpage. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 12:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll just create some content then, thank you --Truthsayer62 (talk) 13:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do Me A Favor?[edit]

Well, a random vandals just royally messed up my userpage. I was wondering if you could fix it up, and block the vandal? It won't let me undo the edits. I think I know who it is, though. Thanks. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 02:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Someone else did so already. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^{Soul teh Hedgie} 02:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You[edit]

For some reason I didn't get the message box from your message on my page and I can't recall blanking to remove it. I went through the archives of the discussion you linked me to, while I didn't realize some people saw me as someone with an attitude problem I thank you for defending me in regards to someone posting 3 welcome messages on my page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.224.167 (talk) 22:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Model releases[edit]

Hi. I wanted to know what you thought of this image. Specifically, I'm concerned about the use of an image with an idenfiable facial features, and no model release, paired with the description on the image and the pages it's used on. Your thoughts? Nandesuka (talk) 11:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look carefully at the image in full resolution you can see that the face has been digitally obscured and the hairline altered, so i don't think the image does have identifiable facial features. That combined with the fact that the man is not named, but is clearly an adult and is out in the open so would not have a reasonable expectation of privacy leads me to think that the image is fine morally. However IANAL and so have no idea whether it's ok on legal grounds. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 10:07, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

I put the old RfC to MfD at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Theresa knott. MBisanz ^talk 14:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's now been speedily deleted by Newyorkbrad. how do you turn this on 15:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. 05:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for clarification re: Teletubbies[edit]

Hi Theresa....I was just wondering, since I'm essentially clueless at reading protection logs--did you just reduce the level of protection on the Teletubbies article? If so, I wish you'd reconsider; that article, each time it's unprotected, gets mercilessly hammered by IP's (and, for that matter, confirmed accounts). If you look back through the history, you'll see the pattern: article is protected, emerges from protection, gets bombarded, is re-protected, etc. I see nothing to indicate a change in this pattern....mightn't we say "better safe than sorry" and move on with the semi-prot? (Sorry to bother you, but I get so very tired of the whole "Tinky Winky is teh ghey because he carries a PURSE and wears the GAY TRIANGLE on his head...."....I mean, really, after all, isn't Pat Robertson dead? or retired, or SOMETHING??? :) Anyway, thanks for keeping an eye on it... Gladys J Cortez 18:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But keeping it semiprotected forever is seriously problematic too in that it discourages actual editing. It has been protected since February, surely it's worth trying unprotection for a bit. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 05:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK 2.0 Voting is open :-)[edit]

A warm hello to all those signed up as guarantor members of the soon-to-be-rebooted UK chapter! Voting is now open over at meta - there's tons of information online over there, and the mailing list has been very active too. Discussion, comment (and even the inevitable technical gremlins!) are most welcome at the meta pages, otherwise please do send in your vote/s, and tell a friend about the chapter too :-) Privatemusings (talk) 22:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)I'm not actually involved in the election workings, and am just dropping these notes in to help try and spread the word :-) I welcome any or all comment too, but 'election related' stuff really is better suited to the meta pages :-)[reply]

Wikimedia UK 2.0 Vote[edit]

Hi you signed up as being interested in being a memeber of wikimedia UK 2.0. Just a reminder the that the vote for the inital board at m:Wikimedia UK v2.0/Vote ends next Saturday (September 25th).Geni 03:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wired for books links[edit]

These are links to free online interviews with the authors that are the subjects of the authors, in streaming audio on a site produced by Ohio University. I don't see why they should be removed. Postdlf (talk) 19:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because we are being spammed by them. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:47, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are being spammed by useful, relevant links to a reliable non-profit site? Seriously, please explain further why these are a problem. Postdlf (talk) 19:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is too bad, but that doesn't mean every link automatically has to go. I added the page as a reference for an entry in List of HIV-positive people‎. Which right now means a BLP has no reference in that list. I already reverted you but you again removed it. A notice on the talk page after the second revert would have been nice btw. Garion96 (talk) 19:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I restored it. Blind removal of all of these links does not seem at all constructive. If you think any links are irrelevant to a given article, then remove it from those articles. Postdlf (talk) 19:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Links added by people with a COI are spam. The vast majority of the links have been added in mass additions many were added by using a template for crying out loud. (So they can copy and paste without having to actually type the name of the page in I suppose) I have no problem with people adding links to useful websites but i have a big problem with people coming from those websites and mass linking from here to there, and doing it on a massive scale. If wikipedians decide the links are useful and relevant then that's one thing, but someone from Wired for books doing it? I'm sorry if I accidentally deleted genuine links too. I shall give it a rest now. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object so much to the first removal, but the second removal was not needed since indeed a "wikipedian", ergo me :), thought it was useful. Garion96 (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't deliberate! I was working from the external links special page and was hitting refresh every now and then to stop myself having to scroll down the list. So when you reverted me, the page reappeared on the list. As I was going quite quickly I didn't notice that I had already done that one. Sorry about that. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. No problem. Garion96 (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user:Alexf's deletion of John Dahlbäck[edit]

Today I created the John Dahlbäck article on the Swedish DJ/producer who was recently featured on the UK's biggest dance music radio show BBC1's Essential mix. Granted, the first version was by no means perfect, but the Discogs would have proved the notability of the subject. I go away from the computer for an hour, and when I come back user:Alexf has not only proded the article (which I coul've lived with by contesting the prod and adding some more sources), but also deleted it! No more than two hours could have passed between my creation of the article and Alexf's deletion of it. That can't be right.

When I look at his/hers talkpage, I see he/she has got quite a few complaints on other page deletions. Frankly, I'm concerned about Alexf's deletion routines. He/she doesn't seem to be taking the adminstrator's resonsibility seriously. So, my question is, where can I record formal complaints on certain admins actions. Is it over at WP:ANI or is there a special place for these cases? Regards, Sebisthlm (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, Alex is a he. Second, the article was tagged as speedy by another editor and deleted by Alexf as notability not asserted (A7). There was not a PROD on it, which would have made it stay for 5 days. As for complaints about my deletion of this article, you could go to Deletion Review. If you do, please be prepared to defend your rationale and check the deletion facts. As an established editor you should know the difference between a PROD and a Speedy. You should also be civil in your interactions instead of using the tone of the message you left on my page. As per complaints on my Talk page, any admin that works with CSD or PROD gets lots of rants from angry users for having deleted their page (see WP:Notability and WP:OWN). As for why are you bothering Theresa with all this I've no idea (sorry Theresa for intruding). -- Alexf^(talk) 16:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to say to Theresa that by no means did I want to drag you into any potential conflict with user:Alexf. All I can say is that my original question where I could bring up complaints on the deletion process of an admin was totally sincere from an (in these situations) unexperienced contributor to a more experienced one. The reason why I asked you was that you had posted some comments on Alexf's talk page concerning another complaint. If you think I in any way bothered you I apologize, it was never my intention to do so. As for my question it has been answered by Alexf himself, so I won't be needing an answer from you. As for my and Alexf's disagreement, it would probably be better vented in another forum. Respectfully, Sebisthlm (talk) 02:58, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allegory of the Cave[edit]

