User talk:Viridae/Archive5
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
|
|---|
|
1:28/04/2006-25/06/2006 |
Bring Back Deleted Images
I can't beleive you deleted Image:Wingo the Nissan Silvia.jpg and Image:Snot Rod the Plymouth Barracuda.jpg !!! I liked those images!!! Please bring them back. I want to make a "Cars (film) gallery". Don't deleted anymore images!!! --TimySmidge 15:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
The imageswere deleted because they had no rational for copyright/no source info. ViridaeTalk 23:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Listen
I don't care if they had no rational for copyright/no source info. I want those images and I want them soon. The longer I wait, the longer it'll take for that gallery to be made, got it!!! --TimySmidge 15:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
Not happening, for the reason already stated. ViridaeTalk 23:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Please
I am begging you. My sister and I absolutely love those pictures. I want to print them, but now I can't. Please, do what you can. I'm sorry about the above, but I desperately need those pictures. Please reconsider not bringing them back. Plus, Boost and DJ's pictures stay, why not Wingo and Snot Rod's. Also (I hate correcting) you wrote "images" and "were" as one word. By the way, I'm a Cars fan. --TimySmidge 20:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
The deleted images did not have any copyright rational, and per your post above I doubt you are about to [21] add any. ViridaeTalk 22:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Copyright Rational? Which post? I left three. --TimySmidge 18:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
The on directly above this. ViridaeTalk 22:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The "by the way"? Okay then, how do you add one? Did you like the images? Do you hate me? I want you to answer all of these questions. Also, could you respond on my talk page. --TimySmidge, Protector of everything Cars (film) 20:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
Per the top of the page, I prefer to keep all conversation n the same place. You upload an image by choosing "Upload file" from the toolbox on the left hand side of your page (with the default skin). Make sure you choose the correct licensing or it will just be deleted again. I do not care either way about the images or yourself. ViridaeTalk 23:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thank you Viridae. Now, I must ask, what are "correct licensing I should be warned about. Also, what's a "viridae"? --TimySmidge 18:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
Viridae means "Virus famly". Correct licencing means making sure you choose the correct licences when you uplaod the file. t will be explained on the uplaod page. ViridaeTalk 00:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I tried such, but when I did, I got terribly confused. Could you either give me step-by-set insturctions (including giving me the correct license) or doing it for me? And, honestely, do you hate me? The truth is good. Also, you never told me which response you're third answer was talking about. Hello, pay attention to me!--TimySmidge 21:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
Dresden Codak
Can I get you to review your close of this, please? You've called it "no consensus" when there is a "no reliable sources" reasoning to delete and reliable sources with non-trivial mentions are not provided. - brenneman 00:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- I stand by the non consensus. Feel free to take it to WP:DRV. ViridaeTalk 08:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
January Greetings
Happy January 15th, 2007 Viridae. Did you know i have created over 60 articles? You can see them by viewing the bottom of my talkpage. Merry... January! --Chikinpotato11 16:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
ip ban on 204.193.6.90
your ip ban on 204.193.6.90 is a ban on a school what happened that made you ban that ip? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stapuft (talk • contribs) 14:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC).
If you'd like to hear from him in the WP:AN/I thread...
...you should probably drop him a note on his talk page. As far as I can see – following an admittedly very cursory examination – nobody has followed up with The JPS during this discussion. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 12:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Block precedent?
Hi. I'm curious about this block? A six-month block for an IP with three edits ever? Is it an open proxy? —Wknight94 (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oh never mind. I see now it's probably a open proxy. Sorry to bother you... —Wknight94 (talk) 13:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I was under the impression that physical threats were a reason for an immediate block, which is why I reported this user. TimVickers 00:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think they were more a case of a school aged child being idiotic, the primary offence being vandalism. ViridaeTalk 00:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Can Admins edit the Edit summary? If this threat could be removed then I would be less concerned. TimVickers 00:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- I cant edit it, but as it was an uncontructive edit I can delete the edit entirely. Doing that now. ViridaeTalk 00:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
The Bacteria article has now disappeared, is this normal? TimVickers 00:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- I deleted it and am in the process of restoring the 2200 revisions. I have to do it in bacthes because I'm getting an RSI checking all the check boxes. ViridaeTalk 00:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thank you. Sorry to bug you but my heart stopped for a moment! :) TimVickers 00:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- I see you have done a massive amount of work on the article, Barnstar coming your way when I finish with this! ViridaeTalk 00:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much! Thanks also for all that revision work. Ironically, after all that the moronic vandal didn't take the hint and re-inserted exactly the same threats. TimVickers 02:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Newyorkbrad's RfA
Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Request for Comment- Please provide Third Party Input.
If you could check this out and provide your input, it would be appreciated. thank you. TheGreenFaerae 08:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Tr%C3%B6del
- Please, I need to get a full consensus of all users who can provide input before the 48 hour deadline passes. As you handled the ANI, your input could porve very important tot eh RfC. TheGreenFaerae 04:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your assistance. I was afraid it would be unlsited before it had a chance for review.TheGreenFaerae 05:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Kuru RFA
Thank you for the congrats and for your vote. It was actually a little creepy, since I was flipping through your logs for samples of speedy deletion edit summaries when the "new message" bar popped up. Here's to hoping I don't live up to my incidental namesake! :) Kuru talk 03:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Protection requested
I had long and way out of line-terrible argument with mkil who was vandalizing marciano and other pages, i also asked him not to talk to me or leave me any more messages, i do not want to talk to him, all messages are left on marciano dispute pages, tell him never to contact me again. Also Marciano page should be locked longer and mkil not allowed to be there. I have evidence he was logging on under some other ip 58.8 and had some of his friends join in on the "fun" He was warned not to revert many times in the past. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rocky_Marciano#Third_opinion Most of the info is here. Boxingwear
- I will make my decision when the protection is removed - I may contact another admin to watch over it for me and reprotect when the protection runs out over the weekend when I am away. Protection is not meant to be permanent, it was placed in this case so editing diputes stopped being fought in the article space. If this behaviour continues, I may just hand out blocks to whoever I think is involved. ViridaeTalk 23:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Right, i agree, but you have to look at the broader picture, on talk, right now, people agree with me, i also requested protection from mkil above, did you read that... i mean, wow. On a different subject... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gwernol#Complaint This user deleted the lineal champions, we need to recreate it, reasons are given above and there are other people who agree with me, i can not believe why good articles are killed on wiki, bad remain...Boxingwear
If you'll look at the Marciano page, BoxingWear was told in no uncertain terms by another editor that my edits were not "vandalism." I requested a third party opinion that resulted in a strong chastisement of BoxingWear. He/She continues to assert that my edits are "vandalism" and that I log on under different IP addresses (which is false -- I welcome any attempts to trace IPs to see the truth of this). BoxingWear continues to attack me and refuses to recognize my good faith edits as legitimate. MKil 04:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)MKil
- Over the last few months Mkil did not contribute anything of value on marciano, except cause problems, you suspended innocent person, who knew a lot on boxing. Most of the things mkil wrote on marciano over time has been disputed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.99.2.175 (talk) 18:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC).
How to do things
What is the code to put things into archive, to merge or rename article or to put music or square on my talk page. Boxingwear Is there any way you administrators can find out if some other user has been using different ip, in order not to reveal who he is like mkil?Boxingwear
whaa? vandal?
Last spring I was looking at the group, The Residents, listing and found it full of mistakes and suppositions. I made extensive corrections which as manager and historian of the group seemed a rightful responsibility. Acutally I am the only authority for this subject as I also oversee www.residents.com. I am even named in the article as a participant in the group. I made all the changes under my real name as I was not playing games. I just discovered that back in June all my corrections reverted back to the errors and I was branded a "vandal" for removing other people's erronous speculations where it seems to me the person who revereted the material back to the errors is the vandal. I had a message from you from June that I am now resonding to claiming this. Maybe it was you who vandalized my corrections. I don't know since I am not a power user.
Anyway, I do not monitor The Residents page nor will I start doing so, but do wish that the term vandal was not generously handed out to us authorized individuals. Meanwhile, the Wikipedia page for The Residents remains flawed and by naming me a vandal I guess it will stay that way. I do not understand allowing the ignorant to freely speculate on Wikipedia while blocking the knowledgable from correcting data.
Hardy Fox <email removed> www.residents.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hfox (talk • contribs) 18:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC).
- Huh? I never warned you for vandalism. 02:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Irwin
Could you help me please? I have received my first warning on Wikipedia (I think from you). Last October there was vigorous debate regarding a quote from Germaine Greer inserted on Irwin's page. After this debate it was edited out and it remained that way for a couple of months until one person inserted it again. Based on previous discussion I and others deleted repeated attempts to insert it again. We suggested that this person read the archives – it seemed to me this person had not read the discussion. The last suggestion to this person was to discuss it before reinserting it. There has been extensive discussion and (at the risk of only presenting my side) all but two people did not want it reinserted for many good reasons. I am confused as to why the person making an insertion in these circumstances gets protection whilst another who removes this with the consent of the discusscion page gets blocked. What should I do. It seems unconscionable to permit this insertion. Alan Davidson 12:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC) I have now noticed you warned both of us. That does seem fairer. Many thanks. Alan Davidson 12:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Please Be slow
Hello dear still discussion is going on page so u can not Vandlize my page before it. Khalidkhoso 10:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Some countries mention Hezbollah as terrorist but some does not? Does this make it terrorist .what will you write on it? Artilce .Just need answer then I will change my user page and should stop vandalizing my page. And u sent me are for personal attacks ,I am not attacking on it ,I am writing some thing that most of communities think and write I can show you material if you want regarding it.
Khalidkhoso 10:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I do not have to say any thing ,it is like taking decison to Hanging some1 and later asking him "Do you have any thing to protect ur self" .u lokced my page and u took decison (now why invitation for disscusion,it is over my side).what else i would ,Say.But fine i would not use flags on my pgae(Just inWikipedia). when u r going to allow me to edit my Userpage. Khalidkhoso 11:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
U guys Own Wikipedia ,if u would not say i would not do it.i do not take parts on topics where my time is waisted and my work gets lost(as today).i just want to give some artilce to wikipedia that are not known to peoples around the world,that's it,other then this i do not have to do any thing here
Khalidkhoso 11:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Well you do not have to warn me ,When u attakced my user page it was My 1st warning for me and i could not do any thing and can not any thing.You do not have to tell me what u can do and u can not.Beacuse i know this.I thought my user page will get Unlocked by u,well i would not ask for it.i better wait for 24 hours. Caio Have Good day. Khalidkhoso 12:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
i think it is more then 24 hours ,u have still put lock on my userpage?can i ask u why? u mentioned that u will removed it with in 24 hours. Khalidkhoso 14:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
You userpage is now fully protected because you have continually reinserted the content in violation of policy. Please note that a protection if preferable to a block, and it was one or the other because of the policy violation. I have chosen protection however to allow you to discuss it here and at WP:ANI (see the bottom of the page). ViridaeTalk 10:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
i waiting for it to be done Please. Khalidkhoso 15:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Undeleting a "prod"
The article, 1936: Horror, was deleted via "prod" apparently without any discussion. I would ask that this be rectified. Thank you in advance. The Bearded One 07:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Prod deletions don't have discussion. I will undelete it for you. ViridaeTalk 07:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I apologize.
I will get a username next time. But I sincerely apologize. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.5.94.15 (talk) 19:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
Wow what was 68.162.20.124 hangup on you?
He's banned for now (4 days it says) geez what you do. Funny that they thought it was you doing the reverts and it was myself and other editors taking care of business. Glad its taken care of for now. See you around. --Xiahou 01:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Because I did reverts my userpage got hammered by 151.198.134.190 which was obviously a sock of User:68.162.20.124, oh well, he's been blocked for 31 hours now! RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 01:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
If I remember rightly, I gave him a {{npa4}} warning. ViridaeTalk 03:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't you ask me what's written in arabic before deleting the template? Do you really want to provoke me? Who the fuck do you think you are? Do you want to bring more racism to wikipedia? Embargo 10:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Just a heads up that I've taken this to WP:AN, to try and stop a revert war, I've asked the user to stop adding it, however, he keeps on doing it RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 11:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Let's take the opportunity to be nice.
