User talk:Theresa knott/archive23

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.

Hi, removing the other information you were justified in doing, but the link I posted was important. It may have been for a program tat ran last year but it has information about the program and contact information, so that if people wanted to either start their own program or encourage them to run it again or perhaps it is outdated and they are in fact running it again this year and are just understaffed and have not updated that website. Furthermore there are links to important readings that are shared through this website. As a major in this subject I found that I got a lot out of this link and I would encourage you to either re-post it or message me back about re-posting it, which I plan to do anyway. I agree that a statement should be made next to it about the date of the program or perhaps one of us should contact the site and see if the program is still running. But the point is that there is plenty of relevant information on this page for people struggling to retrieve information around an up and coming field of sociology. Thank you.

Open Clipart Library

Hi Theresa, I am a co-Admin on Open Clipart Library wiki and am having some trouble with spambots. I wonder if you would be able to talk with me to come up with solutions? I don't really want to talk over here too publicly, so would you be willing to log into #openclipart on freenode IRC? I'd very much appreciate it. I'm on NZ time, GMT+11. Also willing to be emailed. chovynz atsomeplace like google dot company. Nathanhelp (talk) 08:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry! I forgot you were away at the moment. Please contact me when you are available. I have a few ideas I would like to run past you.Nathanhelp (talk) 18:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I will email you. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

You Are A BIG MEANIE

You are an ugly, unattractive, piece of work. how can you go to sleep at night knowing that you have deleted the wiki of the best band on Wikipedia. Yes i am talking about The Dustin Witzel Band. why would you delete the Wiki of this great band, the Dustin Witzel band's fans are outraged at your stupidity. The Dustin Witzel band has a under 1,000,000 fans. i think that it would be in the best interest of Wikipedia if this wiki was reinstated. so the next time you look in the mirror remember, The Dustin Witzel band is for both attractive people and unattractive people like yourself. So remember, choose The Dustin Witzel Band and let his music turn you from the ugly person you are to an ugly person with a good taste of music.

Have a Nice Day Corrjo (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

This made me laugh. Thanks.Theresa Knott | token threats 18:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

PS i didn't mean any of this in an offensive way, just a little constructive criticism. :D

If one googles "dustin witzel band -myspace" you'll find nothing. I believe real bands exist OFF of myspace, as well. Just my opinion. Hrhadam (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Owl City, please?

Hi, I don't know how bad (you mentioned blatant advertising) the previous page on "Owl City" was, but I think the group seems notable enough to have a wikipedia page. Can't we simply add a stub for it, with their two records so far? they apparently reached the Top Unsigned Artist position on Myspace.Valeria.depaiva (talk) 05:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Theresa is just a hater. Owl City is more-than-notable, but hey, someone with more Wikipedia magic than you doesn't like them. IrateManBear (talk) 00:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Ring out the old,
and Ring in the new.
Happy New Year!
From FloNight

Hi, happy new year to you too! Could you tell me how my artical was an example of advertising?> Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmm2008 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

It's your own non notable company that you have repeatedly tried to add to Wikipedia for nearly a year. Theresa Knott | token threats 16:18, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiLove!

DougsTech (talk) has given you a fresh piece of fried chicken! Chickens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot chicken, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of chickens by adding {{subst:GiveChicken}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

User talk:Yorkshirian

A discussion has been initated by User:Yorkshirian on his talk page today (9/1/2009). As it was yourself who extended the block to life, and are quite neutral to the goings on, I'd very much welcome your input, even if to point us in the right direction. However, I'll understand if you don't want to get involved. --Jza84 |  Talk  03:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy Theresa knott/archive23's Day!

User:Theresa knott/archive23 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Theresa knott/archive23's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Theresa knott/archive23! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.

Your day is 9 Jan. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:35, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

What a nice idea! Theresa Knott | token threats 07:23, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Congrats Theresa. Rlevse was kind enough to give me a day too :) -- Tinu Cherian - 08:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists

Dear Mrs. Theresa knott, I saw the List of best-selling music artists, where I showed the user Harout72 five reliable sources about Black Sabbath, where he could see than this band has sold more than 100 million albuns worldwide. One of than is from the world's biggest music Tv channel, MTV. Anohter one is from the famous site amazon.com. Please look:

http://www.amazon.com/Black-Sabbath-Souls-black-t-shirt/dp/B001OR23BC

http://www.metal-archives.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=42351&highlight=&sid=223ac726a08a0268d8a3012f70ab9ae1

http://geekzkrieg.com/top-10-influential-metal-bands/

http://www.discogs.com/popular_artists

http://www.mtv.com/bands/m/metal/greatest_metal_bands/071406/index2.jhtml

He showed me only one source. Shouldn't we change it? I saw than you are a sysop, so I though than there was a good idea to ask it fot you. Thank you and sorry for my English

MainBegan (talk) 01:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

The number of sources that you can come up with is pretty much immaterial. It is the quality of sources that count. The gold/platinum certifications are high quality reliable sources and they simply don't add up to anywhere near 100 million. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox monitor

I appear to have done something wrong in a sandbox -- see User talk:Tenmei#User:Tenmei/Yōzei

I'm guessing that someone with sandbox monitoring experience might be just what the situation calls for. Unfortunately, I see that you spend your days with young scholars who are a little bit above the age group I had in mind. Can you suggest how to reach out to someone else amongst your Wikipedia peers -- someone whose work experience is with a much younger age group? --Tenmei (talk) 17:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are asking me here. I'm happy to help out but please explain more clearly what it is you would like me to do. Theresa Knott | token threats 17:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Death in the family

Perhaps this thread can lie fallow for a while. --Tenmei (talk) 04:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

London meetup

Hi Theresa, further to yesterday's discussion, I've calculated that you are entitled to display this,

This editor is a Tutnum of the Encyclopedia and is entitled to display this Book of Knowledge with Coffee Cup Stain, Cigarette Burn, and Chewed Broken Pencil.

and with a few more edits you get to upgrade to the one with a Post it from Jimbo. WereSpielChequers 22:15, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

<Laughs> Thank you. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Your note

Thanks for that, Theresa. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 16:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

A Rocket to the Moon

Hi, I saw A Rocket to the Moon was A7'ed. This shouldn't have happened, as the group is signed to Fueled by Ramen [1] and has hit the Billboard charts. [2] I'd appreciate it if you could restore it and also restore the redirects and relink the delinked links. Chubbles (talk) 21:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Tagging it as A7 was a mistake on my part. What i meant to do was tag it as a recreation of deleted material see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Rocket to the Moon. This would need to go to deletion review to be undeleted. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll take it there myself now. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, this site truly is a hotbed of hiveminded clusterfuckery, with no rhyme or reason for edits or deletions but the whims of a delusional, powerhungry, cunt-tastic few.

Feel free to ban me...I won't be using this site again.

Goddamn, what a clusterfuck of diva personalities and inane, droll bullshit.

Wow. (unsigned IP editor)

So you haven't quite made up your mind yet about Wikipedia eh? Theresa Knott | token threats 20:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Lead summary

Template:Lead summary has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Fram (talk) 11:15, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

THANK YOU.

For realizing that it ISN'T vandalism.

kashimjamed (talk) 21:07, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Nothing to thank me for. However calling people trolls etc isn't on either, so please reign in your language. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/London 18

The Victoria and Albert Museum Wikipedia Loves Art event is February 1 (this Sunday), -not- February 8. Thanks!--Pharos (talk) 02:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

True but there will be a meetup on the 8th too. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Fallow thread

Thank you for your patience in waiting until I could re-visit User:Tenmei#User:Tenmei//Yōzei.

The simplest way to summarize the gravamen of issues is with the words of George Santayana -- "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Although it may have seemed obscure to you, the fact of the matter was that I didn't understand enough in the context of an edit User:B made -- not so much that there was confusion about matters of right or wrong, but rather more to do with what I just didn't understand well enough. In other words, I would have been amongst those condemned to repeat past mistakes because I couldn't quite see how to mitigate avoidable future problems. --Tenmei (talk) 21:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Token threat

Seeing your signature (love it) compelled me to come here to threaten you with something. Of course, it has to be credible, so here it is: If you continue to edit Wikipedia, as you did here [[3]], you'll get older. Gerardw (talk) 01:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Smiles Theresa Knott | token threats 18:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Mohammad Ali Baig, Sir Afsur Jung‎

Hi, You said that Mohammad Ali Baig, Sir Afsur Jung‎ was not eligable for speedy deletion. The tag says that is applies to articles which are about "a real person that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject." I believe it doesn't, so could you elaborate/direct me so I understand that tag better? Thanks! :) Bladeofgrass (talk) 13:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I tend to err on the side of caution preferring not to delete articles that have potential. It seems to me that someone who has received the CIE, and the MVO is reasonably significant and probably merits an article. Never the less i could easily be wrong, in which case why not take it to AFD instead. That way there is a debate on the topic. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Bladeofgrass (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Ukufwakfgr

Thank you for your kind comments at WP:AN... unfortunately, Uku continues to be disruptive and hostile. If I was sure that he was in fact a newbie, I would say that he needs some serious mentoring. However, looking at his behavior and edits, I am beginning to question whether he is, in fact, a newbie. I may be wrong, but his editing style just does not strike me as that of a newbie. In any case, I would ask that you (as a disinterested Admin) keep tabs on the situation at Talk:Masonic conspiracy theories. Thanks. Blueboar (talk) 17:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm watching the page for a bit. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... and you are right about my "complaints, complaints" thread... it isn't really article related... I have removed it. Blueboar (talk) 19:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank _you_ Theresa Knott | token threats 19:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I also want to thank you for keeping an eye on User:Ukufwakfgr's level of civility. But I agree with User:Blueboar that he is no newbie--he is too quick to cite Wikipedia policies for a newbie. He was also too quick on filing admin complaints. I didn't file my first complaint until I'd been editing for nearly two years. (Taivo (talk) 00:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC))

It's more than that... it's the little things... like knowing where to find my block log, and knowing how to format a double link (typing [[WP:EL#AVOID|Links to avoid]] so the link read simply Links to avoid. I am not going to accuse him of sock puppetry, since I have no knowledge of what name he used before... but he is clearly an experienced editor editing under a new name. Blueboar (talk) 01:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(ec)I'm probably telling you things you already know, but I think we're dealing with someone who is more interested in what he thinks than what is accurate, and also has a real need to have the last word. Case in point: rather than simply do what is asked of him (which is to restart the discussion), he would rather go on about how he was mistreated, or how we're unfair, or whatever. I don't foresee this having a positive outcome; the average editor usually gets it after the third request or fifth revert. MSJapan (talk) 00:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Theresa... Since Uku seems to be upset that you redlinked his name and deleted his user page... and in an attept to have us all get a fresh start... I have extended a hand of friendship and reconsiliation by (re)creating it (and adding the standard Welcome message) as I would do for any redlinked new user without a user page. I hope this was not presuptuous of me (you being an admin and all), I just think it was the right thing to do (especially since the reason why you redlinked him in the first place ... the WP:AN discussion ... is now concluded). Best Blueboar (talk) 01:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Im fine with that. I'll give you some advice though. If you want him to start again one point at a time it's best not to reply to previous threads, since you claim they are untenable. I went to archive the older discussion but couldn't because it was still active. You can't have it both ways. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah... I see what you mean. Since he is reluctant to choose one topic for discussion, I have taken the bull by the horns and have chosen one for him (it happens to be the one at the top of his list... which also relates to the most recent revision of the article). From now on I will only reply to things he posts in this new focused thread. Blueboar (talk) 15:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Comment via WP:COIN: I don't know if this is useful context, but I just had a look through Talk:Masonic conspiracy theories and User talk:Ukufwakfgr, and think you're dealing with a classic case of Wikipedia:Civil POV pushing of the filibustering variety. It's always an early warning sign when a new user with a strong viewpoint arrives and immediately turns the Talk page into a struggling ill-structured mess of longwinded procedural and semantic nitpicking.

Exchanges along the lines of:

"Don't do X."