Hello Theresa. I'd like you ask you to consider doing a diagram for the above article. The old one (which can be seen here:[24], under the Plot section) proved unsatisfactory. The related discussion can be found here: Talk:Allegory_of_the_cave#Illustration. Kudos for your good work and thanks for your consideration. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 16:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I don't mind giving it a go although I'm not promising how well it will turn out. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for giving it a go; and for your prompt attention. Graphically I think it's fine but the philosophical content may need some tweaking. Please see my comment here: User_talk:RJC#Allegory_of_the_Cave_illustration. I'm urging him to collaborate to make this thing happen! Regards, Alcmaeonid (talk) 14:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Hopefully I'll get enough feedback to create something acceptable to everyone. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

University of Hertfordshire 1[edit]

Not sure what to do about that anon-- they don't listen to talk page notes or comments in the source. I asked for semiprotection but they said it didn't happen often enough. It's been nine times now in the last few months, most in the last couple of weeks. :/ The Wednesday Island (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep reverting them seems to be working for now. I think semiprotection isn't needed at the moment. Let's watch and wait for a bit longer. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you possibly drop in a word in the discussion with our anonymous editor (who has now gained an account) to say that official policy is not something I'm making up to mess with him? I feel rather like I'm the only one answering him on the talk page at present :/ The Wednesday Island (talk) 19:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering when I should consider actually complaining to admins (well, I suppose I'm complaining to you in writing this) about the personal attacks he's throwing at me. It's been twice now, but maybe I should wait until he does it some more. The Wednesday Island (talk) 12:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wait for a bit. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh Matron!Oyebo (talk) 13:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

If my family died for anything in two world wars it was for plump schoolmarms and anally retentive Oxford rejects to try and arse me about. Okay, that was hilarious. You should consider a career in standup comedy. The Wednesday Island (talk) 21:35, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's been allowed plenty of rope know and has proceeded to hang himself as expected. I'm going to block him the next time he steps out of line. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:41, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For which you will gain my heartfelt thanks. The Wednesday Island (talk) 21:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image upload from en.wiki to commons[edit]

I've uploaded one of yours images on Commons from here. I don't know if I have to change something in the article or not. Thank you for your work --CristianCantoro (talk) 22:16, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No you don't need to do anything to the article. Thanks for letting me know. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

University of Hertfordshire[edit]

Any edit to the University of Hertfordshire page can be backed up via legal documents. You may have had a valid point regarding the first deletion however Berryman,Lace & Mawer are the lawyers for U.H. What is the problem with a factual statement? Also todays amendment had references and citations and should-by your own rules-have stood.I've had articles/stubs put on Wikipedia previously on a variety of topics and neve had a problem.Que pasa Ms Knott? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oyebo (talk • contribs) 13:59, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please put headings on my talk page. I don't see any references in anything that you have added I'm afraid. Plus there is an issue of undue weight being attached to the supposed incident. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you were facing a 20 yr stetch for a crime you never committed would it be "undue weight"?OyeboOyebo (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!! This is an encylopedia nmot a personal blog. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC) A miscarriage of justice is serious. Go easy on the exclamation marks,theres a good girl. OyeboOyebo (talk) 12:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

You don't seem to understand that this is an encyclopedia not a soapbox. Your smarminess will make you no friends here btw. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 12:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An enyclopedia that Wednesday Island" said was more interested in citations that truth. Can you cite where I was smarmy?As to making friend seems like you 1.Had a coterie going all along. 2.Prejudged me immedaitely. Never mind I am sure some "great sex with someone who loves you" is around the corner.Try onanism. OyeboOyebo (talk) 13:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Yes now you are finally getting it!We are not interested in "The truth" we are interested in what can be proved to be true via references. As for the tone you continue to take with me, you only make yourself look bad, Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ms Knott, Wikipedia is against censorship.Could've fooled me.I am uncertain of where to put my final comment as you lot are all over the place but here seems good enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "ELEMENTS OF AN ARREST MADE IN MAY 2004 BREACHED THE ECHR AND HERTFORDSHIRE CONSTABULARY IS TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE ECHR IN STRASBOURG OVER THE WRONGFUL ARREST OF AN INNOCENT MAN" this appears in the Herts Constabulary entry and has been there for a while.Don't you or your pals edit/censor that then?All I want is that sentence to stand in the U of Hertforshire entry.I can provide a reference for the ECHR citation.Oyebo (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

1) Where is the link? I have no idea what you are talking about and am unlikely to if you don't provide a link.

2) What has this got to do with the university anyways?

3) Even if true, how is it relavent to an encylopedia article about the university?

Theresa Dear Theresa (if I may) the link was already given, Herts Constabulary page. It has to do with the university as the arrest and false allegation were made there and U of H were complicite in a cover up. It is true. (C'mon now you wouldnt like me to call you a liar now). Its relevance is that the wiki entry should be even handed not a bloody recruitment advertisementOyebo (talk) 23:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

yes i would want to call you a liar. Please prove otherwise by providing a proper link to an external source such as a newspaper or go away. A link is something where I click and it takes me straight there, and it needs to say exactly what you have been saying or I'm not interested. I have repeatedly asked ou for a source and you have failed to provide me with one. Nothing goes in without proof. (And even then it might not go in because of undue weight issues, but without proof this conversation is pointless). Theresa Knott | token threats 07:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)I've tried being nice with you. No va as the Spanish say. Firstly you state that you want a newspaper link (like the one that said I was a black activist?D.Express 1985.I'm not black.) Then you say you PROBABLY wouldnt put it in. Go on admit it-you pre judged me and if I were to drag the Law Lords in here you'd say it was inadmissableOyebo (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I noticed both U of H and Herts Constabulary quote and reference from their own websites.BY THAT RATIONALE I CAN SET UP A WEBSITE AND USE IT AS A CITATION??????

Sigh. I have repeatedly asked for a references and repeatedly stated that even with one i don't agree it's even relevant but without one I'm not even going to discuss it. Express 1985 is not a reference! Nothing you have added so far looks even remotely like a reference and until you can provide one we have nothing to discuss. As for setting up your own website and using as one then obviously no that is not acceptable either. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yet it is acceptable for plodscum and University of Hertfordshire scum.Double standards.Yes by your own admission.Oyebo (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Not by my admission since you never provide a bloody link to what you are talking about. It's all so much gibberish to me. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:09, 30 October 2008

(UTC)As we would say in Pentridge (or Saughton) you are all over the place. 1.Whats this about putting Susan Ls stuff into this? 2.What d'ya mean about myself?Oyebo (talk) 21:25, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. I don't what you are talking about

2. It's so obviously about you. If not then you'd easily be able to provide that reference i keep asking about. Also "(like the one that said I was a black activist?D.Express 1985.I'm not black.)" Kinda indicates that you are talking about yourself.