Hello! If we want to make a neutral encyclopedia, we will need people from all over the world cooperatig with our efforts. Certainly, if Embargo adds non-neutral material to articles, that would be a problem. But maybe they're quite reasonable. Let's talk with them and see! --Kim Bruning 12:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Help over at CAT:CSD
Hi, and congrats on your promotion! Per this discussion, I'm dropping a friendly note to some of the recently-promoted admins requesting help with speedy deletions. I am not an administrator, so if you don't feel comfortable diving into deletions - or if you need more info - please don't come to me, but I'm sure that Cyde Weys would be happy to guide you if you want to help. Any help is great, but I'm sure that Cyde and others would deeply appreciate it if you could put the page on your watchlist and do a bit of work there on a regular basis? Maybe weekly? Thanks in advance! Oh and if you're already working away on CSD please disregard this message; it's not meant as a slight against any hard work you're already doing. Cheers! Anchoress 18:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Recent changes patrol
Hey Viridae i want to be "Recent changes patrol" so can you Guide me how to start work and how to do things here?
thanks ciao Khalidkhoso 22:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Request for Arbitration regarding Trodel
Because you have been working so hard to try to resolve the dispute, I am requesting that you once again help in resolving the dispute. I am filing a request for Arbitration, as it has become clear that Trodel will not abide by any decision we try to come to in the RfC. You won't be asked to do much, I think, just give your statement, much as you have for the RfC. Your help would be most appreciated. TheGreenFaerae 09:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
VegaDark
Hi. Thank you SO much for the offer. As I'm sure he's been active enough that many people will have seen much of his work, I'm afraid I'll have to accept only one or at most two co-noms from people familiar with him. I'm sure he'll welcome your support, though, and I hope you can help me out with my next nomination. Thank you again for the support! It's really appreciated. Cheers. Xiner (talk, email) 03:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problems, I will most definately support his RfA when it is posted. ViridaeTalk 05:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Drini deleted your comments from the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard
AFAIK, this is disruptive behaviour.
I asked for all the comments (and my original text, rebutting Drini´s defamation against me) to be reposted again [2], and Drini deleted my petition and posted new defamatory (i.e., false) stuff against me [3].
I was receiving good ideas about what to do from other administrators until Drini came and started posting factually false nonsense [4] about me (as Drini recognized [5]). Drini was called to enter the fray from the Spanish Wikipedia [6].
I think that this Drini´s behaviour is outrageous, and I ask you for help. What can I do?.
Randroide 11:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Not so bad. False alarm, maybe
Well, the situation is not so bad as I thought (albeit is neither a good one).
Drini pasted the whole discussion in a different linked page [7].
I missed that pasting. I thought the text was deleted.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Nonetheless, any comment?.
Randroide 12:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Quick question
A user/SPA has requested a copy a deleted article (deleted per AFD as NN). I don't see anything in the article that is sensitive - but a quick scan of policy scan reveals no guidelines. Is dumping a copy into his userspace kosher? Kuru talk 13:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Just undelete then move it to a subpage of their userspace. ViridaeTalk 21:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind
I had already indef blocked that CaptJebus guy before you left your warning, so I replaced your warning with an {{indef}}. I didn't think a threat like that even deserved a warning, but feel free to revert me and remove the block if you feel it was inappropriate. Kafziel Talk 21:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
CN
Hi Viridae. I've replied regarding your hijacking re-redirecting of WP:CN at Wikipedia talk:Community noticeboard#Template updates. Picaroon 01:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Odd Trivia Vandal
I found this ip address 68.165.76.174 just pop up on the project today and add toomuchtrivia tags on any page he was on. I reverted all changes, but I wasn't sure what type of warning to leave on the talk space. I will leave a message though, and I would appreciate admin looking in on it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheGreenFaerae (talk • contribs) 12:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
- Yeah, not sure whats going on there. Try posting this over to WP:ANI. ViridaeTalk 00:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Garion96's RFA
Thank you for your support in my request for adminship which closed successfully last night. Feel free to let me know if I can help you with something or if I have made a mistake. I would also like to encourage you to vote often (just in case you don't) on other candidates since we need more admins. Happy editing, Garion96 (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
User:DrAndyWho
Hey. No problem. :) --WoohookittyWoohoo! 07:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Speedies
I wasn't aware notability was remotely relevant to G11 spam ... Chris cheese whine 09:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well considering you tagged it without the use of s epcific template, I took the most obvious one - db-bio, which meant notability applied. As it WAS a bio and not selling a product specifically, that was the appropriate action. ViridaeTalk 12:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
3RR
I would agree, if it weren't for the fact it was a bread-and-butter merge (duplicate articles), and reverting the redirect was effectively a POV fork. User:Mais oui! also seems to have a history of edit warring, ironically using the summary "reverting edit warring by User:X". Chris cheese whine 12:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Not commenting on the other users behaviour yet, just your statement. I am looking into what is going on. It would be a damn site easier though if you two stopp removing stuff from the respective talk pages. ViridaeTalk 12:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Er, it's a duplicate article. There are no changes to discuss. User:Mais oui! is merely being stubborn. Chris cheese whine 12:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
blocking vandals
Hi, you removed an ip that I re-requested at the admin intervention page. Rather than reporting the same IP for the third time, and risking being regarded as a vandal myself, I just wanted to bring it to your attention that new vandal edits came from this ip. Making it 5 in just over 2 hours. Please deal with it in a way you see fit, I will stop monitoring this IP and get out of your way.
Thanks! Sander123 13:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Just re-report in future, if they have vandalised since a RECENT final warning then report them. I was offline. ViridaeTalk 22:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Vandal of IP address
This and this and this is NOT a content dispute. I am resubmitting to WP:AIV. Real96 06:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have absoloutely no idea if that is a valid nickname or not, hence the removal. It does look like a content dispute though. 06:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Deltas are called Deltas. Zetas are called Zetas, not broads. Broad is an offensive American slang for woman. I thought you knew, but I forgot you are from a different country. Sorry for the hostility. Real96 06:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
(reduce indent) broads can be spelled as BRAWDS. The vandal has stopped now (thank goodness!) If the user vandalizes the pages again, I am reporting to WP:AIV, because he/she has passed level 4. It's kind of like slang in America is different around the world? cheers! Real96 07:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
VegaDark's Request for Adminship
Thank you for supporting my RfA. It was successful at a unanimous 52/0/0. I hope I can live up to the kind words expressed of me there, and hope to now be more of an asset to the community with access to the tools. Please feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any suggestions for me in the future. Thanks again! VegaDark 07:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Your indefinite block of User:Dora Nichov
Viridae, I came across Dora Nichov (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s unblock request and would like to talk to you about potentially shortening the block from indefinite. From what I can tell the user has gotten annoyed and made some silly comments to IPs: 'I'm warning you..., You know, I hate vandals..., 'Didn't I tell you to stop!?, 'LISTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When I tell you to stop -- STOP!, If I could, I WILL ban you! Or do anything so you will be banned!. More importantly, the editor made two comments containing the phrase "I'll kill you". I don't want to minimize the significance of such comments, but I do think that, in context, even the target wouldn't take them as serious death threats: test1|Dora Nichov Plus I'll kill you if you vandalize my userpage again., and Stupid vandal, I'll kill you the way I kill moose!. Certainly, such comments display horrible judgment, are absolutely not acceptable, and warrant a long block. That said, I don't see how this is either a personal attack placing another user in danger or a pattern of persistent personal attacks (the two applicable situations warranting an indefinite block that I see in WP:BLOCK). Finally, given the editor's history of positive contributions, an indefinite block probably has the net effect of doing more harm than good to Wikipedia. I would instead suggest shortening the block to two months. In light of the serious reasons behind the block, I feel I need your consent or acquiesence rather than reducing the block myself. Thank you for your consideration.--Kchase T 10:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Have a look at this and consider the block. It was that diff in paticular that sparked the indef. If you want to reduce the block, feel free but I don't think behaviour like that shoudl ever be tolerated. ViridaeTalk 12:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Request for comment
Further to your intervention at User talk:217.44.98.169, please see:
- Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:81.155.34.127_reported_by_User:Mais_oui.21_.28Result:.29. --Mais oui! 11:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Please do not refactor my comments
as was done with this edit. While I realize your intentions were good and likely would have made the change myself if asked, I would like to be able to type and format comments as I choose. Thanks! Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 21:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- fair enough. Just remember that it specifically says at the top that it isn't a vote. So xfd/rfa style bold text like that is strongly discourage. ViridaeTalk 23:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello
You reverted my redirect on Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors - twas not vandalism, there's a consensus of sorts for this experiment on Talk:Main Page. Cheers --Monotonehell 08:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Redirects don't work when there is text below them. ViridaeTalk 08:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think I've rectified it now.. I was a bit confused, but then I saw your edit on the talk page. --Monotonehell 08:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
AfD: The "Super Stunt" Page
I was under the impression that Articles for Deletion had a five day review process? I just created the article on 2/20/07, it was vandalized repeatedly, and then deleted the same day. I don't recall seeing any votes for Speedy Delete or a Speedy Delete template. It would have been nice to have more than 12 hours to address the complaints and find more sources.--Notmydesk 10:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- WP:DRV. Yes the set length of time for AfDs is 5 days but many articles reguarly don't last that long. ViridaeTalk 12:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Any particular reason this article needed to be deleted in less than a day? It would have been nice to have at least a chance to address the issues raised on the AfD page.--Notmydesk 14:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Notmydesk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC).
- The consensus was that it was unsourced, unencyclopedic and highly likely to remain unsourced. There i sno point in letting the AfD run its course in that sort of situation (hence why many afds are closed before the 5 day time). ViridaeTalk 22:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- There was an external link to a column on the Minneapolis Star Tribune's website that covered the events written about in the article, which should count as a source. I would have been happy to point this out on the AFD page if it hadn't been deleted so quickly. It appears you didn't follow the external link, nor apparently did anyone else who voted for deletion. This is why it would have been beneficial to wait longer than a single afternoon before rushing to delete the page. Again, I don't know how I'm supposed to address the feedback given on the AFD page if the article is deleted before I even have a chance. Could this be why there's a five day period... so people have a chance to edit the article and address the reasons it was proposed for deletion?--Notmydesk 23:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- The consensus was that it was unsourced, unencyclopedic and highly likely to remain unsourced. There i sno point in letting the AfD run its course in that sort of situation (hence why many afds are closed before the 5 day time). ViridaeTalk 22:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Any particular reason this article needed to be deleted in less than a day? It would have been nice to have at least a chance to address the issues raised on the AfD page.--Notmydesk 14:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Notmydesk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC).
An editor has asked for a deletion review of The "Super Stunt". Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Notmydesk 16:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Category:British Royal Consorts is up for discussion
The link is here. Your comments would be most helpful as you deleted the category on December 2nd but it was subsequently recreated. So we now have both Category:British Royal Consorts and Category:British royal consorts. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 09:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Rlevse Rfa
Thanks for the rfa support. Glad we can work together. Rlevse 03:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
i know i messed up
i realized that what i did was not funny, and would like to appologize. yes i did vandalize 3 pages. and it was only to illustrate how unreliable wikis can be to a friend. anyway i would like to know how i can get unblocked. do i have to do some positive contribution? 7areega 03:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- You aren't blocked. If you are blocked under another username let me know. ViridaeTalk 03:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- my ip is blocked, i had to fiddle for a long time till i managed to log in to post here. i think i clicked a "secure login" link. then created an account. :) thnx for your time.7areega 20:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I did not edit anything about Steve Erwin...
(I did not edit anything about Steve Erwin...) Hi! I got "spanked" a little for editing away the statement on the Wikipedia page on David Icke which stated "as an indisputable fact" (that's the impression) that The Protocols Of The Elders of Zion is "an Anti-Semitic Hoax". This has not been proven to be the case in any way and is simply a subjective statement, of course also adding to the "Anti-Semitic allegations" against Mr. Icke that are really quite ridiculous. I have read several of his books and I have not seen any statement by Icke condemning the Semitic race. (definiton of Anti-Semitism). He HAS on the other hand condemned Zionism many times. Something that also many Jews have condemned. Anyway.... Icke's message is a message about waking up to the Truth (opening one's eyes) and questioning consensus reality. And what the Wikipedia page hardly mentions at all; he documents thoroughly through his writings and lectures the criminal and unconscientous activities of the most powerful individuals and corporations on the planet. Whether they be reptilians or not. But "Anti-Semitism" and "Right-wing" something-something is what catches the eye of the reader. And this is certainly very far from "objective". greetings, Bjorn —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bjornyvan (talk • contribs) 19:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC).