"Where am I doing X? How am I doing X? How is X defined? What's the basis of your right to tell me not to do X?"

are pretty diagnostic too (compare [4] with WP:SOUP). Gordonofcartoon (talk) 10:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

There was no explanation of how I engaged in incivility, which does nothing to prevent any future instances. As I understand it, admins on Wikipedia are for preventing disruptions, not for dictating from the top-down. You can't say "Because I said so" and expect me to cow-tow like I'm some sort of clueless idiot. An inability to convey ideas results in inefficient communication, which is not conducive to exercising leadership. If you feel that the issues in my case are already documented, then please point me to the relevant documentation. WP:SOUP says: "sometimes they genuinely think that spitting in your soup was fine, because it was their spit and your soup." My "long-winded nitpicking" helped to resolve a dispute about an un-approved edit. In addition, it appears that practically all of the active editors of "Masonic conspiracy theories" are Freemason admins, which is like putting a gang of criminals to build a prison. Ukufwakfgr (talk) 18:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Theresa, AFAIK, none of the editors involved in the page are admins, except for you ofcourse. Blueboar (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I know I'm not an admin and, AFAIK, only Blueboar and myself are Freemasons. MSJapan has openly stated that he is not. Sarek hasn't declared one way or the other. Our membership isn't a secret, but if you look at our edits to the article and our discussion, you will see that we strive for NPOV. (Taivo (talk) 19:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC))

MSJapan's user page contains a Freemason template, and he has been editing this article since 2007, so he has a vested interest. Ukufwakfgr (talk) 19:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

So it does. I must have misattributed the "I'm not a member" comment that someone else wrote. (And don't think I didn't notice that you originally wrote "either he's a liar or you're a liar". That's the very kind of incivility that people are noticing here.) (Taivo (talk) 19:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC))

Blueboar said that he quit the York Rite. He has not said what rite he has currently taken, nor do I care. Ukufwakfgr (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Your comment shows that you don't understand the structure of Freemasonry even though you seem by your comments to be a proponent of one or more of the conspiracy theories. The York Rite is not Freemasonry, neither is the Scottish Rite--they are appendant bodies, like extra clubs you can join if you want to spend more time with your Masonic Brothers. The highest degree of Freemasonry is the Master Mason degree (the third degree), there are no higher degrees. Blueboar is still a Master Mason, the highest degree in Masonry, as am I, whether or not we are members of any other appendant bodies. (Taivo (talk) 21:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC))

I think most people who know Freemasonry know the differences between the Blue Lodge and the various rites and bodies. Ukufwakfgr (talk) 21:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Guys... I don't think we need to fill up Theresa's talk page with arguments about Masonry (I doubt she cares). It does not matter who is or is not a Mason so long as we edit as Wikipedians. Blueboar (talk) 00:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

True true. You are all of course welcome to edit my talkpage anytime but my main concern is that we try to write a good quality and neutral argument, not who is or is not a freemason! Theresa Knott | token threats 13:01, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Skylas

I think a block is in order for User:Galloman and User:Scyllas777. » \ / (⁂) 21:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Trying a brief protect first. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:21, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Typoglycemia

An article that you have been involved in editing, Typoglycemia, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Typoglycemia (2nd nomination). Thank you. RossPatterson (talk) 16:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Royal Hospital School

[5] & [6]. -Jrcla2 ^{(talk)(contribs)} 05:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, I wasn't being curt when I simply posted these links, I just figured not much else needed to be said. -Jrcla2 ^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. You didn't even need to put them here. Adding it to the article was fine by me. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Quick question actually – now that it's been verified as true, are you going to undo all of your recent edits regarding his contributions? Apparently it wasn't spam and that what he put was completely verifiable, so I was just wondering. -Jrcla2 ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Good lord no! Most of the links he added were simply inappropriate. He was warned and even blocked by another admin for doing it. Take this one as an example. He is not trying to improve that article but merely looking for an excuse to add a link back to the Royal Hospital School. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah. Point taken. -Jrcla2 ^{(talk)(contribs)} 08:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Tatar Language

I appreciated your involvement in the dispute at Masonic conspiracy theories. Thank you. I am involved in a different problem right now and wish your advice on how to proceed. There is an anonymous IP over at Tatar language who refuses to discuss issues on the Talk page and only uses edit summaries to communicate. There was highly irrelevant religious language inserted in a discussion of the history of the language. I removed it and he continually reinserts it, calling it "fact". We are both way beyond 3RR (since he only "talks" in edit summaries). Thanks (Taivo (talk) 18:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC))

I'm quite surprised that you haven't tried going to his talk page and inviting him to discuss on the article talk page. It is possible that he hasn't even discovered that an article talk page exists! Theresa Knott | token threats 20:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

He's an anonymous IP so he doesn't have a talk page. One of his edit summaries said he doesn't need the talk page since he says everything he needs in the edit summary. There's a partial block on the article now and I've requested a third party to read the issue and comment, so hopefully it will calm down. Thanks for looking at it. (Taivo (talk) 20:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC))

persection

But the word Persection DOES not exist in a standard dictionary ! The one example you provided is an exception, almost a spelling mistake. Actually this is a sly trick to get maximum visitors to these pages...then why not create Persection of Hindus...and Jains...and Sikhs.... Reply on my page please Jon Ascton (talk) 10:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, again. As you have no objection to the term "persection", I have made a page Persection of hindus, and I am also going to make one each for all other religios minorities who are not much bothered about by people in the West. Kindly let me know you thoughts about it. Regards  Jon Ascton  (talk) 01:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. Theresa Knott | token threats 05:54, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

So I'm not an administrator, but...

There is a longrunning discussion about whether the article on masturbation should have pictures, and if so what. User:Walid Osama has removed all the pictures (and added a rant of several pages on the talk page about why having the pictures is comparable to Israel's actions in Gaza) and when I reverted his changes he told me not to change them[7] because I'm not an administrator! (He claims there can't be an existing consensus because he disagrees with it.) But maybe I'm out of line. Since you're an administrator who has proved clueful in other disputes I thought I'd come and ask your opinion on whether it's legitimate to revert his changes during the dispute (rather than the underlying question). The Wednesday Island (talk) 02:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

As a sidenote here, I think that Wikipedia should do what it can to discourage exhibitionists trying to get pictures of themselves in articles under the guise of 'improvement'. Mediawiki itself has had an ongoing problem with random guys uploading pictures of themselves in such a fashion. Jtrainor (talk) 23:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Codebreaker Game

I'm stuck on level 5, any hints/tips to get to level 6? --DFS454 (talk) 18:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC) `

Tell me what you have tried so far. Have you read Frequency analysis? that should give you the info you need to crack it. Theresa Knott | token threats 07:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Well I first tried to decypher the text in bold using ROT-13 when that didn't work I tried to decrypt everything using ROT-13. Then I gave up . --DFS454 (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The password is, as you probably already realise, the text that is bold. However it isn't rot 13 but it's something similar. The whole of the text is there to make frequency analysis work. Read our article then give it a go. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:06, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Rude and/or vague

You have quite often construed my words as "rude." Please review the following and suggest a better way to avoid being perceived as unhelpfully rude.

• User talk:Urashimataro
• Talk:Iwashimizu Hachiman-gū
• User talk:Spokechieves ‎

In an effort to be "diplomatic," I have more often achieved merely "vague" ... and I would appreciate comments about this problem as well. In order to "find my own voice," I obviously need to learn to avoid being perceived as rude and/or vague. --Tenmei (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's great that you are making an effort. I am tired at the moment so, will look at th exchange in detail the next time I edit wikipedia. It might be an idea for you to email me so that we can speak frankly without offending anyone. Theresa Knott | token threats 01:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --Tenmei (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Clearly?

With regard to 74.12.251.168 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), You say this user is "clearly" not a vandal. How is this clear? Given, the dispute over the lead is somewhat like a content dispute, but some of material repeatedly removed about Khomeini's education is afforded no explanation in summaries, talk page, or anywhere else. There is little reason to consider the material controversial... it just says he studied math, geography, &c. in his childhood, and is taken directly from Moin. How is this removal different in wrongdoing from blanking? Anyway, I'll bring the whole issue to ANI once I figure out a good section title and all that. A baby turkey^{[citation needed]} 02:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe he thinks its irrelevant. Everyone studies maths geography etc in childhood so why state it in the article? The point is he is disputing the content not vandalising the article. I have seen plenty of vandalism in my time and this isn't it! Theresa Knott | token threats 02:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I've responded on my talk page. I guess we'll just keep the conversation there. A baby turkey^{[citation needed]} 02:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Right

I had been thinking about the utility of devoting my time to Wiki in this time of recession. This incident unequivocally again proves that I was, in deed, wasting my time. Probably this kind of a rebuke was needed for me just to get myself detached from Wiki. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Bye bye then. Clearly if you cannot accept someone disagreeing with you then a social site such as wikipedia is not for you. Theresa Knott | token threats 17:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Well Ma'am, you had written the above while I was busy requesting CSDs, so I thought I should reply. Its not about co-existing with others. I can very well co-exist with any one, be it a supporter of my views or otherwise. There's plenty of evidence of that throughout. The reason, why I got totally pi**ed off is simply because I could not tolerate idiosyncracy from a group of people who have administrative power over here. This same group would have jumped in to and blocked a user if he/she had replaced the sentence "Nazi Germany" with the name of its opponents during WWII. But the same group of people would term it a "Content Dispute" if somebody replaces "Pakistan" with "India" in an article on Kashmir. And all of it is cited, as a matter of fact. What would you call it? Systemic Bias, I guess. Anyway, bye. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that you are taking things waaay too personally. You were asked to provide the diffs that would prove what you are saying, but failed to do so, then got totally pissed off because we couldn't see the vandalism which you kept referring to. :-( Theresa Knott | token threats 19:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry that you are upset, that was not my intention nor was it the intention of the other admins involved. Hopefully you'll calm down soon and when you do I'll be happy to restore your userpage and subpages. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Just maybe

Would you be interested in being 3rd moderator on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration? Kittybrewster ☎ 21:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but no, I'm not willing to take something like that on at the moment. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Please reconsider this block

I do not believe that this block was warranted. the editor did not make any additional reverions after recieving the 3RR notice and had only actually reverted once. (the other edit was to include the material in the first place.) Thanks! -- The Red Pen of Doom 15:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't a 3RR block is was a disruption block. I looked at the entire edit history and I saw a SPA whose edits did nothing but disrupt that article for months. Removing external links, removing references and reference sections. I did not see editing in good faith. Take another look, if you still think a block was OTT then say the word and I'll remove it. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

OK - thanks. -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Canvassing

Thanks for handling it; I was in business meetings for hours and hours today. Anyway, why do people canvass for others and not me?!?!!?! -- Avi (talk) 05:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

82.19.66.43

82.19.66.43 is back to make nonsense edits after exactly 1 month. Magic.Wiki 13:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

G-Ball Page

I recently noticed that you nominated a page entitled User:G-Ball (Sport) to be deleted. I acknowledge that you may think that this page does not live up to Wikipedia's notability requirements, however i would like to respectfully disagree with your opinion. I see that it says on your page that you are from England, i while i don't think that this in any way diminishes your credibility, I believe that it shows you do not fully understand the popularity of G-Ball, which is a very much Australian sport. It is predominantly played in Melbourne the capital city of Victoria but has also began to spread to other states and is now played through out the country. I would like to thank you for your comments on the page, how ever they are unfounded and it would be greatly appreciated if you would please remove them and allow the G-Ball page to continue to function and spread the fantastic sport of G-Ball through out the world. --Raphsaff 15:57, 22 February 2009

There is no way that I am going to remove my vote no matter how many sock puppets are made or meatpuppets recruited. If the game is notable than a) it should be article space not userspace and b) it should be easy to find plenty of references. Theresa Knott | token threats 08:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Hong-Jiang Zhang

Now, the IP-hopping begins. Would a rangeblock be in order? -kotra (talk) 10:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to try semiprotection. Thast should stop it. Theresa Knott | token threats 10:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

That sounds better. -kotra (talk) 21:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