3. Learn to use a talk page please and leave a space before replying. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop all the "please" jive. If someone is obese and they are commented on as obese is it 1.True 2.False? This detracts from the central issue. Hertfordshire "University" have a damn sight more money than an individual.Therefore it would appear that any derogatory statements are deleted.Oyebo (talk) 21:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't give a fuck if you say I'm fat. I was referring to you calling someone from Cambridge an Oxford reject. I don't care how much money an institution has. We are writing an encylopedia and you will abide by our editing standards or you will leave. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly I object to you swearing at me. I never once in all your nastiness swore at you.Perhaps its the fact that I served this country. In army and navy uniform. Often sworn at but had to keep my cool.Secondly Oxford reject is friendly banter. I was at a Russell gropu Uni for my M.Litt so I've no problem with that affectionate term.Yes you do care how much money an institution has.Finally you made up your mind long ago that I was to be banned.Be honest if not with me than with yourself.Oyebo (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise if you took offence at my swearing but trust me - it's not friendly banter. Don't do it. And yes you are right. I had made up my mind and am in fact expecting you to insert the sentence again. As soon as you do i will block you. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Querida you have already decided to block it.Stop the hypocracyOyebo (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that I haven't done it yet should tell you something. I will block if you do it again, but if you don't then i will not. There are plenty of other pages on this encyclopedia, perhaps you want to edit those. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final comment before I head off. The page for Hertfordshire Constabulary has the identical sentence I wanted inserted anywhere on the U of H page. Yet it wasnt edited, deleted or comented on.It has been there for ages.Double standards?Oyebo (talk) 22:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AIV[edit]

Replied. — neuro^(talk) 17:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you suggest ANI for this? #wikipedia-en seems to think that might be optimal. — neuro^(talk) 17:45, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By all means. State that it already went to AIV so that no one tells you to put it there. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting people's opinions[edit]

I'm not sure ehat you meant by Not a forum but he is entitled to express an opinion. You can't just delete it. Theresa Knott | The otter sank

Talk pages are not a forum for any comment. Users are allowed their opinion but that comment went well beyond that as the editor even admitted to. --Tom 18:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed the item in question, my contribution to the "RFC" on whether or not to include the sentence on the tax lien report was restored, but not to its original form. It had been edited first (by the same user (Tom) and a sentence had been taken out with the same edit summary "not a forum." I reviewed your entry on his talk page, saw that either you or he had reverted the item, and noticed that the reversion wasn't as intended. I made an entry on Tom's talk page, explaining my situation. I took the time to revert the entry to original form. Within minutes, Tom came and undid my entry without asking my permission (which seems to be what Wikipedia requires for that type of activity), even after I had (on his talk page) politely welcomed his request and explanation to alter the entry!?! So I'll post another item on his talk page, but I'm a little apprehensive as to how this will be received. You see I welcome his request on my talk page for permission to change my entry, but I get the feeling that he doesn't even see any need for my permission. Thus I am posting this little notice here prophylactically. Let us hope that he is going to take some time and have some patience with this matter. In any case, thanks for your time, trouble and interest in regards to this very minor item. --VictorC (talk) 23:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joe the Plumber[edit]

Taking it offline .... You wrote "You appear to be saying that it's OK for us to include it now because we'll change it later?". No. Wikipedia is actually less permanent than other media in general - your metaphor about printed paper was surprisingly old school in a digital world where search engines mine content from many sources. All of those articles will permanently have the lien information, for all to see. Wikipedia may or may not. Over time, this may be trimmed down. Trust me, after the election, interest in this article will drop dramatically.

And in the end, this is so much navel gazing and a bunch of editors who have too much time on their hands.Mattnad (talk) 19:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I know it'll die down. The article will most likely be merged. But I can't help put myself in his position. He asked a politician a smart arsed question, and he's now in among the wolves totally out of his depth with people who barely hide the knives behind their backs. I couldn't care less about an American election (I'm a brit), as an outsider I can see that Wikipedia repeating the mudslinging is just plain wrong. When this is over the journalists wont care and nor will the politicians, but he'll still be a plumber who doesn't pay his taxes, isn't registered, has parking tickets (and who knows what else will come out). Of course it's going to harm him. There is nothing I can do about the press but I didn't sign up for this. I'm here to write an encylopedia. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If Joe is feeling any pain, it's more due to other media outlets and politicians making hay out of this. And that will stop after Nov.4 and a few "Year in Review" articles that will mention him, thanks to McCain's current campaign strategy. I'm interested much more in the dynamic between editors and how the politicking has spread so far and wide. It's quite amazing. Mattnad (talk) 19:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word for it that it somehow looks "very bad" for an admin to edit the article, but one of the things I fixed was an incorrect date given for the debate (the incorrect October 17 instead of the correct October 15), which in my mind looks worse remaining in the article (as it now does) than it would look for me to correct this objectively incorrect information. Moncrief (talk) 19:51, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'll note that I didn't revert that edit. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Inclusionist seems to be taking dead aim at you (having missed me I trust). See Talk:Joe the Plumber "discuss content not contributor" (he did remove part of his post). Collect (talk) 23:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares? I'm a big girl. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 00:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You sure are, and a BBW at that. Daaaaaaamn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.39.107 (talk) 12:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smiles! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BLP[edit]

Can you take a look at Michael Barrymore? - it appears to be in need of some cleanup that is out of my comfort zone. -- The Red Pen of Doom 20:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mid dabbling a little. But I'll take it slowly. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intervention at Talk:Aramean-Syriac people[edit]

Hi Theresa, I see that you've tried to calm things down a bit recently at this talk page...I recently got involved as a neutral admin after responding to some complaints, and ended up protecting the article as well as blocking one of the parties for a 3RR problem. Since you were there first, I just wanted to touch base with you, and make sure I wasn't stepping on any toes. Like you, I know little about the subject, but I am quite interested in seeing if the warring parties can be brought to the table and coaxed into having a discussion that focuses on actual proposals, refs, etc., without focusing on the personalities and past histories. Tall order, I know. I've managed to accomplish a semblance of this on other contentious articles, but it's never an easy process. If you see me stepping over the neutral line, or being too firm with the parties involved, please let me know. And, if you have any suggestions or words of wisdom, I'm always open to them. Many thanks! AKRadecki^Speaketh 00:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest. I can't even remember it. I've had a hand in trying to informally mediate quite a lot of articles, sometimes it works, often it doesn't. The page is no longer on my watchlist so please feel free to deal with it in any way you can. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 00:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, maybe I should have looked at the article before replying since my comment was only 5 days ago. Shows how much of a wikiholic I am that i can't recall. Anyway, now that looking at the page has jogged my memory, the truth is it was just one comment that i happened to notice as user make whist I was recent changes patrolling, so what i said about it not being on my watchlist is still true. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 00:48, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, many thanks! AKRadecki^Speaketh 01:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedians/United States[edit]

Looks like a friend (User:PEOPLSP) of User:GooglePedia12 created the Wikipedians/United States article that User:GooglePedia12 originally created (and was speedily deleted.) User:PEOPLSP also 'nominated' him already. Something fishy is going on. thx. --Clubmarx (talk) 02:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh he is clearly socking. Kids eh? I'm watching events. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BLP privacy policy for limited public figures[edit]

I think that the current deadlock on Joe the plumber is due to unclear BLP policy on limited public figures. I've made a proposal to clarify the policy here. Since you are one of the parties involved in the dispute, this is a notification for your input on the proposed policy clarification. VG ☎ 10:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joe the Plumber[edit]

Theresa, do you have any interest in making a first run through a re-draft of the Joe the Plumber article to address BLP concerns? I have set upa workshop page to formulate a major re-write. Currently what I have done is mostly a restructuring, just moving content around. Thanks! -- The Red Pen of Doom 16:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! But I won't be able to look until tomorrow (Just got in from a day out that included a fair bit of alcohol so serious editing is out for now) Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar of peace[edit]

		The Barnstar of Peace
		I proudly award this Barnstar of peace to Theresa knott, for her willingness to make uncomfortable choices for the sake of peace and stability. Thank you.