Unsure of how to report a vandal
An anonymous user under the IP address of User:74.109.244.5 has vandalized many pages [[8]], despite several warnings on the talk page. I am unsure of how to report this vandal, and knowing that you are an administrator I thought that I should let you know about this user. MelicansMatkin 00:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well I can't see any recent vandalism (ie in the last few hours), however if you do find someone vandalising in the future, give them a warning using one of these templates (starting with the level one and moving through to level 4 as appropriate). Then if they continue after the level 4 warning, report them to WP:AIV. For more information see Wikipedia:Vandalism. ViridaeTalk 00:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me
- Hi Viridae, I understand your concern. I have sent an unblock request to you via email. If you need more information, pls let me know asap. Thank you! --WikiInquirer 02:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me
- Thanks for unblocking me. However, before I continue to solicit responses, I would like to wait for your reply. If you think it's ok, I shall carry on. --WikiInquirer 02:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me
- (edit conflict)As you can already post here you are already unblocked. I had a closer look and it seems legitimate, however mass spamming of talk pages seemd and intresting way to go about it. I am also interested as to why you require the participants to have signed up before Jn '06? ViridaeTalk 02:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Having now read the email, I see how you picked the names. I no longer have any problems with what is happening. Thankyou for your speedy response and the politeness you have shown in light of the block. ViridaeTalk 02:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for your support on my RfA. It passed with 55/0/0. I'll try my best to be worthy of the trust the community has put in me. If there are any of my actions you have a problem with or a question about, please feel free to discuss this with me and if needed to revert me. If there is anything else I can help you with (backlogs, comments, ...), you can always contact me on my talk page. Fram 14:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Cave Clan site
Hi Viridae,
firstly thanks for taking the protection off the page. I don't really appreciate your comment "Lets see if people can behave" but hey this is the Internet and communication works in different ways...
Anyways, onto the topic in question... there is a constant 'dark cloud' hanging over the Cave Clan wikipedia page, that is a person who (amongst creating different usernames that are really the one person, him) was once an accessory of the CC (I don't think he was ever a member...) but is now vehement in his revenge on us, and an integral part of this is defaming us here because Wikipedia is for some people the first reference for info on some things. I'm not sure of his reasonings but he loves to paint us in a bad light - see his web links http://www.urbanadventure.org/main/stuff/ildraino/caveclan.htm and http://www.urbanadventure.org/main/stuff/ildraino/wikipedia.htm.
I don't know if you've read through the blab in the talk page on CC wiki but he has used a lot of different usernames to put forward his posts. His aliases are: hibou, UrbanExplorer, Raresaturn (recent creation), Panic!, Gunny... anyway I think you get my gist (I've listed them on the Talk page too). All the posts read in a similar vein, I hope you can notice that.
Just wondering; is there any way to check on IP addresses of the posts that have been made by the above and any users onto the Talk page? I would like to know what ones are associated with all the users who have made posts. Also this would ascertain the above statement further.
Finally... I was wondering (have talked with other CC people about this too) if you'd like to meet us, Cave Clan, to get a gauge of who we are and what we are about ('larrikinism' is something that can be as close as it gets to explaining our whole character). You can email [email protected] for... more info, or browse www.caveclan.org for more (endorsed?) info. Thinking this would give you, a wikipedia admin person, a better idea of who we are, what we do, how we are organised etc. This is to support a definite NPOV being described on the CC wiki page e.g. homophobia, KKK comments removed permanently (as if we'd allow people like this to join or be associated with us...)
Anyways (final one) I hope you can understand what I'm saying above, overall that the CC wants a 'NPOV' cemented for its description here, Because at the moment some of it is, to put it simply, 'shit'.
Thanks Dmnscar 13:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- You might want to file a request at WP:RFCU. Only checkusers can see registered users IP addresses, to check for people using multiple accounts to edit abusively. ViridaeTalk 21:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
RfA mistake
Hello, I'm sorry about the RfA confusion. The RfA looked malformed, because I have made that mistake when I nominated ProveIt. I did find answers afterall to the questions. What threw me off, was probroly the fact that there were no votes or comments, and that the edit count box looked incomplete.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Recent 3RR report
Would you mind expaining how you came to the conclusion that no 3RR violation occured here?
- Um, Rayis just unilaterally removed your decision from the heading. You might want to check it out. The Behnam 22:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please explain why you do not think the rules should apply in this case, thanks --Rayis 22:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
It has been explained at the report. You have not demonstrated 4 reverts. ViridaeTalk 22:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Even the user admits that he has done 3RR and 1 likely other one! overall there have been 5 "undoings of edits" and definite 4 reverts --Rayis 22:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
In the interest of disclosure, Behnam has been blocked and his appeal has been declined. You're welcome to have a look (if there's a greater history, here, I'm not yet familiar with it). – Luna Santin (talk) 07:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Here's The Code For {{further}}; If You Know How To Make It So That We Can Use Infinite Arguments, Please Be My Guest:D100110100 21:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- Further information: [[{{{1}}}]]
Question regarding reporting vandals
Hello, I noticed that you removed the request for Admin. intervention regarding the IP addresses 64.179.53.224 and 80.188.72.172. For the first you stated, "no recent warnings," although the last warning was less than a month ago (February 22, 2007) and his user page consists entirely of vandalism warnings and blocks. For the second you stated "no recent vandalism" although the incident I reported took place only a couple days ago (March 6th). This user's talk page also consists only of warnings about vandalism. Can you please specify for me what the time limit involved in reporting vandals amounts to (e.g., is there a policy regarding recency of activity or warnings). This would prevent me from providing spurious reports. In this case, however, I don't see that these two IP addresses have done anything but vandalize Wikipedia, so I hope this matter can be given some attention. Thank you. ◄Zahakiel► 03:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Recent warnings means within the last 12 hours or so for IP addresses (that doesn't apply to logged in users) because unless you can show the IP is not dynamic we may be blocking someone for someone elses previous offences.
- In the second case, we do not block vandals who are nto currently active, ie within the last half hour or so unless in ccases of very malicious or wide spread vandalism. Blocking is punative not preventative. Hope that clears things up. ViridaeTalk 03:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Merge and delete
I notice that you've interpreted the result of the AfD on double posting as "merge and delete", and I figured I should point out that actually going through with this (merging the material and then deleting the page it came from) is probably illegal under the GFDL. Section 4 B of the GFDL requires that modified versions of a document must include a list of five of the primary authors of the original version and in Wikipedia this requirement is met via the article histories. A merge without a copy of the article history being preserved somewhere on Wikipedia would therefore be unlicenced, and a copyvio. I'm moving the double posting article back to its original location, merging it, and then turning it into a redirect; as far as I'm aware this is the proper way to preserve article history in this situation. Bryan Derksen 04:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, sir, I took Twasnow's advice and changed it from "This user supports armed resistance to Israeli hostilities" to "this user supports resistance to hostilities". Now someone else, replaced it from "This user supports resistance to hostilities" to "This user supports resistance to Israeli hostilties" because he thought I had every right to keep, since other people can express whatever views they have. "This user supports cats to dog hostilities" should dog hostilities occur is acceptable. Now every one has witnessed Israel's last war, and we can all agree Israel is a disgusting murderous state. I can see you try your best to provoke me, thankfully till now it hasn't worked. Good thing not every one on wikipedia is biased against Arabs and Muslims. You are asked to leave me alone, or remove every single political userbox on Wikipedia. Regards. Emбargo 00:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- The word hostilities was wikilinked to massacre. And I saw that you were the user who changed it, absoloutely unacceptable and you know it. ViridaeTalk 00:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, "This user supports resistance to hostilities" was accepted by everyone. The link to massacres was always there. Your racism and flagrant bias makes me sick. Another user thought I had the right to add Israeli to hostilities because everyone on Wikipedia expresses his/her political views. You know I'm right, you just decided to protect my userpages under false pretext. Another attempt to provoke an Arab into getting blocked. Unprotect my userpage or delete every political userbox on Wikipedia. You are abusing your administator rights. Racism and flagrant bias could have very serious consequences. Avoid double-standards and unprotect my userpage. Emбargo 00:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Also, where in WP:USER does it say I don't have the right to have that userbox? I think "Hezbollah=Murder Inc." is attacking someone. Supporting Lebanese resistance to Israeli hostilities or Canadian to American hostilities, should they occur, is not attacking someone. But I guess you know that, you're just too racist and biased to accept it. Emбargo 00:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
| “ | libelling people on userpages is a bad idea, and in fact, using userpages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea | ” |
- - Jimbo Wales,[1] Wikipedia founder and leader
Oh and you are quite welcome to continue to console yourself with the thought that you are being picked on because you are an Abrab. I really don't care what nationality or upbringing you come from. That userbox is nothing more than political soapboxing and as such is not welcome on wikipedia. ViridaeTalk 01:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I was looking for an answer to my request, no for you to comment on the few words I wrtoe in the end. Another way of getting out of it. You are asked to unprotect my userpage. Again, your flagrant bias and racism is quite obvious. Reply, if you will, to what I said earlier. Again, either you leave me be or you delete every userbox expressing support to anything. God you people make me sick. I hope your next reply isn't a comment on "God you people make me sick". Emбargo 01:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- You userpage is not being unprotected because I don't see any change in your attitude and i have no doubt you will immediately replace the offending userbox. The quote from Jimbo answered the other part of your query. And once again you accuse me of rascism without any grounding whatsoever. ViridaeTalk 01:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Also, this is a short list of users who have userboxes expressing support of Israel. User:Snickerdo User:Kmweber User:Dana I am allowed to show support for resistance when Israel is hostile, as it was when it attacked last summer and destoryed my home. You people just do not want to accept the fact that Israel hated by most people. Showing support for resistance isn't hostile, is it? What the movement resists is what is hostile. I think 60 years ago, you would have allowed the French to express support of resistance to Nazi hostilities. Emбargo 01:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- All three of those users have the userbox supporting a "free an independant state of israel", which, while frowned on, is not as overly offensive as yours. We have covered this territory before, maybe its time you saw reason...? ViridaeTalk 01:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
'Sigh'
Huh. To think you'd have something else to do beside going through my contributions. Thankfully, I do not have as much time to contribute to Wikipedia and I'm not willing to discuss this any further. I assume you have seen my correspondants' userpages? I am willing to reinstate the usebox that hasn't received any complaints and that an admin proposed, by removing the 'Israeli' part, so that it reads "This user supports armed resistance to hostilities.". It is not in violation of policy, nor does it offend anyone. This is a good gesture, and I await your reply. Emбargo 03:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- That seems fair as long as "hostilities" is not wikilinked to "massacre". I will unprotect your userpage if you confirm that this will be the case. ViridaeTalk 04:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. I think you know I have the right to keep it, and you know this formulation has been agreed on, and the link to massacres has always been there. You're just abusing your rights as an admin, and abusing my act of good gesture by removing what disturbed people about this userbox. Israel does commit massacres, and massacres are to be responded wth resistance. I removed the Israeli part so that no one is offended. Should you decide not to unprotect my userbox, I will discuss this with another admin. Emбargo 13:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- Go for it. It wasn't the mention of israel that I was complaining about in the first place but the use of the wikilink to massacres. ViridaeTalk 21:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Unprotection of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Hello Viridae, I noticed you unprotected this page. There's been a lengthy feud on the talk page (spanning two archived subpages and most of the current one) which is still unresolved. I haven't really been part of it, but I watchlist most HP articles and just thought it would be unhelpful to the discussion. However, I'm not too acquainted with protection rules, so if there's something against having a page protected for a month, I understand. Best, Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
We're Waiting
I'm waiting on you to change the code.100110100 01:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Request for some sort of ban on 70.92.175.102
This ip has edited many pages of which you have issued him a warning for one and today edited the Wikipedia Admins entry. I issued him a warning at which point he accused me of harassment and lied about being friends with an administrator which turned out to be untrue when the person mentioned came forward. This can all be found on my user discussion page. Can something permenant be done about this? I don't enjoy being accused of harrasment because I tried to edit a vandilised article! --Rboxer 10:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Okay
Ok. I want to resolve this and go one with my editing. I will change the content of the userbox and replace it with "This user supports armed resistance to Israeli hostilities." Hopefully, we won't have to discuss this matter any further. Emбargo 11:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Rollback
Hi. Please roll this back. [9]. It has broken over a thousand mainspace articles.--GunnarRene 11:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Hostile User Boxes
I stumbled across this userbox business by accident while tracing another edit. It seems a bit sick. Anyways, another user User:Wa3ad7 also have the massacre userbox.