One of the sockpuppets is requesting on Talk:Hong-Jiang Zhang that User:Hong-Jiang Zhang be renamed, so that the article history wouldn't show that the article was an autobiography. While I don't entirely believe his explanation (that he's just a misguided assistant), would this be possible? I'd assume the name change request would have to be made from the User:Hong-Jiang Zhang account, would the block prevent that? -kotra (talk) 06:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

(the block expires in 3 hours anyway, though, so maybe that's moot) -kotra (talk) 06:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet case on Andyvphil and Bill Moyers

You may be interested. Case here. I think you blocked him before. ► RATEL ◄ 15:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please look into this, as well as my refutation of Ratel’s so called evidence. This is a cheap move to lock down debate. CENSEI (talk) 17:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I am not aware of having blocked this user, and my name does not appear in the block log. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Theresa, thank you so much for all that tireless hard work you've done on the foie gras article. If i could be so bold... You Rock.Sarah Katherine (talk) 06:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

No need to thank me for working on an article, 'tis what I do! Thanks though. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, Theresa ~ would you happen to have the time to look at the Chicago Ban being mentioned twice in the Foie gras controversy article? It's in both the chef's section and the ban section. Thanks again.Sarah Katherine 17:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep it probably could do with a bit of a rewrite there. I can't do it today though. Theresa Knott | token threats 07:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I know you are busy... do you have a suggestion for how i might help? I did post it in a new section in case someone else wants to take care of it, as it does look like a POV issue. Sarah Katherine 17:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, i had learned from Scruffy that "we don't just write anything on the page without a reference", which he said just before removing my additions. So i assumed that was the rule. Hmm, i'll get these rules down one day... Sarah Katherine 18:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

That helps clear things up. There is a lot to learn!Sarah Katherine 21:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Still attempting to clean up the redundancy in the foie gras controversy article. Confused as to why you have not offered help by suggesting how it can be cleaned up, or doing it yourself... all you have offered is "(Sigh, redundancy about the ban doesn't mean yu get to remove the whole section)". Would you be willing to advise on this? Sarah Katherine 20:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Theresa, no rush... i won't be able to work on it anytime soon. Take care Sarah Katherine Sko1221 06:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are talking about. My comment that you quote above was an edit summary where I partially reverted you but only added back in details of the chef's argument to the chefs section and left out the redundant part about the ban. As far as I am concerned both sections read pretty well and the redundancy issue has largely been dealt with. What else did you have in mind? Theresa Knott | token threats 15:53, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It was regarding your notes to me when we discussed the science section on the main page, and you said that we never mention something twice in an article (explaining why the science paragraph was removed). "When I added it I did not notice that the info was already in the article at another place. As a general rule we don't duplicate info twice in the same article because, well why would we? Whst would be the point of that?"

I noticed that we had done the same thing in the chef's section and am wondering about why it's OK in one instance and not the other, if you could explain? Thanks again! Sarah sko1221^talk 18:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

As i look at the chef's section, i do still see that it is talking about the ban, be patient with me, i must be really confused here... Sarah sko1221^talk 19:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

As a general rule, we don't duplicate infotwice in an article. however we need to be sensible and use our best judgement to ensure an article is readible and informative. The chicago ban is certainly relavent in the chefs section because it was two chefs having a public spat in the newspapers that caused it. It is also clearly relavent in the legal section too. What to do? I think having the chefs opinions in the chefs section and details of the ban itself in the legal section is the best way to approach things. Naturally, as the chefs argument lead to the ban it would be weired not to mention it in the chefs section too as failing to do so would make the section read badly. However details are left out so as to aviod redundancy within the article. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppets: TagSmallPig

I've just blocked three socks I'm sure of and there are a few more that are less clear. I'm mentioning this because you have intersected with this user on several occasions and might like to keep an eye open for further incarnations. All the best, — Roger Davies ^talk 10:39, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

me

i just accidentally remove the picture of lukas podolski.i thought that i knew how to switch the picture but i didnt so can i have some help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiff (talk • contribs) 19:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Already dealt with. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Jerry LaBuy

The AfD notification on this page directs to The Caledonia Night Sky Co. but there is nothing on the AfD page itself which says that both pages are under consideration. I42 (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does but I clearly didn't make it prominent enough. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

• I hadn't spotted that either, I've read through it now - thinkwe can safely hit them with the same stick Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 14:20, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Good to see you still active

I saw you pop up on my watchlist—it's nice to see you still active. AN/I is always short on common sense and it seems quite a lot of the long-time users around here have gone inactive or left. Just thought I'd drop a note. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Truth is I'm not as active as I once was but I have no intention of actually leaving. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Support

Thanks for your support in the AN/I about the personal attacks. You seemed to be a voice of reason! SpartanSWAT10 (talk) 19:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem.Theresa Knott | token threats 20:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

A. Haines

Sorry, Theresa, I had to reblock Alistair. Turns out the reason that he was so "cooperative" in withdrawing his legal threats all of a sudden is he had someone else resume them on his behalf via OTRS.

I think, at this point, that we should keep him blocked until and unless the Foundation or ArbCom gives the all clear. — Coren ^(talk) 01:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

London Meeting

Thank you Theresa, for thinking of me for the meet-up. However I have a family get-together over the Easter hols. I most certainly will try to make the next meeting after this (at long last). Thank you again. Dieter Simon (talk) 23:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/London 21

We're currently debating whether or not to move it to the following weekend (not an attempt to undermine James's claim last week that we are the most established and regular meetup group, that is just an excellent side-effect) in order to allow User:Werdna and myself to attend. If you are planning on coming along then feel free to contribute to the discussion here. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Suicide threat

Hi Theresa. I wanted to follow up on your comment here. I've reported dozens of these to local authrorities in English-speaking North America. Every time, the officer is appreciative of the report. IP's have geolocate links at the bottom of their talk pages. That can almost always identify the local area to figure out which local authorities to contact. Local police (or in this case, the RCMP) can track the IP address with the assistance of the ISP. Almost all police forces have "Tech Crimes" relationships with ISPs to provide 24 hour access to decode who has what IP address at what time.

Frankly it's unquestionably a cop-out on the part of the Foundation that they don't have a policy mandating these get reported. If a teacher found something like this and didn't report it, the teacher could easily be fired. Wikimedia just doesn't want to be sued in case one is missed. This is one of the more contemptable policies (or lack thereof).

While I personally believe in the right for patients with terminal or horrific diseases to commit suicide, I don't believe anyone posting a notice here would fall into that category.

All this to say, I strongly encourage you to follow WP:SUICIDE. It's just good sense. I'm not sure where you're located, but you're welcome to share this.

My ₤0.02 worth. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 02:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I just don't see the point. You are responding to trolling, feeding those trolls by taking them seriously. Yes the police can track the IP address with the help of the ISP but then what? An IP identifies a computer not a person. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:27, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks for the kind words, I would be grateful to any help from fellow Londoner.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 19:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you look at my talk page please and see the comments user Ricky81682 is writting, its just not on.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 15:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Diamonddannyboy

My comment to him here was in response to his comment here at the talk page. My second warning was over this comment, which he did remove. Comments like this and this are not productive, which he doesn't seem to want to drop, are not helping the situation. Frankly, I take civility very seriously and if he won't do that, I don't care to bother with him. If he wants to be productive, that's fine, but if he won't drop the issue, I will ignore him. He got the page archived, attacks on other editors over there aren't productive. I will try not to interact with him any longer, since he just seems to get on my nerves. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Forget I said it. Per his comment below, he may not want to drop it but I will. I do think you should suggest to him an alternative venue rather than just ranting wherever he wants. He will find himself at ANI again. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

you striked the above after I wrote the below--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Rubbish

If read the links here I can't see a bad word about user Ricky81682 Infact I was agreeing with him. He then attacked me, I really have better things to do than get involved with rude petty arguments, and I really don't care about being blocked, like I say if editors have aproblem with the artcile, put it up for ADF, oh and if I want to rant, i'm sure I can on a talk page..look up the word rant. Rant over lol, also rember WP:GOODFAITH lol lol lmao every thing I do is light hearted, and not ment to offend perhaps I should insert a smilely face every time I rant, lol. Oh and Ricky81682 if you want to block me for ranting, go ahead, I won't cry and run to mummy--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 08:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Gypsy Bare Knuckle Fighter

The Darren M Jackson was orginally about bare knuckle fighting and had links to Romany routes, and was more about the under world of this fighting and Gypsy culture, problem being gypsy culture is not written and is very much passed down by word, alot of work went into the article, and now it's been bastarised and is so far away from the orginal with some good sources removed. The talk page now is all about the few MMA fights jackson had... Its the same for Jimmy Stockin, he is a famous bare knuckle fighter with one book out, in bare knuckle terms he is famous, but you try and find goog online sources, its hard work researching Romany people, and im sure due to the nature of the artcile we are coming across mild forms of rascim. I would love to work with you on this--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 08:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Certainly I'll give it a go, a couple of ground rules though.

1) Wikipedia isn't about what's true, it's about what can be verified. Something that is true but isn't written down anywhere simply cannot go in. This is unfortunate but there is no other way of preventing inaccuracy. This isn't racism it's pragmatism.

2) When others come along to help (and they will, this is a collaborative encylopedia) be nice! No edit warring, and no personal attacks. These are both blockable, and I am an admin. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Foie Gras page help

Theresa, we went through a lot of time and trouble debating images on the foie gras page. All of our efforts and owrk have been completely reverted without discussion. The feeding picture removed, the wine bottle is back, picture of foie gras replaced by a picture of pate... Help!?! ~ sko122168.13.134.213 (talk) 01:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC) I've reverted things pretty well, but if you wouldn't mind looking in on the page, that would be great, thanks! 68.13.134.213 (talk) 01:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Apologies! That was a mistaken keystroke on my part! I see that Theresa has undone the damage. Sorry for the confusion, all, on the rare occasions when my anti-vandalism tool messes up -- or when I mess up -- I usually catch it right away. (Theresa, I've left you a question about what possibly was my intended edit.) Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 09:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Report to the Anti-terrorist hotline

I guess that'll be two lots of coppers going "Eh? Wiki-what?", then. I did consider calling my local non-emergency police number about it, but the thought of trying to explain what I was actually talking about was a bit daunting... Cheers, Tonywalton ^Talk 20:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

No I'm pretty sure that they must know Wikipedia by now. (God I hope so) Theresa Knott | token threats 20:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I protected his userpage as well ... just in case he has any ideas of putting that info back on his userpage while logged out. Blueboy96 20:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Rachiddebbagh

I sent the problem about this user to the administrators of the french WP, in this page. I hope they will proceed fastly because he commited the same 'crasyness' in french pages. Dhatier (talk) 20:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Theresa Knott | token threats 20:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Theresa, we're looking into it; no weirdness found so far. Ah, scratch that, I just found an edit where he claims to have murdered someone. --gribeco (talk) 22:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for scribbling on your talkpage, Theresa, but this seems to be a good place to centralise this. If you'd rather, please feel free to make a page in my userspace (or I will, if you like). I've just given myself the unpleasant task of going through the deleted revisions of the en User:Rachiddebbagh userpage; he claims to have murdered several people. I discount his claim of having cut off the penis of King Gyanendra of Nepal, but one "confession" in particular is disturbing. This: "On a more serious level, the territory of Morocco is dangerous for all my descendents as I have mutilated people in various location in Morocco, mainly House 17 Crique Pont Blondin near Mohammedia city" is rather specific. My French isn't up to it, but is there anything in the Francophone press about anything happening at that address? There are also edits by five IP addresses to that page. I assume you're not an admin on the en Wikipedia, gribeco, so can't see the deleted page, but if you'd like to email me I'll give you further details. Tonywalton ^Talk 23:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

By the way, this is what worries me. The editor obviously needs professional help, but that doesn't mean that he isn't capable of causing harm. Tonywalton ^Talk 00:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Rachiddebbaugh

I found a couple of more obvious socks of the above party and, yes, an expectedly loony article they had written about him. I've remarked on this recent activity at the ANI thread, and would appreciate any sort of response, particularly regarding the blocking of the now inactive socks. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 18:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Lpkids2006 is back