Compromise in question thank you. Inclusionist (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes, you deserve it, I think a person respects another person who does something they normally never would, and show them how to be a better person in the process. ;-) Inclusionist (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allegory of the cave image[edit]

I saw that they have removed your image as well. My image being removed angered me, but I got over it. However, removing yours which meets quality standards and accurately depicts the allegory for newcomers absolutely infuriates me. I highly recommend that you post an item on the administrators noticeboard and get backing in keeping the image there, so any further attempts to deface this article will be dealt with by administrators. You have my full support. tj9991 (talk | contribs) 17:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that big a problem, and I'm not annoyed at all. I'm going to work on the image per the suggestions put on the talk page. (I am an administrator b.t.w.) Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion[edit]

Hello. Can you tell me please where your deletion of this article was discussed? Nobody mentioned it to me. Would you mind restoring the article please? -SusanLesch (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She contacted the oversight list stating that we was deeply uncomfortable with an article existing on her. She removed her resume from her university website so the article only had the one source. I looked at the article, decided it was speediable and so deleted it. I really don't think she is notable enough to merit an article. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. Thank you so much for your reply and for taking care of this. Sadly this makes me uncomfortable writing BLP biographies anymore, how worrisome. And I wonder why in two years this is the only request of its kind I have run across. Although other sources could be added and I am quite sure it could be established that the subject is as or more notable than many others, I feel bad for writing this. I checked my inbox and don't have any email from the subject--that would have been my first reaction, to write the editor directly, if I shared this problem, but I guess people don't all think alike. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People who aren't familiar with wikipedia would know how to find out who the authors of a page are. I wouldn't feel bad if I were you, you did nothing wrong. Some people are happy to have an article about themselves others not. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind, I deleted enough above to put the subject out of the way of search engines. No problem from my point of view if you keep precise talk page records and want to restore that. Thank you again for your help. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 01:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI reply[edit]

Thanks for taking your time to explain the semi-protect philosophy. Being new I am still somewhat in awe of the community acceptance of the anon IP editing. It seems when there are vandalism problems, sock problems etc., that sometimes ranges of IP's have to be blocked to address the issue. In that light, wouldn't making registration a prerequisite for editing a bit easier to manage the project? Is anonymous editing THAT important to maintaining the project? Please understand I am still learning and if I have overlooked some obvious principle it's from ignorance...which is curable. So I hear :o) 74.182.86.58 (talk) 03:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

oops...I wasn't logged in...that's my post above. I guess there's one instance of IP editing. :o\ Tide rolls (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that much vandalism is done by anon editors, but it's also true that most vandalism is trivially easy to deal with and isn't a big problem. Our worst vandals have always logged in, so making that a requirement would not stop those. Plus we need to run a checkuser in order to rangeblock those, so personally I prefer my vandals not logged in. OTOH it is also true that anon IP editors contribute a great deal of content. Possibly more content than logged in editors. So forcing people to get account has the very real possibility of putting people off from editing without much loss in vandalism anyway. Theresa Knott | token threats 12:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:DAJF is edit warring with us on Magibon[edit]

I hope he stops adding the irrelevant and stale employment info. Isn't there some special BLP enforcement rule for cases like this? VG ☎ 14:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure but I intend to remove it until someone can demonstrate how it is in the public interest to know about it. Theresa Knott | token threats 16:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I left a longer explanation on the article's talk page and the issue seems resolved. VG ☎ 16:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Brook[edit]

Dear Theresa knott, thanks for requesting speedy deletion of the Taylor Brook article. I was about to do the same. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 16:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Post[edit]

I changed my post. Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home ,User:Yellow Evan/Sandbox,H , E,HE 18:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That looks a lot better. Thank you. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:30, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re[edit]

Ok, i'm sorry. --Ripepette (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Theresa Knott | token threats 11:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What comment?[edit]

What do you mean by "I'm making a non edit so you don't get reverted."? What is this about? 124.188.180.129 (talk) 11:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Theresa. It's quite frustrating that there are comments that you don't want around and keep coming back. It's my fault for misunderstanding the comment made. Sorry about that. 124.188.180.129 (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Has No Relevance?[edit]

I would like to know why you have deleted my page, Sous Chef, LLP. This is an actual company with a product that is attempting to gain capital to begin production. I am following guidelines on how to make an article. I think I should be given ample time to complete my article before it is deleted. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nymets1726 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for cleaning up the mess[edit]

If you want to know what I am talking about consider 'What part of an Under Construction tag can people NOT understand?' Thanks, Now I can depart in peace. FoolesTroupe (talk) 10:39, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heddlu Gogledd Cymru.[edit]

The entry on North Wales Police has a reference to an alleged remark-citation needed.If such can stand there then why/how not on the University of Hertfordshire or Hertfordshire Costabulary page?Noswaith dda.Oyebo (talk) 18:26, 3 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

If you have noticed a page with an unsubstantiated allegation on it do feel free to either add a reference or remove the allegation. As for the university of Hwertfordshire i have personally done a fair bit of searching and can find no credible sources whatsoever for your claim, so clearly it can't go in until you find one. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might it not be that if Herts Uni were covering up they wouldnt leave evidence in plain sight?As for credibility that seems to be HIGHLY subjective.Oyebo (talk) 22:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Or it could be complete cosdwallop, and that's why there are no references, either way it doesn't go in. As for credibility see Wikipedia:Verifiability click on the link and read what it says.In particlular note that it explicitly states

"In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers"

and also states

"self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, knols, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable."

It's not going in unless you can come up with a reliable source, (no matter how many comments you leave on my talk page.) Theresa Knott | token threats 16:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You said (above) it isnt going in either way then it isnt going in without a reference.Consistent?Oyebo (talk) 17:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I don't understand what you are asking but let me repeat this again. Find a reference and then we can talk. Without a credible reference I have nothing more to say. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too lax[edit]

Hi, Theresa. I think you're being too lax in the application of our image policy. [25]

The "Library of Congress" has a lot of images. The source info should contain the images's catalogue number. Without that, we can't verify the licensing information saying the image is a in the public domain due to comming from the Congress.

I know you did that in good faith, but you may consider trying to be more careful when dealing with such complicated issues as Image Policy and copyright status.