Embargo on the other hand keeps leaving messages going on about racist Zionist pigs, I hope Embargo stays with userbox vandalism and doesn't start editing articles again. 148.63.236.141 22:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
just a question
are you jewish, or are you just against Hezbollah because of the propaganda that jewish/americans put through to the people? there is nothing wrong with my template. please do not start an arguement with me. Yahussain 00:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- No I am not jewish and no i do not have somethin in paticular against hezbollah. Your userbox however violates WP:NOT and WP:USER - it may be considred overly offensive to some peopleand therefore has no place within the userspace. PLease remove or change it or it will be done for you. ViridaeTalk 05:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Chacor RfA Talk Page
I like how you enforce the blanking of my thread by protecting the page. I made it clear in the now-blanked thread, that I was not "soapboxing", but simply expressing my views on the talk page, as the nom had been pulled by the time I was able to get back to the RfA to discuss. That the four of you chose to tag-team me, and then protect the page to enforce your edits is against all that Wikipedia supposedly stands for.K. Scott Bailey 06:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- if you wish to discuss other editors behaviour please do it in an appropriate forum not a now closed RfA. Try WP:RFC... ViridaeTalk 11:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Request for reconsideration
Hello.
I'd like you to reconsider your block of Certified.Gangsta.
Please look here.
It isn't that I'm lovey-dovey with gangsta. (frankly, I know little of him and don't even care)
However, I'm very much concerned with how rules are applied, especially in related cases.
Case in point:
- Ideogram violates 3RR. No question about it. Definite infraction. He isn't punished.
- CG comes close to violating 3RR. He's reported by Ideogram. He is punished.
- These two obviously have quite a bit going on between them. They have an ongoing conflict with eachother. The only way to not take sides is to treat them both identically.
- They are not both treated identically.
CG really should have simply received a 3rr warning. At least that would've conveyed the same sense of "you're on the edge, but you get a reprieve" that Ideogram got.
More importantly, when two editors are at odds with eachother, admins treating one demonstrably better than the other really sends a bad message. Consistency and fairness are necessary if anyone is to take the position of 'admin' seriously. Have you noticed how many editors have been 'retiring' lately? How many seem to have problems with admins abusing the system? Inconsistent application of rules certainly isn't going to help that.
Ultimately, the decision obviously lies with you, but just try to consider this: Which is the worse evil?
Irrefutable evidence that, when two users have a conflict, one can receive far better treatment than the other, independent of their actual actions?
Or lifting a block, and giving a possibly problematic editor enough rope to hang himself, if he really is a disruptive problem? Bladestorm 01:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding our past disagreement
You may be interested in reading my comments here as I have completely changed my mind about the issue. I now believe your thinking was correct.--BirgitteSB 22:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- It was still on my watchlist so I saw it, but thanks for letting me know. ViridaeTalk 22:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: WP:UW strawpoll
I've created {{uw-vblock}} and {{uw-dblock}} for you, I've not gone through the relevant redirects yet on the overview but let me know if you want any more. Cheers Khukri 15:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Viridae. I think you should help me with this user who has been reverting everything I do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/216.30.182.60 He has reverted one of my edits in the article List of billionaires 2007. The IP should be blocked. Emбargo 17:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your intervention. I'll keep an eye on related articles. --RFBailey 23:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
assistance
I seek administrator assistance. User:Emerson7 monitors my edits and reverts them whevener he feels like it. In the articles "List of billionaires (2006)" and "List of billionaires (2007)" he reverts my addition of the Lebanese flag next to Carlos Slim Helu's name, and does it sometimes with using an IP instead of his username. Get him off my back, if you will. As much as it may bother "Emerson", Carlos Slim Helu's parents are both Lebanese, his holds the Lebanese citizenship and visits his country very often. Emбargo 19:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Have you calmly and politely asked him why he is reverting all your edits? That would be the first step. ViridaeTalk 02:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes I did, and now I am blocked. Please see my userpage, I hope it's a joke. Do something about it, if you will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.189.142.201 (talk • contribs)
- I noticed that and I suggest you take it up with the blocking administrator. Refer them to our conversations if you wish. I suggest not editing from the IP you are using, but using the email this user function. ViridaeTalk 03:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
No Viridae, it's your responsibility. I have made concessions, you can't profit from this and tell me to contact the other admin. Restore it and explain to him. Embargo 16:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
You also mentioned that you have noticed the removal of the userbox. With everything we've discussed concerning the userbox, it would be your responsibility to restore it and deal with whoever waited for me being blocked to blank my userpage. Otherwise will show you have been playing it dirty and you show absolutely no good faith. What I think you should do now is contact whoever blanked my page and get him off my back as well as anyone who tries to approach my userpage. Embargo 20:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- You have it all wrong. Just because we have had a now-sorted-out past disagreement doesn't mean this makes me your protector. Please take it up with the person in question. ViridaeTalk 22:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Embargo's Hezbollah userbox
Hey there, I've followed this controversy from afar for awhile. Looking at Embargo's page, it appears that this version is the one that you and he compromised on?
| 40px | This user supports armed resistance against hostilities. |
There's others popping up now, Proabivouac [10] and Avraham [11], who seem to find even that one out of bounds. Is there a special dispute/conflict resolution for userpage space? If so, this issue has been bouncing around for ages, and should probably see a solid resolution soon. Tarc 18:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah we compromised on that - mainly for the sake of not arguing, but polemical statements have no place int he userspace. The main reason that was compromised on was 1. because it is far less offensive than what was there and 2. because in its toned down its not too much worse than many of the other politically motivated userboxes. I am not sure about a dispute resolution process for this userbox, you could try a WP:RfC on the userbox itself. Or email arbcom and see what they say about it, maybe they have another idea as to the best way to go about this. The amount of hassle caused by these things is ridiculous, especially because in its previous incarnation it was quite obviously offensive. ViridaeTalk 22:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Question pertaining to WP:AIV
Hi, I was wondering why you cited "no recent warnings" when you removed 68.161.68.171 from the noticeboard - the anon had received an "only warning" for extensive vandalism on March 21, but still persisted in inserting deliberate errors. Can you clarify your rationale? Thanks! +A.0u 04:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- IPs are often dynamic, so a IP vandal must have received a warning for the most recent bout of vandalism (ie within a few hours at least) before they can be considered adequately warned and be blocked. That doesn't apply to registered users however. ViridaeTalk 04:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks very much for helping with the vandalism caused by Tennis Bossman. Tennis expert 15:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
You removed my AIV report of 987654321zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcba saying it was not a violation because it was not random. I wasn't reporting it because it was random (as it is not), I was reporting is for being excessively long, which is also prohibited. —dgiestc 22:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
IPs not being warning today
Just so you know, you removed two IP's, which you said "haven't been warned today". However, where I am, it is still the 24th, and no matter where you are, one of those warnings was only 4 hours ago. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 02:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Peehead (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
No offense, but don't you see the above as an obvious "excretory functions" username violation? I would like to hear your reasoning on a possible good-faith motive for the name. Cheers - RJASE1 Talk 02:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- If it was Peehead I would block it but its not [12] so I am assuming good faith and allowing the possobility that it doesn't mean what you think it to mean. Hence the direction to WP:RFCN. ViridaeTalk 02:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Talk page deletion
well if you know another place my friends and i can talk tell me about it because you have to lay off us people cause youhave been vandalized 19 times--Masterlauryn 15:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)masterlauryn
- Not my job to suggest alternitives. Just find somewhere more appropriate. ViridaeTalk 23:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Vandal on user page
An anonymous user vandalised my user page. I am unfamiliar with handling vandalism. I will revert the edit but I ask, if possible, that you can help take action. Thank you. --Shamir1 20:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Warned. In future you can warn them yourself with an appropriate message from WP:UTM ViridaeTalk 22:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
See WP:ANI#SummerThunder. The OCD claims are SummerThunder's current MO. JuJube 05:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- He's editing from 202.156.14.10 (talk · contribs) now. JuJube 05:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
My RfA
- Thanks for the support position. However, I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
CANVASS
Yes, we did discuss about RFCN, on the RFCN talk page and actually we disagreed with each other. So I believe it is not canvassing. Thanks! WooyiTalk, Editor review 01:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
username
Well, it's too late for me to answer your question at the noticeboard. I'm slow. I considered it inappropriete because it was similar to this one that was blocked, and for the multiple ha's in it.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk • contribs) 00:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- I gathered that might have been the problem, and I support one that was previously blocked, but not this one. Having something on the end gives people the ability to tell it from all the other hahaha usernames (if there were some) ViridaeTalk 00:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
I have moved it as you suggest. Thank you for suggesting that. Danny 01:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Mstatz
User:Mstatz is a sock of Jj0909jj. Why did you revert my edit to his page? Would you like me to post diffs proving it? Nardman1 23:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Go for it, the notice you placed is 1. meant for the talk page. and 2. Incorrect, as he wasn't blocked as a sock, he was blocked for trolling. ViridaeTalk 23:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ta, I changed the tag to a more appropriate one. Proof is this [13]. Chrisaldous is also a sock of Jj0909jj. User's modus operandi includes randomly changing the present tense to the past tense [14] [15] and obsession with the windows xp logo. [16] [17] [18] [19]. Also random 2 or 3 word edits to other people's user pages. Nardman1 02:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Wandering through..
I've seen several dozen examples, lately, of the hard work you are doing, and I just wanted to say that it is appreciated and respected. *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 09:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
For the block on the IP attacking my page - they took exception to me blocking them on Books and then Commons! --Herby talk thyme 13:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Usernames
Apologies but it used to say at WP:USERNAME that they could not contain the word "wiki" and I think that has been removed, indicating its allowed now?? Anyway sorry for any inconveniece and happy editing! Tellyaddict 11:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Quite possibly it has been removed, policy can be pretty fuid sometimes. ViridaeTalk 11:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Userpages
Maybe you should see these userpages User:Politicallyincorrectliberal and User:Matt57. I'm surprised no one has delt with them. I believe the two accounts belong to the same user and I call for his immediate block. Obviously, this user inserts his extremist POV to Islam-related articles. Emбargo 16:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Once again, none of which are as offensiveas your original. The second one I can't see anything offensive about at all...? ViridaeTalk 22:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- "This user supports armed resistance to Israeli hostilities" is more offensive than "I strongly oppose the religion of Islam for being the most evil, hateful and violent doctrine ever introduced to mankind" and "This user strongly opposes fascism in all its forms, including Islamofascism, and the new Hitler in Iran"? I'm sorry but I may have to discuss this with other admins and possibly report you for abusing your admin "power" because now I see the logic you use and the camp you support. Emбargo 17:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Samsung Electronics/Youngjoon Shin
Hi, you might remember putting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Electronics on protected last week because of the edit war I had with Youngjoon Shin. I'm hoping you could protect it again, and block Youngjoon Shin. Once again he merely deletes my comments on the Talk Page and revert the article. I suspect he is also the one leaving me insults here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rmdsc , under the ip 221.148.48.216 since the behaviour of the two strongly correlates (log on times, articles editted etc).
I have tried understanding Wikipedia's resolve disputes policy, but it seems to me that most of the steps talking to the other side. In my case Youngjoon Shin refuses to talk to me at all, so I would appreciate it if you could take a look into it. --Rmdsc 04:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- I understand your concerns and sympthise, but he hadn't be warned on his talk page about removing other peoples comments. I have no done so. If he continues to remove your comments, drop me a note on here and I will take action. ViridaeTalk 06:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!
I really appreciated the Super duper strong support in my RFA:-) I was a bit thrown by some of the opposes based on the same answer you liked (especially for including as an aside in their stated reasons that my contributions are mostly bot type work without actually looking to see whether that was true), but kind words such as yours are what I'll take to the bank.--Fuhghettaboutit 13:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- No probs, you seem like you will make a fantastic admin - good luck and have fun. ViridaeTalk 22:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Re [20]
The Arbitration Committee found the accounts to be sockpuppets per Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Billy_Ego-Sandstein#Multiple_accounts. John254 22:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Bring Back Deleted Images
I can't beleive you deleted File:Wingo the Nissan Silvia.jpg and File:Snot Rod the Plymouth Barracuda.jpg!!! I liked those images!!! Please bring them back. I want to make a "Cars (film) gallery". Don't deleted anymore images!!! --TimySmidge 15:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
- The imageswere deleted because they had no rational for copyright/no source info. ViridaeTalk 23:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Listen
I don't care if they had no rational for copyright/no source info. I want those images and I want them soon. The longer I wait, the longer it'll take for that gallery to be made, got it!!! --TimySmidge 15:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
Please
I am begging you. My sister and I absolutely love those pictures. I want to print them, but now I can't. Please, do what you can. I'm sorry about the above, but I desperately need those pictures. Please reconsider not bringing them back. Plus, Boost and DJ's pictures stay, why not Wingo and Snot Rod's. Also (I hate correcting) you wrote "images" and "were" as one word. By the way, I'm a Cars fan. --TimySmidge 20:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
- The deleted images did not have any copyright rational, and per your post above I doubt you are about to [21] add any. ViridaeTalk 22:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Copyright Rational? Which post? I left three. --TimySmidge 18:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
The "by the way"? Okay then, how do you add one? Did you like the images? Do you hate me? I want you to answer all of these questions. Also, could you respond on my talk page. --TimySmidge, Protector of everything Cars (film) 20:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
- Per the top of the page, I prefer to keep all conversation n the same place. You upload an image by choosing "Upload file" from the toolbox on the left hand side of your page (with the default skin). Make sure you choose the correct licensing or it will just be deleted again. I do not care either way about the images or yourself. ViridaeTalk 23:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thank you Viridae. Now, I must ask, what are "correct licensing I should be warned about. Also, what's a "viridae"? --TimySmidge 18:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
- Vridae means "Virus famly". Correct licencing means making sure you choose the correct licences when you uplaod the file. t will be explained on the uplaod page. ViridaeTalk 00:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I tried such, but when I did, I got terribly confused. Could you either give me step-by-set insturctions (including giving me the correct license) or doing it for me? And, honestely, do you hate me? The truth is good. Also, you never told me which response you're third answer was talking about. Hello, pay attention to me!--TimySmidge 21:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
RFCN closure
We had an edit conflict as I was posting the result of research with several links. I posted what I had begun writing before your closure. I did not comment thereafter on your closing remarks. However, please be aware that your saying the username "does not specifically claim to be a religious figure (however much that phrase is associated with one)" appears to misplace the line drawn by policy, which excludes even names "that refer or allude to ... The names of religions or religious figures". Furthermore, Eagle_101's question whether the name "provokes" is answered in the strongly affirmative. Please reconsider. -- Ben TALK/HIST 08:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Because the user is ultimately good faith (see the edits) I don't wish to reinitiate the dicussion. However if you find another admin willing to folowo it through after seeing the dicussion, feel free. ViridaeTalk 08:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Viridae, "good faith" would only be an issue in deciding whether to disable account creation when blocking ("In these cases it is frequently useful to disable account creation, if the username is believed to have been created in bad faith."). "Good faith" does not make a username acceptable if it violates policy, just as "bad faith" would not make a username unacceptable if it obeyed policy -- the question of user conduct would be entirely distinct from username acceptability in either case.
Since you wish to refer the discussion to someone else, I'll copy this thread over to WT:RFCN for wider discussion. -- Ben TALK/HIST 09:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Viridae, "good faith" would only be an issue in deciding whether to disable account creation when blocking ("In these cases it is frequently useful to disable account creation, if the username is believed to have been created in bad faith."). "Good faith" does not make a username acceptable if it violates policy, just as "bad faith" would not make a username unacceptable if it obeyed policy -- the question of user conduct would be entirely distinct from username acceptability in either case.
Edit Warring
Hi, I am reporting an editor who is engaged in edit-warring. User:Certified.Gangsta has done a huge number of reverts on this article alone in the last few weeks. Certified.Gangsta was recently warned and blocked before but he has continued edit warring. Protecting the article is useless, once it is unprotected, Certified.Gangsta will start another round of revert war. Certified.Gangsta is clearly ignoring the intent of the 3RR rule, only a block will stop his disruptive edit warring. Please reply here. Thanks. LionheartX 14:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- You have both been edit wwarring, and the only reason I have not taken action was because the most recent clear cut case was 2 days ago. Let it be, sort it out on the talk page. ViridaeTalk 16:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
KirbyTime
Kirbytime removed the abusive message you took out. This is his 3rd trolling episode. How many times is this user going to be blocked and warned, continued to return and wreck havoc here? --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 01:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Viridae, I'm intrigued to hear your thoughts on Buick, now, evidence seams clear that he was involved, but does what he did merit an indefinate block given his past experience? I'm thinking that maybe an unblock may be for the best for a full explanatin on AN/I. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I would fully support that, and was considering an unblock myself. I firstly find it hard to believe that given the users good history that he would hijack an admins account. If that was the case, once again given his history I would support unblocking still, perhaps on a good behviour bond. The checkuser evidence is like genetic evidence in a court of law - ie it places the defendant at the scene but can never prove that they did it. Either way, I would like to see him provide an explanation - there is no risk of further disruption, so I can see no harm in unblocking him. ViridaeTalk 13:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Um, at a minimum, the checkuser evidence shows that all of Buick's recent edits and AndyZ's block of Ryulong came from the same IP within one minute of each other. The least incriminating explanation would be that Buick saw the main page go down, recreated it, then logged in to AndyZ's account (using the password given in the deletion log) and decided to play a prank on Ryulong. It would be nice if he would acknowledge this. He claims to be on wireless, however if another Wikipedia was using the same wireless connection then there would be multiple edits and users showing up in the checkuser. At a minimum I think a more forthcoming explanation is required. Thatcher131 14:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that we need an explanation, I think it's clear that BCD is involved in this, I would say though, that if he is willing to admit fully what he has done, we should allow him to edit it - a prank or not, it's serious, but BCD hasn't exactly been the worst wikipedian prior to this. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, above I assume that BCD was only responsible for the block on Ryulong using the password exposed in the deletion log. If BCD was also responsible for hacking Jiang's account and vandalizing the sitenotice, he should be banned with extreme prejudice. Thatcher131 14:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well the IP that deleted the main page was different to the one that blocked Ryulongs (same as BCD's) so it actually seams like a high probability, although I am concerned that BCD created a new main page saying where's the main page?, that seams totally unacceptable to me, and rather disruptive. This is a tough one. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have no problems with the creation of a new main page in that way, I would have been confused - as long as it wasn't him that deleted it. Blocking Ryulong was dissruptive, but considering his history, not something worth an indefinite block. I am resigned to the fact that he probobly did do the second action, but I don't believe he deleted the main page. ViridaeTalk 23:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well the IP that deleted the main page was different to the one that blocked Ryulongs (same as BCD's) so it actually seams like a high probability, although I am concerned that BCD created a new main page saying where's the main page?, that seams totally unacceptable to me, and rather disruptive. This is a tough one. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, above I assume that BCD was only responsible for the block on Ryulong using the password exposed in the deletion log. If BCD was also responsible for hacking Jiang's account and vandalizing the sitenotice, he should be banned with extreme prejudice. Thatcher131 14:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
You are!
I hate you, I think you are an idiot, and you're contributions are stupid. --64.24.40.3 22:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)64.24.40.3
I've just emailed you, so hopefully you'll get it soon. Cheers Ryan Postlethwaite 13:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Username report
I asked the user. Should the report be removed now, not being a clearly offensive username afterall. It seemed clear, but since you're not sure if it stands for the Ku Klux Klan, the report probraly doesn't belong there.--U. S. A. 03:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- If the user does not respond at all, should I report or not, and how much time should the user have to respond?(I would think at least a day)--U. S. A. 03:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- But presuming they don't make any edits, I shouldn't re-report the account?--U. S. A. 04:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- You can if you wish, but having a username blocked when they aren't going to edit anyway achieves nothing - they still remain in the users log either way. If they have an offensive username and they start editing, that is when it is going to offend people - go through the users log and you will find thousands of offensive names. However, blatantly offensive usernames are ussually blocked either way, as they are likely created to cause trouble. I don't think this is the case in this situation, but I leave it up to your judgment as to wether you think this is blatant enough that it still warrants a block on the off chance they edit and offend/cause trouble. ViridaeTalk 04:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
The block, unblock, and immediate re-block of Shaunybot
Re: WP:RFCN#Shaunybot: For the record, this name was reported to WP:UAA; Cbrown1023 imposed a username block at 01:46, 10 May 2007, and the RFCN section was accordingly closed; mitigating information was offered, to which Cbrown1023 replied, "I'll just re-open the RFCN case, be sure to post this there"; Cbrown1023 lifted the username block at 10:28, 10 May 2007, "for rfcn debate"; but then you re-blocked at 11:50, 10 May 2007, closing the debate at 11:52, without the mitigating information ever being posted for discussion. Not a whole lot of "debate" gets to happen in less than an hour and a half. -- Ben TALK/HIST 19:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Simply because it is quite simply a violation - we aren't going to change the policy now to suit one user. ViridaeTalk 01:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Shaunybot
This user is having a rant on their talk page probably because the block you applied does not permit account creation (they should be allowed to choose a new username). Unless there is something I've missed then th block should probably be changed. Thanks. GDonato (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
ResolvedThanks for your help. GDonato (talk) 11:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Please restore OneChild
You deleted OneChild as an expired prod. Could you please restore it to my userspace so that I could add the following references to the article, which I think are enough to establish notability?
Thank you. --Eastmain 02:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done at User:Eastmain/OneChild. ViridaeTalk 02:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia
I have responded to administrators about CBW actions. I think, it satisfiies you. I am also sure that wikipedia is not managed by Ghosts. There are some real people behind it and have some professional senstivity in their conduct. CBW must be a person and frankly I am not interested to know his/her whereabouts but I am really concerned about the way wikipedia as a public domain information hub is being managed. Dispute settlement must be at the center stage of any such activity. Try to learn from www.wto.org ;)
- yes Wikipedia does have quite a number of dispute resolution process in place. Hav a read of WP:DR. However the first and formost of those is rtalking with the user on their talk page or that of the article. ViridaeTalk 06:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
r u an admin? please tell me how i can get admin assitance for Last stand, there is a user there called Miskin who just undos everyone else's edits, i counted and he's undone 8-9 edits of others in the last 2-3 days...is this allowed?
Thanks
Thanks for understanding my point of view. Frankly, I may not have that much time to go through all those documents which a couple of people coming to the rescue of CBW are mentioning. If there is something specific, please let me know and I am ready to make correction. For example, if anyone of you thinks that sentence 'a' to 'd' needs changes or disclosure of source or whatever, then I can do that. I am sure it will facilitate your work and improve the content on wikipedia. The bottom line is we should be part of solution than a source of conflict by pricking people with blocks and unilateral truncations and adding frivolous information. In the case of Iman Ali, I can speak to her about the whole episode.
My bot request
I have put in a bot request for the new bot at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/HBC NameWatcherBot. Since you have expressed concerns about the bot I thought I would point you to it so you can participate. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 16:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Faniman
Thanks for getting the guy to stop. I will of course walk away from this as I doubt there is little that he and I could achive together. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Anarcho-capitalist-facsist
Hey, I noticed that you blocked User:Anarcho-capitalism for being a sock of Billy Ego, and said ArbCom said so. Anarcho-capitalism was one of the best editors in economics-politics-related topics though I disagree strongly with his views. How could he be the "fascist" Billy-Ego be the same person to the libertarian Anarcho-capitalism? It doesn't make sense a person can be fascist and libertarian POV at the same time, it's like being both abolitionist and pro-slavery. What was the ArbCom's sock judgment based on? WooyiTalk to me? 17:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
wrong impression?