Hi! I just want to report that User:Lpkids2006 is back on editing after the rangeblock you've implemented expired. He/she still vandalizes articles related to Philippine television. He is currently using 122.54.246.37 as his IP address. Please see this anon user's contributions for evidence. Thanks. -danngarcia (talk) 10:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't like doing this but don't see another option. Upped the block to 6 months. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

196.217.145.190 (talk · contribs)

Please be a bit more careful when phrasing lock reasons? The IP is on a dynamic range and someone else might have gotten that block message :) -- Luk ^talk (lucasbfr) 13:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Unlikely given the contribution history though. But I'll bear it in mind. BTW it was sincere advice, not an insult. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Edin Dzeko and country of birth

Hi! You seem like a person that would perhaps be a good mediator in an on-going argument over Edin Dzeko's and Vedad Ibisevic's country of birth. If you wouldn't mind to scroll through the talk page at Talk:Edin_Džeko. Thank you for your efforts in advance.--Stlunatic071 (talk) 05:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I really don't know what I could do. I tend to stay away from nationalistic issues. Try the admin noticeboard, some more knowledgeable about the manual of style guidelines may be able to help out.Theresa Knott | token threats 19:53, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Stop

Theresa, stop what? I don't even know what happened when I was away, I'm still looking through my history. I don't quite know how to check on wiki what was said and done by this account. --Gryffinclaw (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Stop pretending.Theresa Knott | token threats 22:02, 17 M

I am not pretending, I left UK to say in my native country for some months, I took my travel laptop with me, leaving my personal one at home, which was then used so cause havoc, I was not the one who caused any of the trouble that happened from this account, although I am partly responsible for leaving my data accessable. I am sorry that you have trouble beleving me, but I am not asking for you to beleive me, although I don't remember seeing your username in the edits history that i've just found, but i'm not finished with it yet so I don't know if you were involved in what happened. I just wanted to point out to the people involved that what happened was something that could have been avoided. But from what I gather, you were not part of the mess created in the lest week, because judging from theedits page, most of the trouble was caused in the last few weeks concerning the anime/manga issue of mermaid melody. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gryffinclaw (talk • contribs) 22:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh for crying out loud. Please, stop. We've heard it all before, in fact it is so common an excuse we have an essay on it.Wikipedia:BROTHER. Enough with this sillyness. You got blocked, so what? Just deal with it. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not bothered that the account was blocked for 24 hours, i'm actually glad, it stopped any further trouble from being caused by my cousin. I don't understand your negitive approch towards situations. Not everything is black and white, there are always grey parts hiding in the middle, you just need to look carefully for the silver lining on every cloud. it's midnight here, and my boardband is playing up, i'm signing off, good night. please leave me a message if you wish to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gryffinclaw (talk • contribs) 22:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC) Bwfore I retire for the night, I would like to add, I didn't try to get the block removed and nor did i want to. So please refrain from thinking that I did, and no, I am not childish enough to use the 'little brother' excuse, if I did something I would own up to it, but as it remains the only part that I did have in it, was unintensionally providing the account.--Gryffinclaw (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not being hostile, and i don't think you were trying to get the block lifted. But I do think that you are trying to distance yourself from that block and there really isn't any need. It's not that big a deal. Theresa Knott | token threats 16:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Prima Ballerina

Lily Tomlin once said, "What if everyone grew up to be what they wanted to be when they were children? Imagine a world filled with cowboys, firemen, nurses, and ballerinas." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Pipe in sig

The pipe in your sig can cause problems with templates, I think if you change it to & # 124 ; (without the spaces) that would fix it. –xeno ^talk 19:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you talking about the decline template for the impostor IP? If so it wasn't the pipe it was me.Theresa Knott | token threats 19:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Check out how your declined unblock template looked before I tweaked it. –xeno ^talk 19:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it but I'm sure it wasn't the pipe that caused the problem. It was me being stupid when I added the template. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

[8] Nope, it's definitely the raw pipe. –xeno | ^talk 19:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm maybe you are right. Hang on let me have a play. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

OK you were definately right. Thanks for letting me know. I have fixed my sig. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

No worries =) –xeno^talk 20:09, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Diamonddannyboy and Darren M. Jackson

Hi, Diamonddannyboy (talk · contribs) has returned and your input on his additions would be much appreciated at Darren M. Jackson's talkpage. Cheers, --aktsu ^(t / c) 06:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Owl_city Band Page

Hi Theresa,

I recently heard this band on Pandora and I wanted to look up more information on them as I normally do through wikipedia, however I noticed that you deleted the page 3+ times and I believe it's now protected from editing by you for good reasons (I'm not attacking you by any means). If I were to say go online and find why they are significant and history about them with the proper citations would you be willing to unlock the page?

--Tm1000 (talk) 00:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course! I have unnprotected the page so that you can write the article. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Georgian alphabet

Thank you. And what do you think about "neutrality disputed" and "opinion needs balancing" tags? Victor Schnirelmann is a famous scholar (see here, here) and his book "The value of the past. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia" is often quoted (see Google Scholar, Google books, ). Why his "opinion needs balancing" or "neutrality disputed"? Whose this opinion? Divot (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't really know anything about that. Sorry. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia in schools

Hi Theresa. It was good to talk to you at the wikimeet on Sunday. It would be great if you could get involved with the discussion on doing wikipedia workshops etc. in schools in the UK - see [9]. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks I'll take a look. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request of Yorkshirian

Hello Theresa knott. Yorkshirian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards,  Sandstein  13:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Lpkids2006 is back again

Hi! Just want to inform you that this user is now back in inserting hoax info here in Wikipedia. This time, he is using a different IP range (ranging from 112.200.150.110 to 112.201.132.111). Please see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Lpkids2006 for the list of suspected socks. Thanks. -danngarcia (talk) 16:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

OK I'll take a look. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I have put a block in place but am thinking that we need a new tactic. Perhaps semiprotecting the articles will work better. I'll try that if he returns again. Theresa Knott | token threats 18:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Just an update on this, he is back again after the rangeblock expired. He/she is still using the same IP range I've mentioned last month. I think semiprotecting articles will be tedious task to do to stop this anon since he edits a lot of articles and based on the anon's behavior, he edits related articles if an article he previously vandalized was reverted or semi-protected. -danngarcia (talk) 13:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

History wars

So how's your experience of the madhouse that is the "History wars" article going so far? I appreciate your sincere offer to help but wouldn't blame you if you 'ran screaming from the room' as so many have before. Webley442 (talk) 09:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I second that, but I would appreciate it if before you close the door on the way out, you make some sort of comment. --PBS (talk) 16:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest. This is an annoying debate, but the same points repeat again and again. The main problem is that a fringe opinion, the natives of Tasmania in the 1820s mostly died of disease, is presented as a legitimate scholarly position, which it is not and never was. The historical consensus is that they were hunted down and killed by the settlers. Genocide scholars call this one of the first modern genocides.Likebox (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't really see that as a problem. If it's a fringe position why not simply state it as such? Theresa Knott | token threats 13:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Because it isn't a fringe position. It was generally accepted for most of Australian history that the major cause of the depopulation, particularly in Tasmania, was introduced disease although the role of violence and conflict was always acknowledged. Disease wasn't heavily focussed on (i.e. they didn't write chapter after chapter about it), largely because earlier generations of historians didn't have much understanding of the true impact of new diseases or why they affected indigenous people more severely than the Europeans, nor did they see their role as being chroniclers of what diseases the 'natives' died from in an obscure outpost of the British Empire, but it's there in the literature. See the section on the talk page 'Introduced disease and the Tasmanian Aborigines'. However, in the late 1970's, through the 1980's and beyond, some extremely political Australian historians started to rewrite history. Part of that rewrite involved dismissing, on pretty specious grounds, the role of disease (except when it could be claimed to have been deliberately introduced) and claiming that violence and deliberate genocide played the major role. This 'revision' has become very popular in some segments of the population and is strongly defended by its supporters but it was never as widely accepted in academia or by the public as some people would like to think.

Unfortunately many academics found that if they contradicted this view publicly, they got labelled as 'reactionaries', 'old-fashioned', 'outdated' and sometimes as 'racists', so they tended to keep quiet publicly but still referred to the works of Bonwick, Plomley, Blainey and others when they wanted a serious discussion about Tasmanian colonial history. Since Windschuttle published his work, more have been willing to stick their heads out and publicly agree with much of what he's written and some historians on the other side (like Reynolds) have found that they have had to revise their positions to avoid being seen as holding positions that simply aren't supported by the evidence. No-one could honestly say that the position espoused by Windschuttle is now the majority position (again) but it's a very, very long way from being a fringe position. Webley442 (talk) 01:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

ANI

I've responded to your comment there. Please stump up a diff or retract. Clearly "start" has a different meaning in your part of the world than mine. As around 50 miles seperate us geographically I doubt it, but there we go. By the way - we have a whole guide on assuming good faith. I won't bother blue linking it for you... Pedro :  Chat  23:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

And you "WTF" comment gets all it deserves. No hurry on the diff - whenever you're ready. Or you can of course strike comments using <s> and </s> markup if that helps. Please Theresa, you're making the proverbial mountain from a molehill out of this. It does people credit to admit they are wrong at times. Pedro :  Chat  23:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Look you have clearly got the wrong end of the stick. Or maybe I have. I dunno. No bile was intended on my part, hence my WTF. Theresa Knott | token threats 23:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, I was not even vaguely commenting on you, but you posted and indented under me so I assume you felt I was - hence asking for a diff. But, either way it's not a big deal if you don't think it is (which is the point I guess). Shall we agree to drop it if I offer my apologies? We don't need more admin bust ups on WP right now.... Pedro :  Chat  23:26, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course we can drop it. No apologies necessary. Theresa Knott | token threats 23:28, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Pedro :  Chat  23:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Not going well

Well it's been less than 48 hours since your Yorkshirian unblock and he's already been reverted or otherwise ruffled feathers at no less than 11 locations ([10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]), and been warned for 3RR once. More drama was something this project did not need. Wknight94 ^talk 01:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

He has edited a huge number of articles. Personally I'm not concerned about him ruffling feathers or getting reverted, however revert warring- that's a different matter. I left a strongly worded warning on his talk page. Maybe I'm foolish optomist but I'm hoping he will heed my warning. Theresa Knott | token threats 12:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This is not a subject that I am very knowledgeable about, but I wonder if you think it interesting that after I completed this redirect to an orphaned article created by this blocked sockpuppet, run by this banned master sockpuppeteer that this occurred? Regards, Ben MacDui 16:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC) Both the sock and the puppet master were banned in 2007. Yorkshirian was banned a year ago by the AC and has as far as I am aware served his time. If he edit wars over it then that's a different matter. Theresa Knott | token threats 14:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

au contraire

Actually, I do. And that's why she asked you to remove it, presumably, my dear. 83.76.6.80 (talk) 19:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Only 31 hours?