I'm respectfully reverting you mistake, --Damiens.rf 20:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well why not say that in the prod notice, and in the notice on the uploader's page? I have no problem with you reverting me but you need to make a bit of an effort to explain what you are up to. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. I'll do that. I haven't done so because, based on what I see on every other "Library of Congress" image on Wikipedia and Commons, I though it was clear enough that the source information was not verifiable. --Damiens.rf 20:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably because I'm a bit dense at times. ;-) Thanks for sorting it out. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken! --Damiens.rf 20:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It came out that the image is a grave copyright violation from Associated Press. See the importance of verifiable sources? --Damiens.rf 19:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help Desk Notification[edit]

Just a heads up, someone has posted to the Help Desk about you and Luna Santin. The relevant section is WP:Help desk#Administrator Abuse. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 21:48, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK v2.0[edit]

Hello! Thanks for showing an interest in Wikimedia UK v2.0. Formation of the company is currently underway under the official name "Wiki UK Limited", and we are hoping to start accepting membership in the near future. We have been drawing up a set of membership guidelines, determining what membership levels we'll have (we plan on starting off with just standard Membership, formerly known as Guarantor Membership, with supporting membership / friends scheme coming later), who can apply for membership (everyone), what information we'll collect on the application form, why applications may be rejected, and data retention. Your input on all of this would be appreciated. We're especially after the community's thoughts on what the membership fee should be. Please leave a message on the talk page with your thoughts.

Also, we're currently setting up a monthly newsletter to keep everyone informed about the to-be-Chapter's progress. If you would like to receive this newsletter, please put your username down on this page.

Thanks again. Mike Peel (talk) 19:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC) (Membership Secretary, Wikimedia UK [Proposed])[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubama[edit]

Hi, I noticed you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubama. Don't forget to place the {{subst:at}} above the title instead of below it. Keep up the good work! DARTH PANDA ^duel 21:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. I shall endeavor to be more careful in future. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm unusually OCD about that sort of thing. Hey, if it isn't too much trouble for you, since you like responding on your talk page (like me), would you mind using {{talkback}} templates? They're quite useful! DARTH PANDA ^duel 21:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah I can't be bothered. Sorry but if I'm saying something vital I'll copy and paste it to their talkpage as well. But generally speaking I find assuming that someone will check the conversation here works. I always do when I post to someone elses user talkpage Theresa Knott | token threats 21:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, no problemo. Whatever floats your boat. Cheers, and happy Wiki-ing! DARTH PANDA ^duel 21:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Waves reflecting from a curved mirror.PNG listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Waves reflecting from a curved mirror.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Srleffler (talk) 04:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC) --Srleffler (talk) 04:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to delete it. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Susie Luchsinger[edit]

I undid pretty much everything you did here. Luchsinger is clearly notable and the article states as much; I'm not sure why you prodded it, given that your reasoning made no sense. PROD isn't for images, so I removed those. I don't know what the status of NONFREE is these days, maybe you will have more luck getting them deleted that way. The other edits by the possible Ms. Luchsinger, I must say, are extraordinarily balanced, neutral, informative, and well-formatted; I wish everyone editing about herself did as much. It's hard to make the case that they should be reverted. Chubbles (talk) 22:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My problem, being English, is that I have no idea how important the Christian music market is. Gospel - yes, country -yes, but modern Christian? Is this a niche market? If it is then should we be having articles on her, if it's not then why isn't she reported in the press, where are her chart positions etc? Theresa Knott | token threats 06:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a fan[edit]

I'm not a fan of yours. I much prefer Cyde Weys. 217.39.1.189 (talk) 23:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa[edit]

Would you mind re-reading the AN thread you recently posted in? I'd appreciate a little bit of clarification regarding one of your statements, as it disturbs me greatly. Thank you. Bullzeye^{(Ring for Service)} 02:52, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously. What do you want me to clarify? I think you misread me if your ED reply is anything to go by. I was not joking. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Shoot me if I am posting uninvited nonsense to your talk page, but I am beginning to consider the possibility that this greatly disturbed user at least half-seriously believes you may have homicidal, rather than hyperbolic, tendencies. --Hans Adler (talk) 23:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, But as I already told him that he misread me and don't know what else I can do? I've replied at the AN in a way that I think is unambiguous. Hopefully that will settle it. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yonsei[edit]

Caspian blue has turned his anti-Japanese POV to another article I was working on -- this time involving a subject which is far away from where I might have expected us to clash. It is arguably possible that, having watch-listed my edits, Caspian blue was led to become involved in an article about fourth-generation emigrants/immigrants of Japanese descent in Latin America, North America and elsewhere in the world.

~~It may be helpful for you to be made aware of a potential tempest-in-a-teapot which is brewing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Yonsei? --Tenmei (talk) 00:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)~~ The best feedback you can hope to discover is when someone tells you that one word made a difference -- that something you wrote came to mind at a critical juncture and it made a constructive difference long after you'd moved on to other things. For me, it was a Norman verb -- to feign. As you know, Caspian blue creates serial Gordian Knots; and this small verb is nothing like the sword of Alexander.[reply]

Knott > knot <

Remembering your verb gave me something much more valuable than a useful solution to a knotty problem. Remembering helped me find a moment of pause in which to try to discover another way, an alternate option. --Tenmei (talk) 20:43, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- That's good to hear, I'm sorry that I didn't answer you until now. I have been really busy IRL and am likely to remain so for quite a while I'm afraid. Theresa Knott | token threats 08:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki UK Ltd Membership applications now invited![edit]

Hello,

It gives me great pleasure to announce that Wiki UK Limited is now inviting membership applications! You can download the application form in PDF format from meta:Image:Wiki_UK_Ltd_membership_application_form.pdf

Information is given on the form about membership fees (£12/year standard, £6 for concessions); these need to be paid by cheque initially, although we hope to accept other forms of payment in the future. Applications should be submitted to me at the address given on the form. If you have any queries about the application process, please let me know.

We will formally start accepting members once we have a bank account, as we cannot process membership fees until that time. We will be submitting our application for a bank account in the very near future, and we hope to have this set up by the end of December at the latest.

Thank you for your support so far; I look forward to receiving your membership application.

Mike Peel (talk) 21:50, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Membership Secretary, Wiki UK Limited

P.S. if you haven't already, please subscribe to our newsletter! See meta:Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Newsletter for more information and to subscribe.

Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.

Reply to "Are You RandomEnigma?"[edit]

Yes I am but for some reason I wanted to start afresh on Wikipedia and be a better user, apparently I was a WP:GW Warrior as RandomEnigma but now I just want to be an expert Wikipedia writer even though I'm finding it very difficult to create userboxes and upload images. Why do you ask why I was RandomEnigma anyway?--RandomEnigmaReborn (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes people create usernames very similar to that of an established user in order to impersonate them. It's probably a good idea to log in as RandomEnigima and state on your userpage that you have decided to start afresh with a new username so that people such as myself are not suspicious. As for userboxes my advice is don't bother with them, none of the old timers do.Just say what you want to say using ordinary text. And I think that photographs can only be uploaded by autoconfirmed users. So you'll need to wait a while before you can upload them. (Sorry I don't know how long it takes to become autoconfirmed). Theresa Knott | token threats 22:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disappointed[edit]

I was told that you had a picture of your tits on here. This is not what I was expecting at all! Disappointed. seicer | talk | contribs 14:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know, telling a woman that you are disappointed by the sight of her naked tits isn't very polite! However, I am willing to let that ride. He is a picture of a bust. It's not mine but it is at least bare. Hopefully that will be enough to satisfy you. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Perhaps I was being a bit bold when I did this, but I decided to remove a speedy tag from an article. [26] I am not an administrator, and I'm not entirely sure if this was an appropriate decision based on my reasoning to do so. It's currently at AfD (AfD page). Feel free to undo if I made a mistake. Master&Expert (Talk) 06:32, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No that's fine. You do not need to be an admin to remove a speedy tag. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Airwolfe31[edit]

Yeap, they are the same people and sorry for not taking the time to check if you were an admin. Too tired to think straight. But it was fun to file my first SSP report and use the IRC. XD;;...anyways, happy editting and I hope you live long and healthy. Rgood erm ote 08:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wonder if you could have another look at this one? User:Airwolfe31 is loudly protesting his innocence on his talkpage (and has emailed me asking for his article to be userified). I don't doubt that the article in question is probably never going to be suitable for the site, but to be honest, it doesn't strike me as unreasonable to do what the user did and register a second account after the first was blocked for inappropriate username. Also, because you didn't add a 'blocked' template to the user's talk page, they are unsure of how to appeal their block properly (hence, harassing me).

Just to add more mud to the pond, I've found User:Peterson Tractor, which would appear to be a sock of the type that we don't like. Also, I don't think his story checks out, and I'm not sure that he's going to be contributing anything useful to the site anytime soon... but I think that process should be followed. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:42, 28 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

The block was for using another account to carry on the same exact spamming as the last and at this point I can not tell who is the sockmaster and who is the puppet. But it is very clear we have a mass spamming issue and from earlier comments from this person it is very clear that this is an advertising company or the company themselves. Also, all sources that this person/s use are from peterson related websites and not from third sources. They have no intention of making this article encyclopdiac but are using this site as their own free promotional area. Rgood erm ote 05:42, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined the unblock request. Daniel Case (talk) 19:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to take another look at his latest request. His attitude has improved somewhat, I think. Best, Sandstein 23:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went to unblock but was beaten to it. I've endorsed the unblock for now but we should keep an eye on what he does next. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Denialist Hate Speech[edit]

First and foremost I would like to sincerely ask you for your help. Your input and patience is appreciated. I want to bring to your attention this. HD86 has made numerous comments such as "The Assyrians are EXTINCT people of ancient Mesopotamia whose name was stolen by some modern politicians and used in reference to the modern Syriacs. To label the modern Syriacs by "Assyrians" and to claim that "The Assyrian people trace their origins to the population of the pre-Islamic Levant" is indeed stupidity in its purest form." These comments are inflammatory, racist, unhistprical and outrageous. This user continues to deny that a whole race even exists. He needs to be wiki disciplined. This is unacceptable inflammtory denialist behavior. The equivalent of his statments would be that jews or arabs do not exist. Do you not see the point. His languge is very hateful and dimeaning to those of us involved in the project. If you take a look at his history he has similar incompetent statemetns regarding other controverisal topics. I ask for assistance in order to remove this hateful user from this discussion. He has denied the existence of an entire race that through ample ancient and modern evidence has existed for thousands of years. I will be waiting for your response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nineveh 209 (talk • Ninevite (talk) 03:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take this to WP:AN/I for other admins to look at. I need to scale back my wiki presence at the moment (too busy IRl) Sorry i can't be of more help personally. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving from an old friend![edit]

Hi! I hope you remember me.

I'm just dropping in to say Happy Thanksgiving! I gained liked, 50 pounds from eating so much turkey.

If you have any advice for me on editing, etc. don't be afraid.

Cheers!--Degenerate-Y (talk) 02:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I do remember you but I am not likely to be on Wiki a great deal before Christmas :-( Theresa Knott | token threats 06:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your block of User:62.30.249.131[edit]

Due to this IP address being somewhat sensitive at the moment (please read the block form message), I've changed the block settings. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 18:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I blocked, then went to the talk page and saw there was an issue. I was reading the AN note and was just about to change the block settings myself. Theresa Knott | token threats 18:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Zahd[edit]

If you checked the history of the page, you would have seen. By the way, as far as I understand it, blocked users can edit their userspace, just not the mainspace, unless their block is modified to disallow edits to their own userspace. Now to explain things, even though a peek at the article history would do enough justice, someone else had edited the page, not Zahd, and since that page was experiencing vandalism, I reverted.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs 22:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have to to be kidding me! Of course I checked the history page, I can only conclude that you didn't or you would have seen what actually happened:-( The person you reverted was in fact reverting someone else who removed the comment. This is why i didn't understand your edit summary. As for a blocked user editing, they can only edit their talk page not their userpage. Anyway it's sorted now, so no harm done. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giano block[edit]

1. blocks of Giano are not worth the subsequent heat they create. 2. that was hardly uncivil in the scheme of things, and 3. take note of the bottom of this page: [27]. I would suggest overturning your block asap. Viridae ^Talk 12:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, let me think. I would have blocked anyone for making constant personal attacks like he was doing. Whether they were or were not on civility parole. Why is he being given a free hand to make attacks that no one else is allowed to make? I don't understand. Theresa Knott | token threats 12:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will move this to my talk page and answer there for clarity. Viridae ^Talk 12:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your block of Gianno has automatically blocked the hundreds of us on the BT IP he shares. This is the second time today this has happened! I have had to come through the secure server to get here. Please lift your autoblock which is preventing many UK based Wikipedians from editing! Jack1956 (talk) 12:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Viridae ^Talk 13:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful with your blocking. I lost a lot of work through this cock-up. Given how many hundreds of editors must have been knocked out, there must have been loads of work lost. The fact that two of you did the same thing within the space of an hour is particularly annoying to those of us connecting through our BT Home Hubs. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 13:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh cripes. That was particulaly dense of me. I should have known better than that. Thank you Viridae for sorting that. (leaves to find a trout) Theresa Knott | token threats 13:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated from the Giano page. If this has been sorted out, then ignore at leisure. Theresa, I have to ask:

What the hell were you doing here to take umbrage on behalf of someone else?
Why are you deciding that someone else has been insulted?
What kind of understanding of the world, humanity, society, language, or being alive are you demonstrating when you decide that a wise standard is to block the aggrieved party for reacting?
Have you even considered the fact that Elonka was doing vast IP blocks, ill advised one, and destroying work, was warned to stop, continued anyway, did not reverse the actions, damaged article writing in progress, and you are blocking the person who brought this to attention? Had Giano not been upset, legitimately, this would have continued, and so the very thing that got the action -- being upset -- is what you think deserves punishment?
Is there a conversation going on that you have not shared? Are you deciding simply on personal standards that Giano's language is so vicious that he can't edit? If so, isn't it fair game for any single administrator to similarly decide that it isn't insulting (since neither you nor that admin are actually the victim of the supposed insults)?
Do you routinely watch this page? If so, have you any thoughts on the matters discussed above? Why is your first entry into a discussion an instruction to someone on how to speak?
Does no one care anymore about block warnings being something greater than ten minutes? I seem to recall their being 24 hours, precisely to avoid passionate, involved admins blocking out of anger.
Does no one still care that blocked users need to have their blocks explained to them? "That does it" is not really an explanation.

Your behavior here is uncharacteristic and foolish. It most assuredly should not stand. It reflects only the worst, most personal and personalized and personality-driven practices. Cut it out. (Should I say "cut it out or else" to be like everyone else these days?) Geogre (talk) 13:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was not taking umbrage. Since when is calling others "Stupid" become acceptable? Since when is someone an aggrieved party because they got caught in an autoblock? Actually this should probably be continued on Giano's page. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa, I make no comment at all on the block applied to Giano, which is clearly deserved. And I may be telling you what you already know, in which case please accept my aplogies in advance. Address 194.72.9.25 is a dynamic IP registered to BT, and an autoblock of this IP hits a very large number of users in the UK including, I guess, the editors posting above this comment. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 13:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know. I think it has already been sorted by Viridae. I note that no one else who got caught in the block made personal attacks against the blocking admin. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the apology and admitting your mistake, appreciated abilities in an admin. Guest9999 (talk) 13:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Theresa - I echo the sentiments above from Guest9999. Ref: your question on my talk page, no you don't need to do anything else. It has all been sorted out now! Best wishes, Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 13:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked Giano II with regard to being unable to find ArbCom agreement, per the motion already linked to you. Should such confirmation exist I would be happy to re-instate the block, but I would request that in future any block notice includes a link to such agreement. Now I am going to withdraw and hope that the shit misses me. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm withdrawing too. As i stated earlier somewhere, ( or maybe I didn't because of an edit conflict) This was not an arbcom sanctioned block, this was not a civility parole block, this was a block based entirely on my judgment of NPA. I would have blocked anyone else for the remarks he made. Anyone who undoes a block of mine is not wheel warring anymore than anyone who undoes an edit of mine is not edit warring. I have expressly stated on his talk page that although I was not willing to undo the block myself if others wanted to they should. So please, no one throw shit at anyone. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need to be de-sysoped! Giano (talk) 13:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice dear. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, Giano. Can we just once attempt to let this pass by without calling for the heads of people? LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, on the subject of calling someone "stupid," let's address it. This gets back to the absurdity of "civility" blocks. I have acted stupidly on Wikipedia before, and I've been called much worse than "stupid" in my time. I'm big and tough and smart and mean, so I usually respond in my pedantic and acidic way, but that's because I believe that all Wikipedia is is an encyclopedia surrounded by an ongoing discussion. Stopping the encyclopedia is the first crime. Stopping the conversation is the second.

Elonka's blocks committed the first crime of Wikipedia. First, they were ill-thought out. The argument that she "couldn't have known" is specious. Doing a range block is always bad practice unless you have extremely specific and serious reasons for it. Additionally, range blocks must always be of the shortest possible duration. I've blocked ranges for periods of 3 hrs when school children were going nuts, as they usually get the block message for :15 and go off to Face Book. Dedicated vandals need precise investigation, not wide ranges. Additionally, identifying floating IP's and rolling ISP's is one of the things we should do before making range blocks. Secondly, when she was informed that her blocks were causing widespread collateral damage, four hours went by. No removal of the blocks, no reversal of the damage. She considered her private determination to be more pertinent and powerful than the editing rights of legitimate users. I.e. she put "vandal hunting" above "contributing to the encyclopedia." It is the first crime of Wikipedia.

Secondly, to decide on behalf of others that they have been insulted is nonsensical. I'm not going to tell rap musicians that calling each other "nigger" is an insult. I'm not going to tell conventionally angry Russians that "motherf*cker" is a vile term (in Russian, it's not so much, although it is a term of abuse). I'm not going to step into another person's mind and say 1) "This person meant to damage a reputation" or 2) "This other person was damaged by these words." It's illogical, and it's unwise, and it results in "seven dirty words" lists. I'm not going to say that my extremely mean treatment of some ancient troll like Dr Zen is better, for having avoided all dirty words and explicit insult, than someone else saying, "Oh, fuck off: I'm pissed at you." It would be illogical. I'm not going, especially, to present an arbitration case with a weird list of "history of incivility" diffs that show that, although no one complained and no one cared, the words, by some magical and emanate power, had achieved some abstract quality known as "incivility."

Thirdly, to block a contributor is a hideous thing, and you know it. Blocking for one hour or twelve is irrelevant: blocking is an insult and an expression of power. It announces to the blocked person, "I'm better than you. You work for me. I control things here, and you only get to work when I say you do." That's a vile thing to do to volunteers, and especially ones like Giano who spend treasure and time getting sources to write high quality articles that increase the profile and usefulness of Wikipedia. Blocking someone does far more of an insult than calling someone "stupid." You know as well as I do that we all rankled under the "tedious" requirements that vandals get three warnings before being blocked, that they have to get a long time before being blocked, that we had to allow them to see the warnings and react or reform. To block quickly, we thought in the old days, was counter-productive. I fail to see how it is protective, prophylactic, or wise with experienced users now.

Fourthly, stopping people talking is something that, in general, should be done as a last measure, and not done as an early warning system. We shouldn't have a DEW line for insult (especially directed at mysterious others). Furthermore, invective is a normal part of conversation. Where old web sites blocked contributors was when all they did was abuse, when they were abuse accounts. We at Wikipedia used to be very shy of blocking even troll accounts. Lord knows, I disagreed with that, but when we have four years of contributions from someone, we're pretty sure that it's not an abuse account. It's possible that the person is actually right, that the other person is being stupid, that the person is incompetent. Elonka's actions show either obdurancy or foolishness, in my judgment.

Finally, we can't excuse a person's blocking of a city because the aims were noble (slapping vandals), if we're then going to turn around and say that, no matter that Giano was vastly expanding a disgraceful page, pouring in research, pouring in time, his single word obliterates all of that virtue and earns a block.

As an aside, I do hope that all the people who throw "drama" around realize its origins and why it is, itself, an insult. Geogre (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Geogre, I am not sure you got Elonka's role exactly right. Are you sure it was a range block? There is another proxy issue here.

Apart from that I would like to add that the basic situation (editor insults others on his talk page, is warned by an admin, insults the admin and is blocked) seems quite similar to something that once led to a desysopping after the admin wasn't able to see what he had done wrong. Of course there were special factors there (prior history between editor and admin), and there are special factors here (it's well known that undiscussed Giano block cause nothing but disruption). --Hans Adler (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what case you are referring to but Giano didn't insult me. Theresa Knott | token threats 18:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you are right. The similarity to the other (Tango) case is that Giano gave an answer that made it clear he felt the warning was not justified, but did not actually repeat the behaviour before being blocked. So the block wasn't preventative, it was punishment for his not admitting he was wrong. It was also not preventative because by blocking him without disabling him from editing his own talk page you were not even interfering with the potentially disruptive behaviour. --Hans Adler (talk) 18:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree there. Telling me to go teach her how to be an admin is repeating the behavior. The only way to take that remark was how it was intended, as a personal attack against elonka. As for preventative, again I disagree, if I had blocked his talk page there would have been no way he could contest the block. Block first, then, protect the talk page if the behavior continues is the only fair thing to do. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then we may have to agree to disagree. 1) The obvious interpretation of Giano's remark, in my opinion, was that he was arguing with you, by justifying his behaviour to you. He complained about what he thought were your problematic priorities, reacting to his choice of words but not to what he saw as Elonka's mistake. Instead of explaining the situation you blocked him. 2) I understand the argument why it can be seen as preventative, but it was still an attempt to force a furious editor to change his behaviour instantly, by preventing him from continuing the actual constructive work for which he is here in the first place. That's at most borderline preventative, and it was completely wrong in the situation. --Hans Adler (talk) 19:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow that's quite a lot for me to read, I've been out Christmas shopping and just got back, I'll look into your post more carefully later but I think the block was caused by blocking an account and the autoblocker kicking in on that account. It wasn't a range block, and the "crime" ( if you want to call it that) lies with BT not with her. More later (I haven't had a cup of tea yet) Theresa Knott | token threats 18:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can any of this "destroy work"? Work sometimes can't be saved for various reasons like the wiki has technical issues, as it does momentarily on a regular basis. Backspace into the edit window, copy the work and paste it somewhere for yourself, then do it again when it's all behaving. I expect this is what all the editors have done, and the "destroying work" line is just for the sake of having a go at someone. Sticky Parkin 18:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec x 2) I believe the answer to your question is here: [28] (second sentence). You are definitely not assuming good faith. ["very clear personal attack" removed by Theresa's request] --Hans Adler (talk) 19:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was talking about this incredibly stupid remark. When I just researched this, I learned that instead of retracting it and apologising to Giano, you eve repeated it! --Hans Adler (talk) 19:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that although Giano claimed an hours work down the drain, if you look at his edit history it was actually 6 minutes work down the drain at most. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was more than an hour. Giano works carefully in word processors, then tries to get the material over to Wikipedia, then carefully set the parameters for images and such. You might see six minutes, but that's not six minutes. That's hours, and then, when he's ready to get the careful arrangement done, he's blocked stupidly.

As for the people wanting to continue to use insult and invective with "tutus" and the like, I certainly hope that you are blocked for insulting Giano and the rest of us who have tried to prevent the abridgment of best practices. After all, any insult, even on one's user page, is unacceptable, so one shudders to think of what insulting me and Giano here on Theresa's page would bring.

Theresa: you and I have known each other for a long time, and that's why I speak frankly to you. I do hope you read what I wrote, because it sums up my operating philosophy and the operating philosophy I agree to work at Wikipedia under. Geogre (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it is viewed as an insult, when it was clearly meant in a humorous manner, then I gladly withdraw it. But, it is in keeping with similar comments that Giano makes himself on occasion... DDStretch (talk) 19:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I view it as an insult. Thanks for withdrawing it, I'd appreciate it if you would actually remove it altogether.from my talk page. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. My apologies. DDStretch (talk) 19:28, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. To Geogre, or course you can speak frankly with me! I appreciate your candor and view you as someone to respect. As for what you wrote, whilst I still vehemently disagree with your take on the exchange and on Giano's behavior I still appreciate your arguments. You have given me a lot to think about and I will certainly reflect carefully on everything you have said. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) After his 72hr Block has expired, Giano will return to Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 21:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. (apologies to Theresa knott for the new message bar) Honestly, anybody who thinks Giano is actually leaving should please come to my talk page. I have a few things to sell you. This is standard operating procedure for Giano, who has declared retirement more times than I can count. This is already the second time in two weeks.[29][30] - auburnpilot's sock 22:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the Giano is truly gone? Why hasn't his UserPage been deleted yet? GoodDay (talk) 18:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's free to stay or go as far as I am concerned. We can't compel people to stay but no should we pander to people because they threaten to leave. I suggest we ignore it. Theresa Knott | token threats 18:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps locking his UserPage would help. Anyways, I like your suggestion. GoodDay (talk) 18:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would help what exactly? He hasn't been banned and is free to edit his userpage once the block expires. I'm finding your whole line of questioning disconcerting. You seem to have it in for him. Rest assured I do not! I have no interest in forcing him to leave despite what some may have tried to imply. Theresa Knott | token threats 18:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nay! He & I have never butted heads. GoodDay (talk) 18:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK well in that case I apologise for assuming otherwise. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. I've scratched out my comments at his UserPage. GoodDay (talk) 20:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Patch clamp.svg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Patch clamp.svg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. J Milburn (talk) 17:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When someone explicitly states that they created the image themselves, then surely GFDL is at least implied? I know i forgot to add the tag but is it really necessary to put a delete template on the image? Theresa Knott | token threats 18:08, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

_David ^WS _(contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy holidays! _David ^WS _(contribs) 19:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aw thanks! Theresa Knott | token threats 20:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Tagging images for deletion[edit]

GFDL is implied, but not explicit. That's why the image is given a few days before it is deleted- to allow the uploader a chance to fix the mistake. I accept that the majority are simple mistakes, hence the message explaining the situation (or, with more experienced users, notifying them that they missed an image). It's pretty standard practice- if I hadn't done it, a bot would have, and better uploaders are alerted sooner rather than later. J Milburn (talk) 16:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your sig[edit]

Hi Theresa. Yes, I know that you're not bothered by your anagrams and I've long been a fan of them (the current one may be my favourite). Nevertheless, whether or not you find Giano's reference to you as 'snotrake' offensive, I find it difficult to read as being intended as anything but a petty jab. He was testing the limits of his civility restriction even while blocked for a violation, but nobody went for the bait. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Am I missing something?[edit]

I have just looked at the block log, noticing that you unblocked Cosine321 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with a comment that he had sent e-mails pretending to be the blocking admin and that you are going to block the IP address - this way he'll be able to return once the IP block expires. (I'd say that he has forfeited his right to edit Wikipedia, so I am re-blocking the account.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 16:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I undid the autoblock on that account as autoblocks only last 24 hours but the history of this kids editing indicates that a week long block would be needed to deter him. At least that's what I thought I was doing, perhaps I clicked the wrong thing (quite possible) Theresa Knott | token threats 17:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm checking the logs it appears that I did unblock the account rather than the IP autoblock. I'm such an idiot at times. Having said that it makes little difference. He'll be able to return once the IP block expires anyway by creating another account. Theresa Knott | token threats 17:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

COI[edit]

Can you come to the WP:AC please. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AN you mean? I think I'd rather not, I've said my bit on conflicts of interests, and I'll leave it to the community from here on. Thanks for your support though. --fvw * 15:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did mean AN. He's angry that you are ignoring his complaints; if you don't reply then you kind of are ignoring them. He's taking your criticism of him as a slur on his ability as an admin, no doubt he needs to grow a thicker skin but there is probably some good that you could do by talking to him. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk page, I've already discussed with him why it's a conflict of interest, but I can't get through to him. --fvw * 15:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]