Don't get the wrong impression. Alison's reduction to 1 week was done in discussion with me through email. What wasn't discussed was the original unblocking by dbachmann. That's the disturbing thing. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 03:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I hope that you will be able to back up with diffs your characterization of Dbachmann as "an admin with a conflict of interest, having had many interactions with Miskin previously". If one editor has had many interactions with another editor, it does not make them either friends or enemies. I believe an admin who is informed about Miskin's pattern of behaviour is better qualified to block/unblock him than an admin who knows him by hearsay, that is, from e-mails by Miskin's opponents or from bigmouths active primarily on ANI and IRC. --Ghirla-трёп- 06:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- I believe it was him who stated that he had helped Miskin thorough his early stages of being a wikipedian and calming down. Hence conflict of interest because he has history and hence shouldn't be changing another admins blocks on that user without consulting them. ViridaeTalk 06:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Miskin/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 17:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Your unblock
See my comment re your unblock. [22] FloNight 23:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- There are three editors who think this editor should not be unblocked. I have asked for further opinions here Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Unblock_of_User:Heatedissuepuppet Sparkzilla 00:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a bundle. The editor is now back and is threatening to harass me further with a bogus CoI. He clearly has no intention to improve WP, simply to harass me. See WP:AN/i Sparkzilla 09:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of Category:Wikipedians in Esperanza
On 15:45, January 6, 2007 Viridae (Talk | contribs) deleted "Category:Wikipedians in Esperanza" (per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Esperanza) yet today March 16, 2007, Wikipedians in Esperanza still has 2 members (User:Ikiroid/Userboxen) and (User:Fang_Aili/Backup) I am confused about the policy of using deleted / non-existant category names on any page. Could you enlighten me? I noted that the link was removed from User: Ikirodid/Userboxen but then added back later While user Fang_Aili has made it very clear that she does not care if entries in her list of categories includes categories that no longer exist and insists on adding them back after someone else deletes them. Being new, I am just trying to learn the ropes. Dbiel 03:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I deleted the category from those two pages. Its not much of a problem though. ViridaeTalk 05:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
re: EC
Ha! I was just amazed that I got in there before that HagermanBot! Flyguy649talkcontribs 05:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Come on
You haven't answered my message on the "Please". I put a new one on. --TimySmidge 20:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
- Been busy. All the images you wish to upload are copyrighted. Consequently the only way they can be used on wikipedia is under fair use. Fair use allows them to be used in an article about the subject - therefore, select the apropriate form of coyright, and add them to the appropriate articles. ViridaeTalk 23:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
User:Nick has closed the AFD for Qian Zhijun based on the two previous AFDs. However, I believe that you created this AFD after the discussion on DRV for the express purpose of letting it run its full course. Given the contentious history of this deletion, and in the interest of process, can you reopen this AFD and restore the article? As I participated in the DRV, and have voted in the AFD, I don't believe it is appropriate for me to take the actions myself. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 12:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed you restored the article, and it's been deleted once again. Sigh, this is the same kind of horrible behavior that messed up the Daniel Brandt case. FrozenPurpleCube 14:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thats it, this is ridiculouis - arbcom time. ViridaeTalk 14:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- It's already at ArbCom. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ahh good. ViridaeTalk 14:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'll keep my eye peeled for a statement! Ryan Postlethwaite 16:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ahh good. ViridaeTalk 14:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- It's already at ArbCom. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thats it, this is ridiculouis - arbcom time. ViridaeTalk 14:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed you restored the article, and it's been deleted once again. Sigh, this is the same kind of horrible behavior that messed up the Daniel Brandt case. FrozenPurpleCube 14:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Arbcom over Qian Zhijun
Since you engaged in a wheel war over Qian Zhijun, I have added your name to the relevant arbcom case. [23]--Docg 14:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- How very nice of you to characterise me before the case. Nice style. ViridaeTalk 15:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I used a factual description. Not a personal attack, like [24]. Is 'Jackass' nicer?--Docg 15:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Come on guys, just calm down a bit - there's no need to start passing the insults to each other, it's at arbitration now so I suggest you both attempt to stay away from each other apart from at arbitration. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm perfectly calm. I was only notifying this user of their involvement in the case. I don't believe we've interacted before - and I've no dispute with him personally.--Docg 15:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Come on guys, just calm down a bit - there's no need to start passing the insults to each other, it's at arbitration now so I suggest you both attempt to stay away from each other apart from at arbitration. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I used a factual description. Not a personal attack, like [24]. Is 'Jackass' nicer?--Docg 15:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I think your revert was actually somewhat justified, but once it got to the point where the closure had been reinstated for the 3rd time, I thought that the disruption element was more significant than what should actually be done with the debate. Oh well. That's the 3rd time we couldn't have an actual debate. I really hope Arbcom takes the case, these unilateral process-ignoring actions are harmful, and Arbcom can help put a stop to it. Mangojuicetalk 16:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Even as I reverted the close, I knew I would have to take it to arbcom if it was re-closed. I really cannot understand why those who keep on closing this thing can't allow the community to make its own mind up. ViridaeTalk 16:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm coming to this way late, but I thought your reasoning in the previous debate was about as well thought-out as it gets. It's just a shame that it got closed as quickly as it did. The admins are near the point of civil war over this (if I'm not over-hyping this). It may not be Brandt or a high-powered lawsuit that brings Wikipedia to it's knees, but an anonymous Chinese gas station attendant. DarkAudit 17:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- (my own personal attacks removed, sorry The Evil Spartan 17:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC))The Evil Spartan 22:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, well that insightful remark will certainly help calm the tensions and unhappiness. Newyorkbrad 22:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- (my own personal attacks removed, sorry The Evil Spartan 17:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)) The Evil Spartan 22:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, well that insightful remark will certainly help calm the tensions and unhappiness. Newyorkbrad 22:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- (my own personal attacks removed, sorry The Evil Spartan 17:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC))The Evil Spartan 22:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
IRC
You seem to have a negative impression of IRC. Maybe you would like to participate in the admins' channel, and see for yourself how unlikely it would be for any kind of organised cabalistic action to be fomented therein? Since you're an admin, your access should be a shoe-in. —Phil | Talk 10:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well I actually logged onto #wikipedia-en today (for the first time). I only went there on dicovering I am apparently banned from #wikipedia - is there anyway I can rectify that? That was the first time I was on freenode. I was considering joining the admin channel (yes I realise approval is required). I see the benefits of a admin irc channel, but I also dislike the idea odf any sort of wiki discussion happening/decisions being made off wiki in an un-logged environment. ViridaeTalk 12:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've asked around but no joy: maybe someone who knows this stuff better will be available later. What is your IRC nick? If you've registered it properly with Freenode, you can send me a memo (use "/msg memoserv help" for instructions, you can leave messages for "Phil_Boswell") or PM me (same nick, but that will work only if I'm on-line at the time: the memo thing can be asynchronous). Your access to other channels should not affect access to the admins channel: I for one never go in #wikipedia and remain blissfully ignorant as to what occurs there. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 17:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
RFC
I know it's become fashionable to make posts on Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents (WP:ANI) complaining about something someone has done that seems wrong, but I wonder if you'd given a thought to the dispute resolution process? Perhaps an RFC on the Crystal Gail Mangum affair would help us to get this thing sorted out. If you can define your dispute in terms of failure to comply with Wikipedia policies (and it looks to me like you can), then perhaps it's time to do that. I've also suggested this to Nardman1 and Badlydrawnjeff. --Tony Sidaway 19:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- I will look into it. I have no problem with the way Mangojuice closed the debate. - its not how I would have done it, but he did it in an unbalanced manner so thats a good decision IMO. (I would have deleted, stubbed and protected in all likelyhood). ViridaeTalk 00:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Switched at birth DRV
I'm happy to have the deletion overturned and relisted since, as I stated earlier, the second deletion of the article was not a correct use of CSD A7. (I do believe that my first deletions were, since there was no assertion of notability--and, as anyone who has done NPP knows, articles get reposted word-for-word frequently, and thus I didn't notice the addition of a single sentence.) If you wouldn't mind closing it for me, I'd appreciate it. (I've never closed a DRV before and am certain I'd screw it up.) You can cite that the admin who originally deleted the articles found the deletion to be a violation of process and that the articles should properly go to AFD. If you don't get a chance to do this, I'll figure it out tomorrow morning. Cheers. -- Merope 00:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- It's not your fault, of course. My head just kind of exploded when reading the ANI stuff. I'll be fine in a few days and after a few drinks. Cheers. -- Merope 02:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- Don't try to restore either of those articles or any of the material in them again. No further warnings will be given. --Tony Sidaway 02:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I hope this DRV can be resolved somehow. A close of 'undelete and list' is clearly incompatible with the current situation. The way, the truth, and the light 03:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not touching it further, I have no wish to cheapen my arguments by opening myself up to allegations of wheel warring. This will probobly go to another RfC and seeing how the current one is progressing - iehter that will turn into another huge mess and solve nothing or it will go to arbcom too. We need some sort of resolution on the matter from somewhere. ViridaeTalk 03:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Your bot
Would you perchance be able to use your bot to perform the same task for me as it did for you. Ie changing links from my old userpage to my new one. There are only about 350 or so, but I'm not running AWB. ViridaeTalk 00:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'd love to but I am prohibited of making such edits manually now let alone automated. Fixing signatures will only get me blocked. So although I want to help you my hands are tied. -- Cat chi? 00:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
AWB
What do you need help with? --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Can you please change all links to my old username from there to User:Viridae. That is my old username and I would like all links to point to my current userpage. There should be 350 or so. Many of them will have the sig skorpion. Feel free to leave the "skorpion" part in place, just replacing them with skorpion - that way when people talked to me, it still refers to the same person (if you get my drift). Thanks. ViridaeTalk 01:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks :) ViridaeTalk 03:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- No problem :) Lemme know if ya need any other repetitive tasks done. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks :) ViridaeTalk 03:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
VP userlist
Hi Viridae, could you please not edit User:AmiDaniel/VP/L2, only moderators can change the list, and while non-mod edits are ignored, sometimes edits can inadvertently break the userlist. Also, I noticed your talk page was deleted when I came to leave you this, so I restored it, since talk pages shouldn't be deleted to keep a record of conversations here. Sorry if that messed something up for you, but I didn't want to mess up the history by creating a new talk page! Happy editing! Prodego talk 03:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Your edit would have been reverted automatically when the next mod edited the page, so I went ahead and resaved it for you. Prodego talk 03:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Um?
[25]. Is this right? --TTalk to me 23:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- [26] Never mind :-). --TTalk to me 23:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Deleting articles
Please remember that BLP is not a reason to delete any article you want to remove - you must follow the correct procedures if you wish to delete it. violet/riga (t) 00:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't delete any article under BLP concerns. Please have a look at my previous involvement in the whole mess. ViridaeTalk 00:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually i didn't delete any article at all... ViridaeTalk 00:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Apologies - I meant to post this to Doc glasgow. violet/riga (t) 00:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually i didn't delete any article at all... ViridaeTalk 00:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Reply
And I've replied (and apologised) to you, also on Guy's talk page. P.S. I'm in Melbourne too. FNMF 12:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Please oh please
Can you not use that new sig. Its huge, unwieldy and very hard to read. Thanks. ViridaeTalk 07:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- No offense but WP:SIG does not seem to forbid that. I do not use any images or templates, and my signature doesn't take much space in the editing box. I will make it smaller but I will keep the font, if you don't mind. ZOUAVMAN LE ZOUAVE 10:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, good. :) I would just like to point out that other users have much bigger signatures and that mine really isn't a problem. ZOUAVMAN LE ZOUAVE 10:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Your note
Hi Viridae, you say "just 2 reverts each for different material". Your implication presumably is that you need 4 reverts of the same material to violate 3RR. My understanding of WP:3RR is that you can have 4 reverts of totally different material to violate 3RR. Given that this is a repeat offense, with a 24 hours block just prior, a 48 hour block would seem appropriate. If you believe that my understanding of 3RR is wrong, can you point me to where it says that the 4 reverts must be of the same material? Thanks, Crum375 14:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- You are right it seems, as evinced by the first line - never knew that. ViridaeTalk 22:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
RfC on User:Mike18xx
Hi Viridae. As you have participated at the ANI discussion regarding the behaviour of the abovementioned user, i just wanted to let you know that I opened an RfC on themselves in response to the concerns raised during the discussion at the ANI and their avoidance to solve the issue. The RfC is located here. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 10:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, not really what I would call participation, but anyway. ViridaeTalk 10:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hehehe. I know but it is just good practice to inform all parties. So no big deals. Happy editing. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 10:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
CSD
I am well aware of the CSD criteria and what is and is not allowed. I used the appropriate tag and have not readded the csd template. I am now using an afd template. In the meantime, to borrow something from mr. neil, his actions and behavior were retarded and totally offensive. //Tecmobowl 10:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
So an admin can call me a lunatic and that's okay? I did not prompt this nor ask for this. If someone disagreed with my use of the template, then it can be removed. Instead of calling me "disruptive", a lunatic, or anything else, a polite message could have been left. You obviously are unfamiliar with ASSUME GOOD FAITH. Threaten me all you want, i don't care. All i care about is the information: Get it right and make it quality. Beyond that, you can have your power. If a person has played major league ball then they are by default, considered important. A person who existed, is deaf, is a baseball player, or whatever, does not make them noteworthy. Look at the articles i have enhanced and created..... then tell me i don't know what i'm doing. //Tecmobowl 10:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have no opinion whatsoever on the content of the articles or what you have created, I was simply warning you not to re-add CSD templates when they had been removed, an impression (it appears wrongly ) i got from that exchange between you and Neil. I also asked you to cool your language - Calling you a lunatic was a bad choice of words on Neil's behalf - what you have said since is far worse. You have been warned, you know the rules and I expect you (and everyone else) to abide by them. If this is getting to you, i suggest you step away from the computer for an hour or so. ViridaeTalk 10:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- My words were simply used to make a point, I am bold and make no excuses or apologies for that. I will continue to do so in my edits. A number of editors have engaged me in an uncivil fashion and I respond to them in that fashion. They use poorly supported arguments and use a double standard when considering alternative suggestions. I expect that from the average user of wiki, but not from an admin. Neil failed to take into consideration two very important things here on wiki: WP:BOLD and WP:AGF. Add that to the fact that he tossed in the word lunatic to an edit summary and you see an admin who has drastically missed the mark. If I cared as much about the people on here as I do the content, I would explore the options of nominating someone to lose their admin status. I don't care, so i'm not going to. I had every right to add those templates and you, or neil or whomever, has every right to remove them. That's the end of it. Engage people in a friendly manner next time and you won't get an unfriendly response. //Tecmobowl 10:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Help with vandal
User:King Heydon's sole purpose appears to be to vandalize articles.[27] Thank you for your help. :) Baseball Bugs 10:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- I ran across him for a different reason, but this one article he's messing with Northholm Grammar School has several other weird entries in it, and in fact I suspect it's a vanity article. I wouldn't think an elementary school would be worthy of a wikipedia article, but I don't know for sure. Baseball Bugs 10:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Feel free to list it for deletion: See WP:AFD. Thanks for the heads up bout the vandalism - I warned him, you can do that too. See WP:UTM if they have had a "final" warning recently (within the past few hours for ips - few days for users) and they vandalise again - list them at WP:AIV. WP:VAND has more info. ViridaeTalk 12:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Your feedback would be appreciated.
I've jotted down some thoughts at User:JoshuaZ/Thoughts on BLP and I'd appreciate your feedback. JoshuaZ 03:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll make soem comments on monday - going away for the long weekend. ViridaeTalk 05:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your interpretation of Wikipedia:Harassment
Hi, could you show me where dispute or dispute resolution is referred to or recommended for WP:HA? User:Arcayne has followed me to ALF and is making blanking reverts and oppose votes to a closed request for move without even knowing what he's reverting or voting on. This is clear harassment. Do you usually recommend dispute resolution for editors who are being harassed? I'm just asking for the behavior to stop. And since you've commented about my user name several times, I've had it since 2004. Thanks. —Viriditas | Talk 11:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- I know you had that username first, I came across you querying my name change. Admins are not magical fixits when it comes to disputes, and typically I would suggest you open a user conduct RfC if you think that you are being harrassaed. ViridaeTalk 11:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Question: why isn't that recommendation on WP:HA, and why don't you warn or block other users for HA? I have been followed to a page by a user who has been in constant conflict with me for five months, and he has folllowed me to harass me further. Why would I need dispute resolution to ask for this harassment to stop? It is obvious from his blanket reverts to that article and his comments on the discussion page that he hasn't even read the article. In fact, his edit summary and comments on the talk page directly mimicked the comments of two other editors who are engaging in reverts and votes. He copied Crum's edit summary word for word ("Restore SlimVirgin's version - we need to ensure that the common terms are easy to find")[28][29] and he mimicked Slim's comments on the closed poll. He didn't even offer his own opinion or reason for following me to this page. This is clear harassment. —Viriditas | Talk 11:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Unblocking of Lucy Vandal
This person has used socks to disrupt Lucille Ball see this, registered with a name, reverted the article again, and was indef. blocked. The evidence is clearly shown, because her IP location matches her username. If the user vandalizes the article one more time with "Lucy is still alive," I will submit this case to WP:ANI for him/her to be blocked indef. Miranda 02:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have seen the IP edits and the subsequent block. I am being lenient - and it has already beeen posted at WP:ANI. ViridaeTalk 03:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
(reduce indent) The user has done it again, only this time with a sock. Please block both accounts indef., since they are WP:SPA. Miranda 01:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- NVM, taken care of. :-) Miranda 02:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Long term abuse is shown here. Miranda 02:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
No, I wasn't apologized to
And Chris just kept calling me names, telling me he closed it because I would be badgering people by talking too much (100 to 10). Completely 100% abusive of administrative powers. Enough of Wikipedia. KP Botany 23:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
No, I was NOT apologized to for being called a badgerer, and not for being called a troll, and not for his closing the discussion because he disagreed with me, and not for closing the RFCN to prevent my discussing the issue, and NOT for removing my responses to other's comment, so don't post on my user page that this happened. I was NOT apologized to. KP Botany 00:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Just drop it, you are getting nowhere. He did apologise for being called a troll, an explanation was provided for the comment removal and the discussion doesn't revolve around your opinions so he did nothing wrong in closing it when he did. The discussion is closed and will remain closed - I support chris's discretion on the matter and likely would have closed it the same way. ViridaeTalk 00:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- This is what it says on AN/I:
- "If you want to make an open informal complaint about misuse of administrative powers, you can do so here."
- The matter on AN/I was about Chris's abuse of discretion. And it remains about that. And about him calling me names. Chris made it perfectly clear when he called me a troll that I don't have a voice in Wikipedia, there's no need to keep saying it. KP Botany 00:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry your feelings were hurt. In my experience an apology is the best you can hope for in these cases. Having received that, I am unclear what your continuing grievance is about. --John 00:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- (ec)The supposed discretion abuse is moot - I support the close, so you can consider it opened and reclosed by me. The troll comment (this is the last time I will say this) has been apologised for. RFCNs may be closed by any admin who knows what they are doing at any time and it is up to that administrator's discretion as to what the result is. If you are really taking issue with chrises supposed abuse of his admin privelages, I would suggest that an RFC is your next step - or talk with him directly. That discussion is going absoloutely nowhere. Step away from the computer for a while and o something else, you are getting worked up and it is not helping you at all. ViridaeTalk 00:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Question re: Lightbringer sock 3RR block
I hate to sound like a jerk, but the part of the notification was to alert to indefblock and community ban evasion via an IP address - see WP:LB for details. Therefore, shouldn't the block on the IP be permanent, or at least very long-term? Obviously, any little bit helps, but this looks a bit too close to overly lenient application of policy to me, and I'd like you to reconsider the block length. MSJapan 03:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Err, what is this in reference to? ViridaeTalk 04:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm asuming that MSJapan is refering to 24.68.249.225, whom you blocked for a 3RR today. 24.68.249.225 is highly likely to be a sock of the banned Lightbringer, a long term vandal that even has his own page at Long term abuse. The reason I, and other editors, believe this is based on the IP range (Shawn Communications), the articles edited, the edits themself and the tone of the edit summaries. His MO is quite distint.
- In light of this (almost certain sock of banned user), would it be possible to get the IP banned for a longer period? As far as I can tell from the IPs contributions, no legitimate user is editing through this IP. Thank you for your time, WegianWarrior 06:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Blocked
Hi there. I see that when I was blocked last month and requested unblocking, you declined (here) stating that "the sockppuppetry alone is well worth 48 hrs". If you will look at this (copied from [[30]], no 84) you will see that a) I had explained away the alleged sockpuppetry, b) it had already been dealt with (and no ban was felt necessary), c) after I took steps to prevent usage of my wi-fi by other user/neighbours, it stopped, and in any case d) it had happened weeks before this ban. The block log indeed does not mention sockpuppetry, so I think that you ought to have dealt only with the alleged incivility. As for this, I think I made good points, although should have made it clear I was quoting. Is there anyway to remove a block from the system after it has expired? L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 12:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- The logs cannot be changed by anyone but a developer - and that never ever happens. ViridaeTalk 13:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- OK, that's fine. Thanks for letting me know anyway! L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 01:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
A PAGE ABOUT MY LIFE WAS DELETED- I DO NOT UNDERSTAND
Hello,
I'm very confused. About 4 months ago someone created a Wikipedia page about me and I was honored.
I checked it out. The Scary Guy is my legal name and that was the name used for this page about me.
I then signed up to make a few changes to make sure it was telling an accurate story.
It was deleted.
Everything on the page was real and is real about my life and who I am.
Help?
Will someone please explain to me why this action was taken?
thank you, Scary11:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)11:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)11:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)~
* Is this a hoax? Someone verify this. If you are serious, I don't know. But maybe, it seemed like a hoax to someone.
Not a hoax, it was deleted as a self promotion article. ViridaeTalk 12:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
How could it be a self promotion article if it was completely factual about me and my life??? Thank you, ScaryThescary1 12:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm very new at all this and I will share the WP:BIO guidlines with the people that created it. ScaryThescary1 12:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
KP Botany
I think it is outrageous to hound an editor until she breaks and then protect her talk page. Even an indefinitely blocked user has the right to use his talk page. There's only one of her (well, there's me; I think she goes overboard sometimes, but I, too, find ChicagoPimp an offensive user name), and there seem to be an endless supply of her opponents, all of whom seem to want to get in the last word. Let it go.--Curtis Clark 13:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I just read this and realized that she requested it. I see that you concur that people should lay off for a while. My apologies for jumping to conclusions.--Curtis Clark 13:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Viridae, I see you proptected the above page, I hope you don't mind, but I blanked most of it - it was simply a personal attack page against Chrislk02, feel free to revert me if you wish, but I really believe that the stuff that was on there isn't appropriate. All the best, Ryan Postlethwaite 15:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Good grief, this is exactly the kind of thing that pissed off KP Botany in the first place. I don't think KP is entirely in the right and could have handled the situation better but things like one editor blanking another editor's talk page are starting to make me think KP has a point. I would suggest letting KP and the other editor work it out, with the help of a third party admin if necessary, and stay out of it. Otherwise you're just pouring fuel on the fire. MrDarwin 17:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- I would add that many of the comments made to her in the AFD and on AN/I seem to me to be personal attacks, and those are now enshrined in "do not modify" blocks.--Curtis Clark 17:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- copied from User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite I'm sorry you feel that way, but using ones talk page as a platform to make personal attacks and then having it protected is totally unacceptable, hence why I blanked it. I would urge KP Botany to drop the matter, and I will do the minute the talk page is unprotected. She's obviously very upset by this matter, but prolonging it is only causing her more distress - that still does not give her the right to make personal attacks. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- You're missing the point: other people futzing around with KP's talk page was precisely one of the things KP was angry about, and by blanking it you pretty much guarantee that the matter will be prolonged. MrDarwin 02:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- copied from User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite I'm sorry you feel that way, but using ones talk page as a platform to make personal attacks and then having it protected is totally unacceptable, hence why I blanked it. I would urge KP Botany to drop the matter, and I will do the minute the talk page is unprotected. She's obviously very upset by this matter, but prolonging it is only causing her more distress - that still does not give her the right to make personal attacks. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I did NOT ask to have my talk page blanked, and I don't appreciate that being done. It was initially NOT blanked. As Ryan has relentlessly harassed me, he has NO business touching my talk page--he is one of the people I am trying to keep away from my talk page. Good God, is there any end to haranging me in retaliation for Chris's bad judgment? KP Botany 23:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Calm down KP Botany, I'm not harrassing you, I just don't like to see personal attacks on talk page. Please just drop the matter, lets get on with editing the encyclopedia. Feel free to email me if you wish. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Those are ALL personal attacks delivered to me by your friends. I notice you couldn't be bothered to stop a single person from peronsally attacking me, then you make up any excuse you can for removing those personal attacks your friends delivered to me, while you were relentlessly harrassing me. Your little maneuvering to continue harrassing me is shameless--cut it out, get out, Viridae already protected the page exactly as I asked. If your friends don't want their personal attacks posted on my talk page, they ought not to have posted them to me, and until you actually do something about the people issuing the personal attacks instead of trying to get me to shut up about them, you're just part of the posse stalking and harrassing me. Stop talking to me, leave my talk page alone, and stop making up garbage like you "don't like to see personal attacks on talk page" when you were fine with all of your friends delivering their personal attacks to me on my talk page, on their talk pages, on AN/I and on RFCN.
You're what I was trying to block from my talk page, and you know it. Don't answer me here or anywhere, leave my talk page alone.
KP Botany 23:50, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- I haven't had access to my laptop this weekend and I've only had limited connection. I'm sorry you feel that I haven't removedd personal attacks against you, but that is the reason why. Are there any still posted? I'll gladly remove them. I just hope that you can end this sorry saga, put it behind you and carry on your work. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Ryan I have spoken to Chris about it and he doesn't mind the talk page being how I protected it. ViridaeTalk 01:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I guess you can revert me (sorry, I'm not doing myself as I feel strongly that the text should not be on KP's talk page), certainly not going to edit war with you about it though. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I can see your point, so I will leave it as is unless KP asks me to revert to her version. However the protection should expire soon. ViridaeTalk 02:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Short of libel or threats, I think it's extremely bad form to remove content from, or especially blank, another editor's user or talk page, whether you're an admin or not. Is there any kind of admin policy on when this is proper or acceptable? Because on KP's talk page I saw a lot of complaining, venting, frustration with an admin and anger in general at the actions of several other editors. In my opinion the policy on personal attacks has been taken to a ridiculous extreme in this case and "personal attack" is being so broadly defined that just about any complaint about another editor, valid or not, could be construed as such. If this were occurring on the talk page of an article I could understand deleting it but if we don't have some leeway to say what we think, or some measure of control, on our own talk pages, then why should we bother registering as editors at Wikipedia at all? MrDarwin 02:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, MrDarwin, nice we agree on things some times. The issue has been settled by a small assortment of people who both listened to what I had to say and did not devote any effort to trying to shut me up in any and every way possible, or rather, didn't have to because they were busy with the former. I see that no one is worried about "Gotta keep the pimp hand strong. Always."[31] But I knew what was what as far as women are concerned on Wikipedia[32] when I first complained about the offensive user name. KP Botany 21:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed that misogynistic comment from the user page. It's not acceptable on Wikipedia. Is this fellow taking this piss? --Tony Sidaway 21:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, MrDarwin, nice we agree on things some times. The issue has been settled by a small assortment of people who both listened to what I had to say and did not devote any effort to trying to shut me up in any and every way possible, or rather, didn't have to because they were busy with the former. I see that no one is worried about "Gotta keep the pimp hand strong. Always."[31] But I knew what was what as far as women are concerned on Wikipedia[32] when I first complained about the offensive user name. KP Botany 21:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Short of libel or threats, I think it's extremely bad form to remove content from, or especially blank, another editor's user or talk page, whether you're an admin or not. Is there any kind of admin policy on when this is proper or acceptable? Because on KP's talk page I saw a lot of complaining, venting, frustration with an admin and anger in general at the actions of several other editors. In my opinion the policy on personal attacks has been taken to a ridiculous extreme in this case and "personal attack" is being so broadly defined that just about any complaint about another editor, valid or not, could be construed as such. If this were occurring on the talk page of an article I could understand deleting it but if we don't have some leeway to say what we think, or some measure of control, on our own talk pages, then why should we bother registering as editors at Wikipedia at all? MrDarwin 02:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I can see your point, so I will leave it as is unless KP asks me to revert to her version. However the protection should expire soon. ViridaeTalk 02:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Sig
See this: [33] I happened to be looking at the move log when he did it. ViridaeTalk 02:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it's not just for monobook, it's for all the skins. But yeah, it should only be used for skins. Perhaps I'll code something to prevent it being used in other ways. It would probably be a good idea to look for other people doing this too. --bainer (talk) 04:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
A Barnstar!
|
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
| For your proven diligence and your quick and appropriate action on WP:AN/I. Lolcats everywhere salute you! Ali (t)(c) 03:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC) |
Hey! Viridae!
I'm back. I have some questions. First, how do you delete an image or and article from Wikipedia? Also, why haven't you answered my last new (you haven't seen it) question on "Please". I moved it to the top so you could see it. And. (kind of a strange question) Are you a boy or a girl?
You're fellow user and friend, TimySmidge
--TimySmidge 19:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)TimySmidge
- I am a Guy and only administrators can delete images or articles. If you think something should be deleted you can check the speedy deletion criteria: WP:CSD or the articles for deletion criteria: WP:AFD or the images for deletion criteria: WP:IFD
Dell Schanze has edited his blog once again, this time making a threat to the Wikipedia in regards to wikipedia Entry. You can review it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dell_Schanze&diff=138708690&oldid=131747087
The ip address is guranteed to be Dell Schanze himself, as reviewing his other Edits will clearly detail. I highly recommend this issue be escalated, but I'm not sure how threats against the wikipedia organization are dealt with (Via ban or other means). Please review if you'd like. I apologize if this is not the appropriate method for escalation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.138.65.1 (talk • contribs)
User:71.30.203.14
I see you blocked User:71.30.203.14 recently. He is User:Sonicrules2.[34] –Gunslinger47 18:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, about your edit to the Biographies of living persons policy
Hi, I noticed your edit here with the edit summary "Yeah not leaving that in".
It puzzled me somewhat. Here are some questions:
Do you know which body is charged with resolving disputes and issues of conduct o Wikipedia?
Are you familiar with the arbitration case Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff ?
Have you noticed the so-far unanimous endorsement (6-0-0) of proposed principle 4, titled "Summary deletion of BLPs", of that case? [35]
The reason I ask these questions is because it seems to me that, if you know the answers and have studied the proposed principle, you know that anyone who fails to follow the instructions that you have chosen to remove from the BLP would probably find himself sanctioned by the arbitration committee.
In these circumstances, why would you wish to mislead your fellow administrators? --Tony Sidaway 02:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Whiteonrice04 and GFDL
After blocking the user for the legal threat, I'm now looking into his altering the licensing for the pictures. I assume this isn't kosher -- do we revert those edits? -- Merope 13:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Pretty mmuch. GDFL, once given is not reversible - I rolled the ones i saw back. ViridaeTalk 13:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
WMF images
I noticed you removed WMF images from Hornetman16 (talk · contribs)'s user talk page. I assume you will kick copious amounts of ass and take names for the other handful of editors who also use the WMF images on their userpages? hbdragon88 02:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Triple Comment
Hey! It's been some time and I have 3 comments so by saving space, I guess, I put all of my comments together
Tip of the day 6/25
I noticed your tip of the day and I've got another way to enlarge the reading text on your computer... I think this is accessible on all computers...if you go to View and then go to Text Size and take your pic between (from up to down):
- Largest
- Larger
- Medium
- Smaller
- Smallest
I hope that if you try it it will work because it should
Wow...
Also I've noticed you get... ALOT of comments and I only get like 1 a month :0
Japan
Do you ever watch SpongeBob SquarePants. If you do in the episode Fry Cook Games spongebob has the Japanese symbol (The one on the Japan flag) on his shirt so either this was a coincidence, spongebob loves Japan, or the fry cook games take place in or near Japan.
Bye--Chikinpotato11 19:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Tip of the day is a template you can add to your userpage, its updated by other people: Just add {{TOTD}} to your userpage and youw ill see them too.
- I get a lot of comments because I'm an admin, so I get a lot of feedback, questions, abuse etc. I also need to archive this page.
- And lastly I have never seen an episode of spongebob. I prefer Invader Zim ViridaeTalk 23:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
XCW Pro Wrestling
Deletion without explanation? How was this warranted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannyfranks (talk • contribs)
- See this afd: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professional Championship Wrestling ViridaeTalk 00:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- XCW Pro Wrestling was unrelated to this PCW other than being in the same state. PCW is non-notable, XCW is notable, as it is seen all over the world on television and pay per view. Dannyfranks 02:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Name swap
Hello, some time ago a friend of mine created a username with my real name (Cameron Ghazzagh) to do pranks on wikipedia just to attempt to make me mad. I was wondering if there is anyone that could have that account deleted user:Cameron Ghazzagh and have my name changed to that. Thanks! Cameron Ghazzagh 737 01:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Im sorry but accounts cannot be deleted. You can change our siganture so that it doesn't show the 737 part however, just go to your preferences and have a play. ViridaeTalk 01:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- In that case would it be possible to change User:Cameron Ghazzagh's username to something else and change mine to Cameron Ghazzagh? Cameron Ghazzagh 737 02:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not unless he requests the name change - if he requests a name change, it may be possible to then change your name to Cameron Ghazzagh (once his request has gone through). I suggest you miht liek to ask at WP:BN because thats the people who actually perform name changes. ViridaeTalk 02:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok thanks anyway! Cameron Ghazzagh 737 02:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not unless he requests the name change - if he requests a name change, it may be possible to then change your name to Cameron Ghazzagh (once his request has gone through). I suggest you miht liek to ask at WP:BN because thats the people who actually perform name changes. ViridaeTalk 02:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- In that case would it be possible to change User:Cameron Ghazzagh's username to something else and change mine to Cameron Ghazzagh? Cameron Ghazzagh 737 02:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Barbara Coll entry deleted
Hi
Please help.
I am really, really sorry to bother you, but I am feeling a bit stuck and hoping you can help.
I created a page for Barbara Coll about six months ago that was recently deleted and I am curious why.
When I first created the page, I spent a lot of time putting it together to ensure it included relevant and reliable sources like NYT, Business Week etc., as well as contributions Coll had made to her industry (SEO/SEM) over time, thinking I was doing the right thing. A user (Cambridge Bay Weather) was brilliant with help, however another user (Jehochman)found much fault and asked for the page to be removed. After contacting Jehochman, and given he has been much more experience with Wikipedia than I, I deferred to his better judgement and really cut the majority of content out.
Since then, I have been afraid to add anything to the page, worried he may ask for its deletion if I did.
However, recently I have noticed he has again asked for its removal, this time I didn't notice until it was too late. However, his reasons this time are that I have not included enough content.
This has me absolutely confused (and cranky sorry ;)and I am hoping you can offer some advice.
One thing that does bother me is after reading Jehochman's talk page, I realized he works in the same industry as does Coll, and I wonder whether it is fair that he has the right to ask for the deletion of a page where it seems to be such a conflict of interest.
If (and when) you have time :) please advise me; I wish to do the right thing, and not upset anyone but truly believe the page should be reinstated.
Many thanks
LidDavis 23:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- It was an expired prod, which means that if it gets deleted it can be undeleted on request, so I have restored it for you. ViridaeTalk 00:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Barbara Coll
Thank you,
Seems I have much to learn - fingers crossed I don't muck it up again. :)
LidDavis 16:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Username:Nikkis
Hello Viridae! I would like to create an account with the name Nikkis. But there has been a user already, who calls NikkiS. I'd like to have this name, because I've the same name in the german wikipedia. Isn't there any chance? 84.131.210.181 17:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- They don't have any contributions so you might be able to do so. Drop by WP:BN and ask them what the procedure is for usurptions - I'm not sure what happens if you don't have an account already. ViridaeTalk 00:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Snom
If I could ask a small fave please? Could you copy the previously deleted page for Snom into my userspace please? It may contain content useful for compiling the new article. TIA Karl2620 14:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- There is nothing there that isnt in the current article. ViridaeTalk 22:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Karl2620 10:59, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Al Rosen
Hi. You can unprotect Al Rosen if you like, as the edit warring editor Tecmobowl has been banned indefinitely. --Epeefleche 16:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
A lobby of editors are trying to provoke me for a edit war.
They are removing cited articles http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pranava_Veda&diff=next&oldid=143660034
I tried to put the same at Veda but they took off the same. Now I created a separate page. They are taking that off too. BalanceRestored 08:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I'm just briefly stopping by your wiki-abode to deliver a brief reminder: please sign your vote, lest the crats discount it. (It seems like you added an extra ~... this happened to me just the other day!) Happy editing, GracenotesT § 03:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Smile!
WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-WarthogDemon 04:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Iceman (wrestler)
Thanks for undeleting that article. It seems marginally notable to me - he was a champion in his wrestling competition. Would you be able to undelete the talk page as well? That was deleted under CSD-G8 back in May. Graham87 13:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: "Heavy IP vandalism" - really? Deiz talk 15:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)