I know it's an IP and all, but considering these were the first edits 'ever' from the IP, and it is clearly someone who already knows and really dislikes SlimVirgin, or, in short, a sock, wouldn't a longer block be reasonable? By the way, I'm not one of Slim's real friends, but vandalism by a sock is already two strikes. John Carter (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I figured that he's on an IP that can easily be changed. Otherwise we would have seen more edits. So what's the point in blocking longer? Blocks are preventative not punishment. The length of the block doesn't reflect how bad the "crime" was. If he returns we can always reblock. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Indefinitely banned User:Yorkshirian is currently engaged in a total rewrite of the England article

I note that you have previously indefinitely banned User:Yorkshirian. Why then is he currently engaged in completely re-writing the England article, without even the slightest hint of a discussion on the Talk page? The England article is very high profile -> many incoming links and heavily vistited. It is also the focus of much contention. I consider it to be highly unwise to allow such a user to unilaterally rewrite such an article, especially as he used an Edit summary to sling a personal attack. --Mais oui! (talk) 13:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Admin Jza84 has been notified throught the time that I've been working on the rewrite over the past few months on Commons. I've showed him the progress of it a few times. You can ask him if you like. I have made one article into a GA before (Catholic Church) and am thus in the process in building this one up from a B to a GA. I don't know what this Mais oui!'s problem is, he seems to be going far out of his way to seek conflict with me, but I won't bite the carrot; randomly wholescale reverted my months of work (the article even has an under construction tag at the top), then when I suggested that this was "vandalism", he then went balistic on my talk and when I calmly messaged him over it he blanked my messages for no reason (?). The guy is basically wasting my time, trying to distract me from article building, for what reason I dont know. There are no rules against me editing articles. - Yorkshirian (talk) 13:29, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

And here is Yorkshirian again edit warring, refusing to discuss his edits, and slinging mud at User:MacRusgail behind his/her back, calling him/her anti-England. Since you unblocked him, he has engaged in a variety of unseemly conduct, including personal attacks, incivility and assumptions of bad faith; and attempts to use Wikipedia as a battleground along geographical, cultural, and ideological lines. Wknight94 ^talk 02:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Dubious claim by Wknight, I don't call reverting an edit as "warring", I have not and will not be violting WP:3RR and as it turns out my edit was roughly in consensus with what was later achieved on the talk.[21] As for the rest MacRusgail openly admits to being bias in favour of Scottish nationalism on his page, many of his edits consist of claiming articles are "Anglocentric" or some other such thing, example British and Irish Lions talk. I don't think contesting the notabitiy of a section called "Status of Isle of Wight" (with a pro-separatist centrism) in an overview of the Politics of England is "ideological warfare", rather than simply removing fringe cruft (WP:FRINGE. Though by all means Wknight, feel free to spend your time refreshing my contributions page in the hopes that I "trip up" somewhere or whatever. I won't be violating WP:3RR or any other policies you can be sure of that, I'm too busy improving articles. :) - Yorkshirian (talk) 10:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

3RR = editwaring. Editwarring, doesn't necessarily fall under 3RR. You edit warred. Stop wikilawyering. Viridae^Talk 11:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Yorkshirian, you weren't banned for violating 3RR over and over - you were banned for being a general negative influence and drama magnet. I don't refresh your contributions, I merely have your talk page on my watchlist. From that, I see exactly the same negative drama that is all over the evidence page of your arbitration case. You obviously agree since you've archived it twice already since your return. Looking at your responses to the talk page messages and other contribs, I see you labelling another individual "anti-English", I see you engaging in nationalistic rhetoric, I see you editing only the exact same subjects that get you in trouble, and I see you completely re-writing major articles fully aware that firestorms would result. Coming off a "one-year" ban (which you got shortened to under six months), I'd think you would keep a low profile - instead you seemingly jumped right into repeating every behavior you were banned for. Wknight94 ^talk 11:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

How do we go about reviewing/overturning the unbanning? I am still undoing vandalism from this person that was done via a multitude of socks whilst he was banned. I think in his case an indefinite ban should mean indefinite, given the behaviour since unbanning. A case of one strike and out. MRSC (talk) 18:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

It's pretty clear that things are not working out. I want to give Yorkshirian the opportunity to learn how to edit collaboratively yet he seems to be failing to do so! My thoughts at the moment are that I could simply reinstate the indefinate block and ask Yorshirian to appeal to the AC to get it lifted. Does that seem a sensible plan? Theresa Knott | token threats 10:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

He is someone who clearly has difficulty operating in this environment. There is strong evidence that Yorkshirian = Daddy Kindsoul (talk · contribs) which means he's actually twice-banned, and has never served out either ban. It was a kind gesture of you to allow him back if he didn't sock, but that's not even what he was banned for. He was banned for exactly what he is doing now - general inability to collaborate. Hell, even if his socks acted cordially, I could see some hope, but his socks were an absolute menace - blatant threats and bullying. What we're seeing now is the nice Yorkshirian - the socks are the real Yorkshirian. At the very least, he would need a mentor but I don't see him ever editing slowly enough to allow for mentoring. The mentor would go to bed one night and wake up the next morning with 15 talk page messages like you're seeing here. In short, yes, off to ArbCom with him IMHO. At least then, people could complain at WP:AE instead of here. Wknight94 ^talk 11:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The desire to rehabilitate is admirable, but this is a lost cause. We are being played for fools. The indefinite ban(s) should remain. MRSC (talk) 12:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't an indefinite ban it was an indefinite block. I blocked him for sockpuppeting and he stopped, hence my unblock. The reason that I am hesitating to reinstate the block is that I am looking over his contributions list and I am seeing a lot of good contributions. (far more than I make) He wants to contribute, and he does look like he is making a real effort to me. The AC ban was for a year, not indefinite. MRSC states that "we are being played for fools" but I too don't want to be played for a fool by people who already have had enough of him. What to do? I'm blocking on the very next incident. Yorkshirian that means if you revert anyone even once, if you edit against consensus even once, or if you are rude to anyone even once you get blocked. If I am not around to do it I'm happy for any other admin to do so. The block will be indefinite. Theresa Knott | token threats 01:12, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I've had recent dealings with Yorkshirian (more than in the past), and I'm slightly on the fence at the moment. Several obvious problems - one is that he's been storing up major changes to major articles during his block period, which he has now tried to implement without warning, with predictable results. He is also (apparently) diagnosed with ADHD, which IMHO explains (but doesn't necessarily justify) his difficulties in engaging with other editors in a constructive way, and his impatience in general. But, I also get the feeling (and I may be terribly misguided here) that he recognises his shortcomings and is trying to improve his behaviour. I know that others have been proved wrong on that in the past, but I also think that all editors should work on the assumption that other editors are slightly less perfect than they themselves are! I think we should give Yorkshirian a bit longer, to see whether there is evidence of more constructive behaviour from now on. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. He really does seem to me to be making a real effort to improve. However we have to take other people into account. His editing has clearly pissed several people off and that cannot continue. I'm not going to go looking for incidents myself but if another user makes another compliant I'm standing by what I said earlier and reinstating the block.(Thanks for the spelling note, I corrected it. I do know how to spell the word but for some reason my brain seems to tell my fingers to use a c. I'm always doing it). Theresa Knott | token threats 09:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Theresa, I would urge caution to the torches and pitchforks, for they corner and harrass Yorkshirian all at the same time, for doing what they themselves do on a consistent basis. If they were the ones being put on the spot, I'm sure they would feel it was they who were treated unfairly and would react sensitively to the belligerence coming from a bunch of people. Whilst they feel happy to engage in WP:BRD and WP:IAR, he is not afforded the same courtesy and it is likely he never was, despite all of the hard work he has put into Wikipedia. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 10:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm coming to the view that Yorkshirian's problems are essentially issues of intolerance and occasional incivility towards other editors, occasioned by his hyperactivity and consequent frustrations here - not to mention getting into "bad company", see above! He still needs to learn more about etiquette and what WP:AGF means. But it's undeniable that he does impressive work - House of Neville, for example - and I'm getting more confident that good management would enable him to become a positive benefit here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

7 years, 11 months, and 30 days

Wow. When did you become an admin? Joe Chill (talk) 00:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't notice that your user page had the answer. Sorry. Joe Chill (talk) 00:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

EC well I would have been happy to tell you anyway. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

History Wars

I hope you have done a little bit of reading (only a few minutes is needed) to see that the theory that the Tasmanian natives died of disease is in fact a fringe denialist history, dating back a few years only, with absolutely no support in the acadmic world. Other people have come to the page, including a third administrator (you and PBS are the other two), but the problem remains, and will remain, until there is some cooperation among the mainstream defenders.

If you are a mainstream defender, and you would like to fix the problem, the main contributors (PBS and Webley) need to be outnumbered by people willing to antagonize. There is no "consensus" approach, because the two editors in question will wikilawyer away any sources that assert the majority position, and wikilawyer out any sources that qualify Windschuttle as fringe. The only way to fix this is to be a jerk. I am a jerk by nature, but I am hoping you could help out by being a jerk as well.Likebox (talk) 14:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

No! Theresa Knott | token threats 08:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that's your prerogative. But then you are part of the problem, and any "help" you give would be counterproductive.Likebox (talk) 20:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I was just 'passing through' to see if there had been anything interesting put on your talk page regarding the History Wars article and noticed the above comment. I feel like I should apologise on behalf of, well, my entire country for the above. Someone who offers to help doesn't deserve that. Webley442 (talk) 12:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

It appears that Likebox is an American, not an Australian, so rather than apologise on behalf of my entire country (Australia) perhaps I should have apologised on behalf of "the Colonies"?Webley442 (talk) 02:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Laughs. I'm in Australia at the moment with only a limited access to the internet, so I'll be taking a look at history wars more when I get back home. Theresa Knott | token threats 10:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

POV vandal continues after block expires

Hi Theresa, Two days ago (On August 3) you blocked User:Izzac56 for 31 hours due to his continued POV vandalism at the article List of Freemasons (he was repeatedly removing Mustafa Kemal Atatürk from the list, dispite the fact that there are multiple citations indicating that he belongs on it). As soon as his block expired he immediately returned and removed the exact same material (see: this diff).

A look at his contributions) this is his only reason for logging on to Wikipedia, and the repetition after his block makes it is obvious that he has no intention of halting his disruptive behavior. I don't know if you can help... but if you can it would be appreciated. Blueboar (talk) 03:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Well it seems that he has already been blocked. Let me know if he returns. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Catterick‎

Since making the complaint about User:Yorkshirian (further uppage) I have not bumped into that user in my Wikipedia travels. However, a couple of days ago a cryptic message suddenly appeared on my Talk page from an (ahem) "new" User called User:Catterick‎, defending User:Yorkshirian. Although not explicitly an ad hominem attack, there was zero substantive content, and an underlying malevolance of the "I know where you live" variety.

Since then that user's contributions to my Talk page have become explicitly abusive, eg. calling me an "arsehole".

I have no idea who this character is, but it seems crystal clear to me they are a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user with some kind of old grudge. It is a bit worrying that they clearly have a connection to Yorkshirian, who by the way has been leaving some pretty abusive, unfounded, sweeping attacks on other Users on Talk:England (eg. "the SNP and Plaid exist purely to present Anglophobia"). Not at all helpful IMHO. In fact downright designed to pour poison into the Wikipedia project.

Please could you have a look at the contributions of Catterick? Thanks. --Mais oui! (talk) 05:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI User:Catterick, who currently signs as "A Merry Old Soul" (see comments further up this page), used to be User:Lord Loxley and no doubt others (I haven't checked), and has a very long history of crank edits, blocks (usually evaded) and personal abuse (including "death threats"). Hopefully, one day someone will take some firm action. In the meantime, WP:DNFTT applies. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

How do you know he was Lord Loxley? Theresa Knott | token threats 09:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I suppose I don't know for certain, but it seemed obvious to me from his editing interests and style. I thought he might have "confessed" somewhere, but I can't track it down now. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:26, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

The Lord Loxley link was suggested here - plenty of circumstantial evidence. I also believe he was User:IP Address. Previous discussions here and here - and elsewhere, I'm sure. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Of course! I've just remembered this discussion, which also seemed to "out" him as User:Kenneth Alan, User:Kenneth Alansson, User:ScapegoatVandal, User:Fitzpaine, User:Borderer, User:68.110.9.62, and User:24.255.40.174. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

If you do find evidence please let me know. In the meantime I'm watching his behaviour closely. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, he seems pretty fond of using sockpuppets! Theresa Knott | token threats 22:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, Theresa...Ghmyrtle believes I am anti-Welsh, anti-Cornish and anti-Breton, all because I am not uncomfortable of the association between English and British, as he does see them mutually exclusive to some extreme level of nazi pedantry. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it is what spawned his witchhunt of me in the first place, after many arguments on Talk:British Isles and Talk:British Empire, in which he has consciously aligned himself with those who ascribe to a "Celtic persona" in contention to an "evil Anglo-supremacist" establishment. He doesn't realise that I don't and wouldn't want to defend the "Establishment" (which I myself have attacked for different reasons than him and his ilk, such as about hypocrisy and lies about democracy and supposed insular "nativism" by an anti-Catholic, Teutonic love affair), but wish for three common communities of Irish (true insulars), British and English (both Roman continentals) in these Isles. I identify with a cross between the latter two and not because of the Government at all, but partly in rejection of the way things are that he also dislikes. There are many hairs to split, but they are worth it to explain myself. For instance, just because I disagree with the way to go about achieving his goals of the Celtic Nations, doesn't mean I oppose the general end goals, apart from some uncompromising approach to separatism. I believe in a cooperative group of communities, despite their distinctions, because the over all commonalities are generally close enough to naturally combine in the same situations and experiences. This is what the world sees of the English speaking world as it is percieved of in Europe. Whether or not we even should be forced to communicate in English, because of some ancient trials and tribulations which make English something impossible to avoid today, is irrelevant. I try to learn other languages often and whilst the Brythonic seem broachable, the Gaelic are a bit more difficult apart from personal and place names. My interest is not in suppressing a culture, but in embracing it. By this opinion, I mean to avoid jumping to the conclusion of devolution supremacists. I am even naming my children after the ancients of Britain. I would never even consider using an explicitly Teutonic name. Why? Well, it's nothing to do with a "self-hating" Englishman, because according to the language family categorisation of ethnic groups, my own original ancestors did not speak English, but gained this custom by mere association and assimilation. What does this make them or me, Uncle Toms and collaborators? In truth, I really don't need to explain myself to anybody here...but I felt like it to try and help dispel Ghmyrtle's myth about my character and motives. "We aren't so different, you and I" is my POV, really. It may simply be that he, Yorkshirian and myself, along with the others, are all too much alike to truly get along. "This here town ain't big enough for the both of us", etc. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 14:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but I am simply not interested in what you think someone else believes about you. It has no relevance whatsoever. Theresa Knott | token threats 14:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I've no idea what I've done to deserve this. Some reversion a few months ago, I suspect, which I have long forgotten, but for some obscure reason he seems to be fixated on targeting me above others. I am getting just a teeny bit fed up with it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you should avoid me when I am editing, considering your checkered past in flamebaiting me. You can't pretend you don't know what you are doing. Also, it is good that you patched up with Yorkshirian real fast, but it was only to cover up what you had been doing, in trolling him. You then refocussed your trolling back on me again. You need to stop doing this to either him or myself. Perhaps, you could patch things up with me the way you did with Yorkshirian and I would accept this apology, if it is backed up with proper action. No "innocent filibusters" of my contributions to Wikipedia and I would rather be on good terms with you with respect to all of these articles you claim to be interested in. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 01:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

You are very hard to reach but by my persecutor. Would the converse apply, that it is irrelevant what he thinks I think of him and why he is so determined to destroy me? You must be joking if you are willing to simply go along with whatever he throws at you and simply because I protest this situation, you are feeling tighter with him? How predictable. If you think it makes sense to be so swayed by emotions in an admin position, to simply agree with the charges made against the defendant by the plaintiff, then what are you, if not a partial prosecutor? You have already made up your mind, so what else do I have to look for at Wikipedia? You play fetch when your master tosses you a bone. Yea, even the female of the species, if you so wish to be offended at the reality of the situation. Go ahead and ban me for reacting perfectly normal to unsubstantiated allegations and your lack of regard for a formal inquiry. You just simply hover and threaten, never promising. How worthless my time is with you. Stay away from my talk page, as I intend to remove myself from future communications here. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 14:44, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I am not in the least bit offended, but note please that I am only interested in evidence not opinions. Yoy will note that I asked for evidence of sockpuppetry and I got it. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

No you did not, or else you would have pursued an admin action against me. You have played coy. What if I admitted to being a WP:meatpuppet, which many people appear to be on my Nixonian enemies list here, all conveniently pushing the same agenda against my contributions? Paranoid much? Ghmyrtle seems to be in the same position he claims of me, that I make unverifiable claims. You have yet to show your real hand if and in what case you intend to do about anything. Face it though, if he was right...there'd be nothing you could do about it anyways...not that I'm a hacker or anything, but you'd never know for sure. As with User:Mais oui! above, 'I know where you live'. You lot ought to get real. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by that. It looks like a threat.Theresa Knott | token threats 15:42, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

It is whatever you wish. After all, this is what we have been discussing, correct? Make it up as you go. I'm sure everybody will agree with you, simply because it is a plausible fantasy, a useful tool in your polemics against me, tiring of what Ghmyrtle left on your doorstep. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 15:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Earlier reply

Theresa, I have unfortunately similar problems that face Yorkshirian and hoped to have simply shown him empathy and defense of his positions on some issues and with some people who themselves, come off as abrasive and pushy, argumentative and often self-righteous. Ghmyrtle is a known troll who likes to get me riled up in anything related to the category of "Brythonic" this or that. You can see this at Talk:English_people#I.27d_really_like_to_retire.2C_so_quit_it_Ghmyrtle_and_Snowded. Fortunately, those who used to join him in his harrassment of me have dropped their fascination. He somehow knows the right way to infuriate me, as he would stalk and contend with my contributions, for the sole purpose of instigation. I noticed that since Yorkshirian and I share similar interests, Ghmyrtle has also made a bit of trouble for him, although Yorkshirian doesn't want to protest too much, considering you have done a very kind thing for him. I would really prefer the feud with Ghmyrtle to stop and I don't want to discuss this on my talk page. I would rather things be quiet there for some time, even positive things from positive and reassuring people. I'd prefer to avoid arguments now, because the other sides of these arguments do what they wish and get away with whatever amount of rudeness and hostility they are comfortable with, but I am in no position to enjoy the "fruits of war", as they seem to be doing in attacking me. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 10:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Surely you notice how Ghmyrtle baited me in the section above and here, as he's done before to me (English people), trying to become part of "bandwagon edit warring" in which he noses himself in to oppose my edits, if any discrepency at all may have come about and here, after I warned Yorkshirian to watch out for his treachery and because he is of the same mind as this person, thus now Ghmyrtle (and confederate in arms User:Daicaregos, whose tirade here sums up what the two think of Yorkshirian and myself--tempers here too) may not like it, but there are those who happen to be different than them and come at the same subjects likewise? It's not enough that somebody may differ in sentiment, such as not being one of the lemmings or pied piper followers, but to oppose activism is seen as an affront by those blinded by their zeal. To take an unimpressed stance is apparently the worst one can do and people like the above will try to destroy you for it. Sure, I may respond roughly to being roughed up, but wouldn't you get upset if you happened to be passing a footie match and get run over by hooligan yobs? I love footie, but don't care for the extremists' behaviour. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 10:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

He is also now engaging in vandalism at Richmondshire, by seeking to reinstate unverified text which was last seen in the deleted article Honour of Richmond, established by single-topic editor User:Brand of Organic (another alias, I assume). Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:09, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hostile allegations are all these are. Twist and distort situations to make a mountain out of a molehill. "Ill news is an ill guest". If you're suckered into Ghmyrtle's character assassination, it would not be the first time. On the other hand, you seem like you could be just smart enough to not fall for it. What do you think, eh Theresa? A Merry Old Soul (talk) 12:35, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry I'm pretty smart. I am also pretty close to blocking you for your personal attacks against other users and disruptive editing. Don't even think about claiming baiting, that holds no water with me. I suggest you stop with the personal attacks and stop going looking for trouble. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you simply profess absolute neutrality and disinterest, like an 'all of you quit bothering me and go away' kind of affair? Please, it would be for the best. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 13:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind people posting on my talk page. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Right, you prefer to hear allegations and keep them in mind. When a reply is made to said libel, you assent and acquiesce only to the original demand for a social death as though you will be the lightning rod for somebody's electrocution. Gotta love how it profits to be an admin. Lather the slop from a pig trough on and see how slick it all shines. There's no way to save face but repudiate, which neither my attacker, nor his preferred admin will ever do. There's too much at stake in online Machiavellian personality warfare. This is the equivalent of popularity contests at primary school, with rich and poor, beautiful melodramatics and know-it-alls at each others' throats. You choose your role and execute, I dare you. To become my enemy's friend in the course of making me an enemy of said new friend, will not obviously make me a friend of my enemy's friend. What, am I masochistic? No, sorry you may be mistaken. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes! I'm fine with people making allegations. I do actually check them and only act when I find those allegations substantial. When I checked the allegations about you I concluded that you are hot headed, sometimes actively go looking for trouble and frequently make personal attacks, why is why I warned you that any more of that will result in a block. I'm sorry if that doesn't make me your friend, but to be honest I am nobodies friend in this instance. I am an admin, doing my admin job. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, it appears you have toned down. My back is killing me and that may make me just a hair more intolerant to high-handedness than I usually am, which is an issue here, because Ghmyrtle has an old vendetta against me from months ago and won't stop it, but you haven't looked into that, have you, nor will you? After all, you have made no indication that you care, so why should I care about your admim "professionalism"? Please, nobody flame me or Yorkshirian whilst I wallow in a wikibreak. I have odd working hours and it doesn't help when everybody who hates me, is active during the time I am away. That's partly what drives my unhappiness here. I feel baited all the time and to see Yorkshirian, who is so much like me, suffering in common, all I feel I can do is defend him during his persecutions and manhandling by hypocritical others that ought to look in the mirror and practicing what kind of rudeness upon themselves, that they assume would be all right to lambast upon another. Perhaps their self-hatred leads them to take it out on him and me...it could be an additional problem that poisons the waters. Ahh, my back. Well, all's well that ends well. I promise not to involve myself in any Wikipedia for several hours up to a day or so. Can I keep this promise to myself? I don't know. I have a wikiaddiction. A Merry Old Soul (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Theresa, I've got quite a bit on this morning, but I'll try and write something on there this afternoon if thats alright. I only became aware of Catterick a couple of days ago, but we seem to have some of the same subject interests. I think the bias lobby groups he is trying to stop from proliferating Wikipedia articles with myth making propaganda (post-Trotskyite, primitivist regionalism and separatism), is a very useful contribution. But he needs to go about it in a far more cool headed way - ie, calm discussion on talkpages and presentation of academic references. Its more collaborative to break down nationalistic disinformation with academic references IMO, rather than all out calling somebody an "arsehole" (which just inflames the situation). - Yorkshirian (talk) 09:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes this afternoon will be fine. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Your old user page

I just did a history merge on User:Theresa knott/Old. I found it while checking out some old deleted edits. Hope you don't mind. Graham87 09:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi Admin, I want to report about multiple vandalism for the article Jerusalem. Every time I add the fact that Jerusalem is the offical capital for Stat of palestine according to The Palestinian Basic Law, some users come to delete it. then there is this guy Hertz1888, telling me about blocking policy, but he did'nt send the blocking policy for the other users whom were deleting my edits. can you see those guys whats wrong with them, because I am totally tired of this subject. they wirte what ever they want and delete any thing dosen't agree with thier own will. Thanks Ahmad2099 (talk) 02:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Please note: This user has been disregarding repeated requests by various editors to respect an existing consensus, and invitations to join in discussion, and has reinserted the same edit five times. Please see this message. The specific issue is under discussion currently (or has been recently), and the wording of the lead results from many lengthy previous discussions, with general agreement to make no fundamental changes without consensus. Hertz1888 (talk) 23:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Jim and Mary McCartney

Mr. Happy-Go-Lucky Catterick (whom you blocked) is revving up his engines again.--andreasegde (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Yorkshirian

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Yorkshirian. Thanks. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 13:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

More legal threats from Alastair Haines

Hello Theresa. Back in April, Alastair Haines was blocked indefinitely for making legal threats against Wikipedia. After some discussion you unblocked him with the understanding that "he will be blocked indefinitely if he ever makes a legal threat again". You may want to take a look at [22] and [23]. Although they are somewhat veiled, they certainly sound like legal threats to me. Kaldari (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I just found out that Alastair was warned about making actual or perceived legal threats in his previous Request for Arbitration, so even if they are veiled threats, he should know better by now. Kaldari (talk) 21:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

You may also want to take a look at this. Kaldari (talk) 01:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but I have been away from Wikipedia for months and don't know what has been going on here.Although I did unblock him he was immediately reblocked. If this has gone to arbitration I'd rather let them deal with it. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:02, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Raleigh Rheindart

stop removing, it is on {hangon}}

Hell no! You need to read our policies. I have salted the article to prevent you from recreating it. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Your stupid! Your policy says that when it is on Hangon, we should resolve it in another way! Not just deleting the page, your wasting your time, in MINE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atenzor (talk • contribs) 00:18, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh I agree that it's a waste of both our times. So try this, stop posting a bloody copyvio over and over again and I'll stop deleting it. Also I will not be forced to block you.So it's a win for both of us. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I just don't understand how are people suppose to create wiki pages? I puted Hangon, I followed the policy and you just remove it without waiting? Besides, you can contact Flemmung at variousmusik@gmail.com and he might confirm something with you. I copy-pasted because it is too long

to write all of that, we are not in the middle ages. I mean com'on, who are you kidding here?

Well in the middle ages they didn't have copyright laws. But we do, and you are not allowed to copy other people's writing. In addition to that the composer doesn't meet our notability guidelines. So you cannot create that article. Simple. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

What kind of discrimination of composers is this? Just because he is not popular/known, he doesn't belong here? What kind of encyclopedia is this? A real encyclopedia should have all possible things in it, popular or not, so people can know things they didn't! Besides, I don't see what is this related to "copyright laws" anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atenzor (talk • contribs) 00:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

• By law, you cannot just go to a website and copy and paste their work here, simple as that.
• Composers need to popular enough that multiple people have written about him or her. That way all information is verifiable. Thems are the rules here. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Well I will create a website with a wiki on it, therefor you can't edit/remove it and it will be considered just like a wikipedia page, without copyright bullshit and stuff. Good day! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atenzor (talk • contribs) 00:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Good day, well actually good night as I'm off to bed now. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:45, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Theresa, Thanks for your promt help with BjörnBergman! Merry Christmas! Rex Sueciæ ✎ 18:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC) (Sysop on Swedish Wikipedia)

Proposed topic ban for User:PCHS-NJROTC

You may be interested in this thread at ANI. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I have opened a new discussion here. Just letting you know since you were the admin who gave PCHS-NJROTC the earlier, related topic ban on Mmmbabies. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Chmod007/Copy of User talk:33451/2004 Archive

User:Chmod007/Copy of User talk:33451/2004 Archive, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Chmod007/Copy of User talk:33451/2004 Archive and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Chmod007/Copy of User talk:33451/2004 Archive during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Sultaniman

Hi Theresa. I saw that you blocked User:Sultaniman for 31 hours, for violation of WP:Civil. Just so you know, this guy has also violated WP:3rr on five different pages [24] [25][][26][27] , despite repeated warnings. [28] He has also refused to use the talk page of those pages, or seek a consensus. His edits on these pages, could also be considered vandalism, as he is engaged in mass removal of sourced material. Given the severity of his incivility, and his inability to follow various Wikipedia polices , could you please consider extending his block. As it is, the punishment does not fit the crime. --Kurdo777 (talk) 13:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

No but what I will do is reblock if his behaviour continues once the 31 hours are up. Theresa Knott | token threats 14:13, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting his incivility on my Talk Page. (Taivo (talk) 15:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC))

No problem. Theresa Knott | token threats 15:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Vineyard bank

It is not a copyright violation because it is a printing from the FDIC, a US Federal Gov entity. I will remove the copyrighted part. Please check in a few minutes. Thanks. Cavscoutrecruiter (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Another admin has already deleted the article. Do you need me to restore it for you? Theresa Knott | token threats 21:13, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

MancinoMats

I have removed the autoblock from MancinoMats (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and counseled him regarding conflict of interest. I have creates the account Incipient09 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for him to use. Fred Talk 23:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Question re: Iammickjagger (talk · contribs)

Hello! I just wanted to ask you a question regarding your removal of that username from the UAA noticeboard. I recognize that someone had commented regarding taking the situation to AIV, however, my primary concern behind taking the name to UAA was not the vandalism. While the vandalism appears to have stopped, my question remains: is it not a blatant violation of the username policy to claim that one is Mick Jagger? I may be mistaken, so please advise. Thanks! --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 06:27, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Ani#Block_review_please. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 15:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Best Wishes for 2010, FloNight♥♥♥♥ 15:27, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For remaining fair, being an outstanding arbitrator, and not putting me through a wood chipper two years ago after that ridiculous response. Also note I'm not doing this to suck up or anything, but because I feel as if you rightfully deserve this. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 05:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Ban

hello! my username is plerimest. you blocked my user account in march 2009 on the grounds that "Only contributions are to send abusive emails". I dont know what that means. I have never written mails in wikipedia. Beyond that I am writing only in german, so why does a english administrator block me? I am here to help wikipedia and I have never done anything outlawed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.19.169.170 (talk) 01:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually it looks like it was 2008, so nearly 2 years ago, unfortunately I can't remember the incident off the top of my head but will look into it. It appears that User:Sceptre left a warning message on your talk page telling not to email personal attacks, and that doing so would result in a block. That was on the 16th March 2008. Early on the 17th of March you blanked that warning and around 12 hours later I blocked you. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:54, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I have unblocked the account. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Your input requested

Just in case you missed my earlier note, I want to direct your attention to this discussion at AN. You gave PCHS-NJROTC a topic ban on Mmbabies-related activities, so I think your thoughts about a topic ban on abuse reporting in general would be worth hearing. In fact, I have invoked your name in the discussion. I note that PCHS-NJROTC has awarded you a "barnstar of diplomacy" in the past few days, so maybe you have already discussed this with him offwiki. Perhaps you could comment at AN, even if your comment is that you disagree with the proposal or simply have no opinion? Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I did miss your note, and I have not talked to him off wiki. I'll take a look. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your input in the matter. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

• gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

• ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

FYI

A user is requesting via proxy to be unblocked, see here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:BjörnBergman. –xeno^talk 22:46, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Please move

Can you please move the article Jenna Bush to Jenna Hager. Her name is Jenna Hager, now when she is married to Jimmy Hager. Thanks for your attention. BjörnBergman (talk) 22:50 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Mentorship

I wonder if you might consider joining others in a mentorship committee for me?

I invite you to take a look at an old edit at Wikipedia:Mentorship#Unintended consequences? In the search for a mentor deemed acceptable by ArbCom, I cite this as a arguably useful context for discussing what I have in mind.

I reach out today, in part, because of the "teachable moment" which failed to develop in November 2008 here. In the months since I created an article about the "Teachable moment," the topic has taken on an unanticipated personal relevance which caused me to re-visit the situation in which I first encountered you.

I have also sent you an e-mail. Please contact me by e-mail or on my talk page --Tenmei (talk) 19:23, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

How mentorship will work?

Theresa knott -- I wonder if the perspective of a former arbitrator might help mitigate some of the inevitable lessons learned the hard way through trial and error? Does something spring to mind which is obvious to you but not to us? If not, good.

Roger Davies seeks more information from the mentors about how mentoring will work.

I hope these words will help "prime" the pump. I believe that what can be done in pre-planning has been accomplished. We will be figuring it out together as the future unfolds. A restatement is straightforward:

• An initial editing strategy based on a theory of wiki-pacifism was suggested by the userpage of Leujohn in Hong Kong.
• Fasten in Germany suggested that I tentatively adopt pacifist tactics as an experiment derived from salutary premises which I posted at Wikipedia:Mentorship#Unanticipated Consequences, especially the words of a famous German:

We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. — Albert Einstein

In the absence of any better alternative, I agreed; however, a willingness to experiment with a novel tactic represents only a superficial change. This is useful as an exploratory gambit, but not transformative. I am not persuaded that pacifist action is workable even in this experimental approach, but we'll see.

The Latin axiom qui tacet consentire videtur is mirrored in WP:Silence + WP:Consensus. In our wiki-context, I would like to find a way to construe pacifist non-confrontation ≠ WP:Silence. In resolving these seeming contradictions, the mentors' points-of-view are essential. Together we will discover otherwise unrecognized alternatives.

In the context of this specific issue, Xavexgoem has agreed to be a non-public mentor. "Finding of facts" in the decision at Tang Dynasty encompassed User talk:Xavexgoem/archive5#Seeking help in presenting thoughts clearly. Xavexgoem's experience in mediation will help remedy an arguable deficit in the composition of our small group. Core policies are the tools at hand; and Xavexgoem agreed to help connect the dots in hopes that it could benefit more than me.

Does this help you make better guesses about how mentorship will work? Suggestions? Comments? --Tenmei (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Mentorship

Theresa knott -- In the past, you have made yourself available for open-ended questions of this sort.

1st try -- message was plausibly "puzzling" or too complicated

At best, this enquiry will serve as a tipping point which causes you to help me comprehend what I would otherwise fail to understand. At worst, you will not read this because your interest in Wikipedia has waned; and this becomes the sound of one hand clapping. The topic needing resolution is something to do with organizing? or structural planning? This is a draft effort to use graphics as a tool in crafting a non-verbose response to Carcharoth's diffs here and here. If you please, are you willing to help me improve this with constructive criticism. What I construe as Carcharoth's main points are highlighted in yellow. I plan to post the following in an ArbCom thread. Can it be made clearer? shorter? better? If you please, I hope you will help resolve this situation by making a thoughtful comment at active ArbCom thread. Arbitrator views and discussion -- Carcharoth's diffs Note: The text highlighted in beige is already posted in the thread. Arbitrator views and discussion I note the comments of a few of the editors approached to act as mentors. I would like to know (a) how you will address differences amongst yourselves (a situation we have encountered in other mentoring situations); (b) what range of actions you are willing to undertake as individuals and as a group; (c) how the "group" will work when Tenmei is also receiving private advice from individuals not specifically included in the group of mentors. In answer to the question above, Tenmei's six-month topic ban on the subject of Tang Dynasty begins once the mentorship is approved. Risker (talk) 05:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC) This can't move forward until Risker's questions above are answered. Could a clerk please notify the editors who need to comment here. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 13:07, 13 March 2010 (UTC) Tenmei, if you want DGG to comment here, by all means invite him to do so. As for your comments about "raising the bar", it is not unreasonable for us to ask the possible mentors to lay out here what they see as their role in all this. I count, so far, Doc James and Kraftlos (of those you list) and in addition to this, Nihonjoe and Coppertwig. The layout at User talk:Tenmei/Sub-page Alerts is impressive, but there needs to be some indication of how this will work, otherwise this risks becoming a time sink if it goes wrong. Carcharoth (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC) Tenmei, I'm supportive of you resuming editing with mentors, but please be patient and wait for other arbitrators and those willing to mentor you to respond here. I realise it must be frustrating for you, but if you wait just a little bit longer and let others speak, then we may finally get something workable set up here. We want this to work, not collapse because it was not set up properly. Carcharoth (talk) 03:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC) GOOD — yes, of course "...it is not unreasonable for us to ask the possible mentors to lay out here what they see as their role in all this"Carcharoth NO -- it is unreasonable to pose ill-defined hypotheticals. Unreasonable to expect anyone to formulate crisp analysis or "answers" given that parameters of prospective mentoring issues are non-specific. The flexible role of mentors exists to address unforeseen problematic circumstances which can only happen as the future unfolds. Establishing tentative framework of organization and plan for mentoring task force is accomplished; but it was and continues to be a time sink in relation to primary mentoring objectives, e.g., addressing express WP:TLDR problems. --Tenmei (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC) WRONG "...there needs to be some indication of how this will work, otherwise this risks becoming a time sink if it goes wrong."Carcharoth NO -- No one can predict how this is going to work. The only thing to be done is to see how the teamwork relationships evolve across coming weeks and months. NO -- this is already a time sink with no observable rewards/outcomes, no difference in non-contextualized speculations, no way to distinguish "right" or "wrong", and no apparent linkages with •cohort of allegations in record •principles adduced in record •findings-of-fact adduced in record •remedies adduced in record •record of ArbCom uninvolved inaction. --Tenmei (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC) DISCONNECT? or DISJUNCTION? Further speculative planning is unproductive. Conventions of law of diminishing returns inform prudent decision to terminate pre-planning. The exercise is nothing other than a discouraging time sink. --Tenmei (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC) "...please be patient and wait for other arbitrators and those willing to mentor you to respond here. I realise it must be frustrating for you, but if you wait just a little bit longer and let others speak" Carcharoth NO -- Frustration? Frustration of purpose? I have now waited for NINE MONTHS for responses to questions about what happened in the ArbCom case. •Sept 09, waiting 3 months -- Carcharoth e-mail postpones questions with delay •Dec 09, waiting 6 months -- complaint-driven ArbCom adopts to conclusory allegations without scrutiny or discussion, ArbCom requires delay until mentors can be located •Mar 10, waiting 9 months -- ArbCom exacerbates time sink with delay NO -- Frustration = Aggravation? Making things worse? And this helps to mitigate WP:TLDR in what way? --Tenmei (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC) "...then we may finally get something workable set up here. We want this to work, not collapse because it was not set up properly."Carcharoth NO -- the notion that ArbCom has anything to do with "setting something up" is an illustration of The Emperors New Clothes which entails adverse consequences of pointless delay. NO -- collapse or failure has little or nothing to do with ArbCom except •avoiding time sink of parsing theories and hypotheticals •ensuring that volunteer mentors receive ArbCom's support and encouragement and thanks in addition to mine •determining parameters for decision-making which leads to ending involuntary mentorship. --Tenmei (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Involuntary mentorship is defined as punitive. •NINE MONTHS of punishment for what? teaches constructive lessons in what way? •THREE MONTHS blocked editing for what? expands comprehension or understanding in what manner? And this helps to mitigate WP:TLDR as predictable sequelae from what methods? Summarizing this record: Escalating alphabeticals, catchwords, catch phrases, etc. have overwhelmed coherent discussion with references to policy acronyms and loaded language. My seriatim responses were derided as WP:TLDR ... and delay muddied an already complicated array of facts, factoids and factors. --Tenmei (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Hypotheticals In theory, it is not unreasonable to ask hypothetical questions; but in practice, the attempt can easily devolve into a time sink. Illustrating the point with a timely issue: Is there a constructive value in examining failures attributable to ArbCom — serial incidents in which ArbCom snatched defeat from the jaws of victory? Can you suggest a better way to solicit your help in a specific context? I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

My initial message is now collapsed. Mentors offered suggestions about how I could have written differently:

• diff "I would suggest writing shorter responses ... and just in general not try to summarize the entire situation ...." -- Kraftlos 19:39, 18 March 2010
• diff "I am learning to give people what they ask for. If they want more info, they'll ask for it ... [which] would be better than being flooded with information that must be sorted through. --McDoobAU93 00:40, 19 March 2010

Let's pretend I didn't send you the "1st try" message. Instead, let's assume this "2nd try" message is the beginning of an unanticipated new thread.

If you please, I want to ask for two things:

Advice. I want to ask for comments about the use of format as a device (a) to focus my comments and (b) to limit the number of words.

Action. Will you post a comment at the active ArbCom thread about a mentoring group for me?

Thank you for your willingness to help me to re-think a style of communication which is a barrier to my working collaboratively with other people in our Wikipedia venue. --Tenmei (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free images

Hi, File:Scum Carlin.JPG, File:Scum Archer.JPG, File:Scum Davis.JPG, and File:Scum Banks.JPG are nominated for deletion. Regards Hekerui (talk) 09:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

RfC on Community de-adminship

You are receiving this message because you contributed to Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC and have not participated at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/RfC or been directly informed this RfC has opened. Please accept my apologies if you have been informed of and/or participated in the RfC already.

This RfC has opened and your comments are welcome and encouraged. Please visit Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/RfC. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Skybridge.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Skybridge.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 08:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The original image was taken and posted by someone trolling. Basically he took a photo of two topless girls on the bridge. The original file stated that the creator agreed to to licence it, but that file has since been deleted it and for some reason I cannot undelete. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:12, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

New Account

Could you maybe check the IP to this account and see that its to my new account when i get it created?... Blackmagic1234 (talk) 09:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are asking here. Admins cannot check IPs but why would you even want the same IP that would be foolish wouldn't it? Theresa Knott | token threats 09:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

well my IP doesn't change unless the computer or router in the basement get turned off or reset .. or something lol Blackmagic1234 (talk) 09:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Just to let you know

I was not "stalking" Blackmagic1234. I had an uncle named Ken who believe it or not, died recently, and I was on the article. I'm allowed to edit, and other accounts I had(the Abby ones), I made each new one to get away from him, and at one point, when I made Abby_94 and only edited articles that he wouldn't edit, he found that one and posted about it. So he did stalking too, if you say I stalked, well from that, so did he. He also made the account Higgys to harass me back in May 2009 but nothing was done about it. It seems that Wikipedia picks their favorites, and I know that sounds immature, but that's what it seems to me. Anyway, if I edit articles that he knows that I edit, I'll be doing what I've been doing, editing from IP addresses so he can't track me, and I don't care if he does the same, since I wasn't tracking him. I'm sorry if you think I was, and like I said before, it does seem that Wikipedia picks their favorites, since I'm being blocked for stuff, yet, when he made the account Higgys to harass me in May 2009, I reported it, and nothing was done as a checkuser, yet there should have been. 142.162.194.154 (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for for block evasion. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Blackmagic1234

It wasn't blatantly obvious to me. How are we not to think that it could have been his stalker vandalizing his User page? Woogee (talk) 19:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Why would the stalker revert her previous edit first? That wouldn't make any sense. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:35, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Funny how she says she had a uncle named Kenneth yet she never touched the article on-tell I went at it um stalker much? Or the article Kitty she never touched it but when I went at it She decided to go at it as User:KittensAndCats2010 or the article Sean I believe User:MesJoursDeFaux is her AGAIN oh wait lets not forget our special guest User:CloudyWesmisho in Lolicon she every bloody time I made a edit she would create a new account and edit what ever i did 142.163.148.8 (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't give a shit! Just get a new account already and let the matter drop. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:08, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		For your helpfulness over at WP:RD/MA, and your patience answering all my questions. :) PerfectProposal 19:39, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of adding this to the Barnstars section on your userspace. Hope you don't mind. PerfectProposal 19:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Theresa Knott | token threats 07:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

• And your uttering of "ENOUGH!!!" over at WP:WQA is very much appreciated, though it somehow reminds me of the white wizard - Gandalf from JRR Tolkien's epic trilogy. Cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 10:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

ha ha I like it. Theresa Knott | token threats 14:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Ref desk

Hi! I've just removed your advice on the ref desk to take paracetamol. While that is probably the best advice, we can't give it. We don't know if the OP is on other drugs that might combine badly with paracetamol or has some underlying condition or something else that I can't think of since I'm not an expert on the subject. That is why we always steer well clear of giving any medical advice, even really obvious stuff. --Tango (talk) 00:43, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

It's an over the4 counter medicine that can simply be purchased in a supermarket. Theresa Knott | token threats 00:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't matter. It is still medical treatment. --Tango (talk) 21:55, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Mrs. Knott

Hello, Could you please remove the three month protection on my userpage, that's be grand. I think it is a bit much to prevent editing of my userpage for 3 months. If you would that's be great. Thanks. TheClerksWell (talk) 05:35, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Well obviously you would think that. However I disagree, there is no particular need to edit your userpage whatsoever, and your trolling made me think that you are not really here to edit constructively. So why not take a break from jokes etc and just edit the encylopedia. I will not remove the protection myself, but i am off on holiday for a couple of weeks with limited access to the internet. So if you can persuade another admin that lifting the protection is a good idea then that's fine with me. They can do so with my blessing. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually scrub that. I've since seen that you chose to troll my userpage instead. Oh well. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

the campus

What can make The Campus (web series) stay on wikipedia? And How does "The Suburbs (web series)" stay online. The Campus has tens of thousands more views and is way more popular. And it was also mentioned in the Much Music blog. Here http://blog.muchmusic.com/my-top-3-twitter-recommendations/ . It's mentioned in the interview. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Senecagrad (talk • contribs) 13:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Multiple mentions in the mainstream press. Blogs are not normally considered suitable as references, newspapers, tv shows, national radio shows are. You would need more than one such reference. Theresa Knott | token threats 13:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Userpage unprotection request

In light of this unblock request, what do you think about unprotecting the editor's userpage, as well?--Chaser (talk) 03:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Please? Clerkenwell TALK PAGE! 05:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

• TheClerksWell, you're running the risk of getting another BLOCK if you don't stop spamming people's talk pages soon. Note if you have posted your request at one of the Administrator's talk page, please stick to it and wait~! We are all human beings, and we have important things in REAL LIFE to attend to first. Take heed. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 05:38, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Not going to happen, not from me anyway, and not at this moment. I'm away for a couple of weeks now. I'll take another look when I get back. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

User pinged me, are you OK with letting him edit it again? –xeno^talk 19:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Since you appear to be on a bit of a break, I went ahead and restored their ability to edit their userpage. –xeno^talk 23:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I think she said another editor can let me if it seems fit. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 19:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok,  Done: just stay away from the tomfoolery/jiggerypokery. –xeno^talk 23:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine with this as long as he does actually behave himself and stops the trolling. Theresa Knott | token threats 16:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		To Theresa knott, for dedication to Wikipedia. Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back! Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, although I often take quite long breaks, I intend never to actually leave for good. Theresa Knott | token threats 06:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

User:TheClerksWell

I was just about to ask that an admin delete this page, as it provides both age and location data. I see you've protected it. Do you think that a 14 year old should be revealing which town of 232 souls he lives in? Hipocrite (talk) 02:11, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it's a township with 50,000 people, thank you. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE! 03:04, 10 April 2010 (UTC) Why should my page be deleted, I can just remove the info, that is, if she unlocks the page that she so casually locked for three months. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE! 03:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Frustrated

Thanks for trying to understand... could I email you some facts to review? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 20:37, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

• Done. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 20:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Per discussion, WP:DENY and WP:RBI, everything has been removed. Cheers! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 22:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Question

Per this edit @ User talk:Dave1185/unprotected talk page#Welcome to Georgie's Italian Restaurant, why aren't those involved Admins want to play whack-a-mole with him? Chicken? Except for you, it is my personal opinion that some of these people are well capable of writing a fat check which they can't cash with their big mouth as they go about making comments/promises and passing judgments. Anyway, I'm off to a 2 week vacation starting this weekend, any idea how to leave a note for these bozos know of it? Thanks and cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 00:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Generally I just put a note on my talk page saying I'm on vacation to let people know. As for the 'bozos' the point of the ignoring is that you ignore it. Seriously, until you do you remain an attractive target. Do you know what I do when someone tries to troll me? Nothing! Theresa Knott | token threats 07:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Also having checked, the IP in question was already blocked by another admin, so I have no idea what your actual complaint is. Theresa Knott | token threats 07:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

118.96.122.158

Thanks for blocking the address, although I think 31 hours may not be enough since the vandal also used this same address last week on putting his MO on most of the same articles--and left unreported. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:29, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Ban

Would you, please, like to notice that user for the ban? Aleksa Lukic (talk) 11:57, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

It's not a ban, it's an indefinite block. He'll know about it when he tries to edit and he'll know that it was me that blocked him, so what's the pint of telling him again on his talk page? Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 12:05, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, you can give him a detail template about his rights under block (allowed to write on his own talk page), and other things that offers such template as well. Aleksa Lukic (talk) 12:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Can't be bothered to do it for this type of user. Feel to do it instead of me if you like but I won't do it. Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 15:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

LordofGifts

Theresa; you have recently indefblocked this editor for vandalism. and he has posted an unblock request. I in no way contest your block, which was impeccably correct, but I wonder if we have here a well-meaning but IT-naive editor who just did not understand. I could be wrong. Could I ask you to look at the unblock request?--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 16:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC)