User talk:Acalamari/Archive 046

User: Blondguynative

Good morning Acalamari, Could I bring to your attention the edits of the above user to the Democratic Party (United States) and Republican Party (United States). This user is constantly making edits without any references and has been asked, by several editors, on his Talk page to please give reasons for their edits. All these requests have been ignored and the unreferenced edits continue. I wonder whether a warning and a temporary block might be in order? With best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 13:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think a block would be appropriate at this moment given how long they've been offline, but give them a warning (which they'll most likely ignore, but it's best to give them one anyway) and do let me know what happens. Acalamari 22:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Might I enlist your help?

Now you have 'ascended to the heady heights' of Bureaucracy (or been given extra detergent for your mop and bucket), I find I am in need of Bureaucrat advice/action and you are the only one I know of. I am not entirely sure how to go about the task I need to perform

As you can see, I am a long term editor with a decent editing history under Timtrent. I have used, almost since day 1, perhaps from day 1, a nickname of Fiddle Faddle (all normal stuff and within the rules). Back in 2006, a good six months after I started, the username Fiddle Faddle was created. It appears to have made no edits, though the talk page was populated in error by EdwardsBot back in the autumn of 2013.

It is quite possible that I even created this username myself while I was nobbut a lad, though I can't remember.

What I'd like to do is to usurp it, create an SUL for it to protect it, and hold it as a legitimate alternative account, probably dormant. I know this is more than an ordinary Admin can do, but I have no idea where to make the request. Are you able to help me, please? Fiddle Faddle 19:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent! Sure, I can help. After taking a cursory glance at the account, I think you'll be able usurp it; Fiddle Faddle has not made any edits and I can't see any accounts with the same name on other wikis. Still, usurpations requests have to made at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations, for unlike admin actions, bureaucrat actions have to be done at their specific pages (although an uncontroversial non-usurpation username change might be okay, but I will double-check that just in case I'm wrong); as such, it would be a massively out-of-process usurpation if I did it right here without you going through the proper process. Is that bureaucratic? Certainly, but I guess I have to live up to the name. ;) You'll also have to specify that you'd like it as an alternate account, otherwise you'll end up with your main account being renamed to Fiddle Faddle (unless you'd prefer that), which brings me to my other concern: I'm not completely sure if a usurpation is acceptable if you only intend to have the usurped name as an alternate account (again, I need to double-check for my own benefit; there are a couple of nuances even I have to clarify!). However, you can still go ahead and file a request over there, anyway; at worst your request will be declined and at best it'll be approved. I hope this helps. :) Acalamari 22:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I have created Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#Timtrent_.E2.86.92_Fiddle_Faddle :) Fiddle Faddle 23:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, excellent. :) I'm curious to see how your request will turn out; it'll help me if/when I come across this in the future! The request should take a week to go through, although somebody (besides the bot) might respond before then. I won't participate for obvious reasons. ;) Acalamari 23:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I understand perfectly why you will not participate. Please would you be kind enough to double check whether I have been clear as crystal on wishing to retain my main account? I'm curious to see how it turns out as well. I'm treating it as a fire and forget request. No-one will die if it is declined. Fiddle Faddle 23:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

You're crystal clear to me. My interpretation of what you've said over there is the same as what you've said here: you use the nickname "Fiddle Faddle", you want Fiddle Faddle as an alternate account and want Timtrent to not be renamed at all. I can't interpret what you've said any other way! Acalamari 23:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't do my best thinking at midnight :) Fiddle Faddle 00:00, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

It struck me that this is actually quite a complex procedural request since it is, presumably, not the norm. A normal usurpation renames the whole shebang, and the usurping user then logs in to the usurped account. My request requires that a password be sent to me for the additional account. While this will not be taxing to any bureaucrat I felt it was worth adding a note to the foot of the request to show that I, too, understand there is a process based challenge. I'm letting you know for your amusement, especially since we are both wondering what will happen to the request. Hahaha So much for "fire and forget"! Fiddle Faddle 10:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually, unless there's some technical feature or process that I'm unaware of, once the existing Fiddle Faddle account has been renamed, all you would need to do is re-create the Fiddle Faddle account and do so with a password of your choice. It shouldn't be necessary for any bureaucrat to have to e-mail you a password. Don't worry, I'm still watching your request with interest. :) Acalamari 10:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

It's rather good fun doing something outside the norms, isn't it? I'll learn something I will never need to know and you will learn something no-one else will ever ask about! We'll find out at the end. I confess to a frisson of the need for instant gratification, but I know we have to await the putative other user's reaction, or absence thereof. Good lord. I used 'thereof' in a normal conversation. How pretentious! Fiddle Faddle 10:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

You're right: had you not made your request I would not have thought to ask about the appropriateness (is that even a word?) of usurping a name to claim it as an alternate account! Nah, it's okay, you weren't being pretentious. :) Acalamari 11:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Please check the following article if its notable.

Hello!, Please give me advice on when I can move User:TreesCanTell to Alex Gilbert. Here are some sources - http://www.throng.co.nz/2014/02/tv-ratings-2-february-2014/ , http://tvnz.co.nz/sunday/s2014-ep1-video-5821764 , http://tvnz.co.nz/sunday-news/alex-gilbert-my-journey-home-russia-5820767 & https://www.facebook.com/SundayTVNZ —Preceding undated comment added 21:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid that there's not much more I can add to what Gadfium already told you; before the page is ever moved into the article-space, you'll have to find better sources than Twitter, Facebook, the IMDb and Alex Gilbert's website. You might want to see Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Best. Acalamari 23:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Acalamari. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Maybe not Rudra, because according to the page history, the template addition was reverted. ///EuroCarGT 22:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Forgotten to thank you, so thank you. ///EuroCarGT 00:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Poocat9‎

Thank you for protecting my late wife's user page. That is greatly appreciated! - Ahunt (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

You're very much welcome. I am sorry to hear about your loss. Best wishes to you. Acalamari 23:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I have received some very supportive comments here on Wikipedia from other editors, which is very gratifying. - Ahunt (talk) 23:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Leona Lewis

Can you help me fix the table here please: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leona_Lewis#2006:_The_X_Factor  — ₳aron 15:01, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Calvin999, is this what you wanted? I admit that I'm not particularly skilled with table formatting! Acalamari 16:53, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah that's it. Thanks. I spent ages trying to fix that!  — ₳aron 16:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I spent twenty minutes on it myself. :) I had to compare it with the equivalent on Sam Bailey while previewing my edits around ten-fifteen times! Acalamari 16:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

That's what I was doing as well  — ₳aron 17:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Nexus 5 edits

Hello there! We're again having issues with some idiot(s) putting nonsense into the Nexus 5 article. Any chances, please, for semi-protecting the article and—more importantly—hiding those offending revisions? Thank you. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 04:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I haven't semi-protected the article (yet), but I have blocked the IP and hidden the offensive edits and their summaries. Acalamari 08:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Hopefully this won't happen again. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 20:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! Happy to help. Acalamari 23:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much! I was wondering if anyone would notice it was my big "wiki-anniversary" day. I hope you're doing well! Everyking (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Username from Shelok10 to Shelok12

Hi Acalamari, Based on your response to my request to change my username, what can I do to have my few edits under Shelok12 transferred to username Shelok10?Shelok10 (talk) 21:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Shelok10: unfortunately, nothing can be done. As I said over there, accounts cannot be merged and edits cannot be transferred from one account to another; if anyone told you that this could be done they were incorrect. If you cannot access the Shelok12 account, those edits are stuck under that name, even if it is moved out of the way and your current username then renamed to its place. Acalamari 21:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello @Acalamari: Thanks a lot! gonna get to work with username Shelok10. Shelok10 21:43, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay then! You're welcome. :) Acalamari 23:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

For your help with Derbyshire articles. Dougweller (talk) 09:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, they've mostly been small edits but nevertheless, I'm happy to help out! :) Acalamari 10:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Automatically moved page while renaming the user Doson to Bluemooneditor

Hey I recently changed my username from Doson to Bluemooneditor but with the bad part is Doson still redirects to Bluemooneditor leaving all the history intact. How do I remove that redirect and permanently delete Doson page. And how do I make sure that Page History don't show up on my new Username. Thanks BLUEMOONEDITOR (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I've deleted the redirects. Acalamari 19:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hey. Just wanted to let you know that 94.14.112.118 (talk · contribs) (aka 94.0.137.176 (talk · contribs)) has a new sock: 90.208.192.91 (talk · contribs). SnapSnap 22:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Blocked. Thank you for letting me know. Acalamari 22:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

And he/she is back: 2.223.75.10 (talk · contribs). SnapSnap 18:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks, SnapSnap! Acalamari 19:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! SnapSnap 19:20, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

They just won't quit: 90.218.205.133 (talk · contribs) SnapSnap 15:01, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for block evasion. Acalamari 18:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

One more... 90.198.84.27 (talk · contribs) SnapSnap 00:59, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocked. Acalamari 08:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hong Kong sockpuppeteer Chowkatsun9

Our persistent friend Special:Contributions/218.102.168.224 is back. Binksternet (talk) 16:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

When I archived my talk page yesterday, which ended up archiving your thread here, I had a feeling that he'd pop up again! Blocked. Acalamari 16:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

As long as you are willing to block the guy so quickly, I will continue to let you know wherever he pops up. Thank you very much for the offer you made so many months ago. You have been quite helpful. Binksternet (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) When I made the offer, I thought it would be easier for you to have someone to go to rather than you have to report a sock to a noticeboard and have to explain each time why blocking was necessary! Acalamari 17:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

So very generous. Here's another visit by our friend: Special:Contributions/219.77.20.152. Binksternet (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Blocked! Acalamari 16:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/210.0.179.179 is back—you've blocked him twice before. Binksternet (talk) 18:31, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Given another two week block; given that he last used that IP in December, a month's block seems pointless. Acalamari 19:01, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

A visit from Special:Contributions/203.218.106.97. One of his signature moves is the removal of multiple spaces in the infobox, which are there for convenience in the edit window. Binksternet (talk) 09:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Nice coincidence, as I've only just logged in, so  Done. Sock blocked. Acalamari 09:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Return visit from 218.102.117.184. Binksternet (talk) 02:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

And a repeat exit! Acalamari 08:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/219.78.76.226 can't stay away. Binksternet (talk) 13:22, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

They can now. Acalamari 14:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I predict Special:Contributions/210.0.179.179 is heading for his fourth block from you. Binksternet (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Three-month block. Acalamari 10:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Two new ones: Special:Contributions/219.77.21.138 and Special:Contributions/218.102.123.220. This guy is persistent, I'll give him that. Binksternet (talk) 04:52, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Binksternet even though I'm uninvolved, I must say kudos for keeping up with so many socks! XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 05:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Binksternet, both have been blocked. XXSNUGGUMSXX, I agree! Binksternet has done a great job looking out for these socks. Acalamari 08:25, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Two more popped up: Special:Contributions/219.78.11.190 and Special:Contributions/218.103.233.84. Binksternet (talk) 14:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Both blocked. Acalamari 16:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

New number: Special:Contributions/219.78.11.23. Binksternet (talk) 17:34, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Subtracted. Acalamari 18:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Here's a trio: Special:Contributions/203.218.169.106, Special:Contributions/219.77.21.212 and Special:Contributions/218.103.233.65. Binksternet (talk) 04:05, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

All blocked. Acalamari 08:48, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Acalamari. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:35, 26 February 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

///EuroCarGT 01:35, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Responded. Acalamari 09:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations!

It is wonderful to see that you've just recently been given the bureaucrat's button, which is proof that Wikipedia must have been in good hands during my prolonged absence! As for me, I've decided to help with backlogs where possible, though I'm determined not to contract a full-fledged case of wiki-fever, and to stay miles away from any stressful controversies (which, I'll add thankfully, seem to be much rarer now than they were in years gone by.) I've kept abreast of policy developments over time; but, if I'm ever confused by any novel situations, I'll know to turn to you for advice. :) Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 18:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Request for Admin judgement on Nelson-class battleships

Hi Acalamari, The Dart here. Just wondering if you could cast an Admin's eye over the articles Nelson-class battleship, the related talk page and HMS Rodney (29). I have been having difficulty with two editors, Red Harvest and Yaush with their claims of POV on my part in relation to two areas of the topic. Since mid 2012, I have have almost singlehandedly added the bulk of the content in these articles in as even handed a way as I can (NPOV). In many cases giving multiple cites for my edits, but have come up against a brick wall in dealing with these editors. Looking at their talk pages and other article contributions, neither seems to have much interest in Naval history, yet they continually hassle me about the many sources I quote from and cite, saying they don't provide sufficient proof of statements I have made. Could you possibly go there and give me your opinion? Thanks, Bill.The Dart (talk) 16:41, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

PS. I actually suspect Yaush may be a sockpuppet as he has been accused of this before.The Dart (talk) 16:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi The Dart, what sort of action do you want me to take here? I see editors disagreeing with you, but I don't see any sort of disruption from them and certainly nothing that requires use of admin tools. As for me giving my opinion, while I am an administrator, my opinion has no more weight than anyone else participating in that discussion and besides, I do not know enough about the subject(s) to give one.

With regards to Yaush, calling someone a sockpuppet is a serious accusation and one that requires evidence rather than mere suspicion. Acalamari 09:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough, you don't know enough about the topics to give an opinion. I don't think that the other editors do either, but I assume you don't think that I am being POV in the the way I express myself in those articles. Thanks, Bye for now.The Dart (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Many thanks for reverting vandalism on my User page - Enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) Acalamari 19:11, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Some Tea

Wikipedians also recommend biscuits with tea.

-TheGeneralUser (talk) has given you a cup of tea. Tea promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better.

Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi Acalamari! Just stopping by to share some tea! This will hopefully re-energize you and remove your stress when you edit a lot :) Cheers. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Acalamari 23:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Change username please

Can you change my user name from "Mikeunknown" to Youngbuck17. Mikeunknown (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

 Not done given your page blankings and odd edits to the user pages of other editors. If you disagree, feel free to request at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. Thank you. Acalamari 23:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Username change glitch?

On March 2, it appears that you honored a requested username change from User:Hemanthtm to User:Hema hh, as noted here. That said, the editor continues to contribute using the former account, while removing speedy deletion tags from articles s/he has created. In all honesty, I'm not all that familiar with the username change process. Would you mind taking a look at this? I appreciate your help. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 06:22, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cindamuse! It's sort of a glitch: What's happened is that the user logged back into and re-created their old account name rather than logged into their existing but renamed account; I would guess that they're not even aware that the rename occurred. While there's nothing actually wrong with them editing with their old name, it's not recommended given that it makes the rename pointless; it might also give the implication that the user is trying to avoid scrutiny while still keeping their original name, but I doubt that's the case here due to the user's inexperience with policies and processes. Still, if Hemanthtm/Hema hh continues to disrupt, both accounts should be blocked if/when a block becomes necessary. Best. Acalamari 08:56, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Based on your explanation, I agree that the editor likely isn't aware of the name change, since it appears that s/he never edited under the latter account. I'll keep an eye out, but agree with chucking it up to inexperience. It all confused me, so thanks for clearing it up! Best regards, Cindy(talk) 09:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Happy to help! To be fair, I was confused by a similar situation recently as well. :) Acalamari 09:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Belated thanks

I know this is late but I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your participation at my RfA. I was very inspired by the many that supported me and it’s that feeling of friendship and camaraderie that keeps me coming back to the project. So, thank you for your support and for your continued sense of fairness and compassion in all areas of WP. I look forward to the opportunity to work together in the days to come. Best wishes, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:09, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Keithbob, you're very welcome for my support on your RfA. It's unfortunate that your candidacy went the way it did; I hope you'll try again at some stage. Best. Acalamari 23:07, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you for looking after my user page - Enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 13:05, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Denisarona! You're welcome. :) Acalamari 23:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Example

Hello! Could you delete or rename this file, because it locally overwrites this example file from Commons? Thank you, best regards. --79.20.187.92 (talk) 14:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi 79.20.187.9, given the image's extensive history, I think it would be better to start a discussion on File talk:Image.jpg or to list it at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Best. Acalamari 15:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done :-) --79.22.142.219 (talk) 01:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Asking for your help in getting unblocked

Hi, excuse me for IP-based block evading on your talkpage but I've been left no other choice to reach my fellow editors. I found you, Antandrus, and Al Ameer son under "A" on the list of administrators. I checked further only to see if you had recently edited. I've asked others for help before, typing long personalized messages, but for the first time I'm going to tell each of you three pretty much the same thing, and point you to some diffs that you may judge the situation if you choose to.

I was blocked without warning or explanation close to two years ago. My blocker said I was a sockpuppet. I never did that, I abandoned a single prior account for privacy reasons. I felt the need to be honest and upfront about this in my very first edit, here: [1]. Ironically my blocker took this as ammunition to block me as a sockpuppet.

I tried the usual avenues of appeal but found the deck stacked against me at every turn. In my opinion, the administrators that monitor the block appeals notification page reject an extremely high percentage. None would listen to me, and most just say "sock," or "I don't believe you," or "you must never criticize your blocker." I tried Arbcom, who declined without explanation. WP:BASC, the Arbcom subgroup charged with considering block appeals, had a reject rate of literally 92 percent the last time it released its statistics.

I've tried other things but I've somehow amassed a bunch of administrative participants that follow me around everytime I try anything, saying "block him, block him, block him." It is like a gang of schoolyard bullies chasing the awkward new kid around the playground yelling at him. I can't shake them off, they won't go away and they sabotage any attempt I make to get unblocked.

Anyhow this runs on too long. You can read the latest thing I tried, an RFC/U, here: [2]. It's long but tells you the story. My fan club sabotaged it with a lot of negative commentary. Those people making the bad comments are largely not normal RFC/U participants, rather they followed me there from my talkpage they watchlisted, so they can criticize me more. I never sockpuppeted. If you want to know the worst thing I ever did, a lot of people seem to think it's this: [3]. The part where I call Nomoskedasticity a provocateur and so forth. I am not proud of that, it was a WP:CIV violation but the back-story there is that I had just a day before read Youreallycan plaintively ask Nomoskedasticity to leave him alone after two years of wikihounding. That's here: [4]. I was uncivil, but I viewed myself as confronting a bully. I was shocked at the behavior that occurs at WP:AN/ANI, but I wasn't really *saying* that Nomoskedasticity never contributed anything constructive, I was genuinely *asking* that. I slipped, okay, but a fair review of my editing history shows a constructive editor. I shouldn't be blocked forever for saying that to Nomoskedasticity.

To wrap this up: I need a defender who is an admin. Somebody willing to stick up for me, and say "lets follow policies in handling him." This is because I have so many attackers and suspicion-mongers that sabotage every community process I try to undertake. I don't like to ask for a defender, but without administrator buttons I'm at the mercy of any administrator, and there are several that have acted against me without any policy at all. I hope one or all three of you will help me. Thank you for even considering it. This is Colton Cosmic. 14:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

It has been a couple days. I am sorry to be impatient, but have you had a chance to decide whether to unblock me? I just don't like being blocked. Does it all seem too complex to you? It does to me, too! There are all manner of critics at the RFC/U. I would like to correct their misstatements of fact, but they vote at WP:AN/ANI that I not be allowed to speak. Oh the vote doesn't go majority against me, but the five or six that follow me around criticizing are enough to stop any "consensus." To address at least one critic, Wormthatturned is an arbitrator, and opines extensively against me at the RFC/U. His main thesis is that I am some unknown old enemy of Nomoskedasticity that started socking to attack him or her anew. But every time he tries to give evidence of this, it turns out he has his facts wrong. You can see where he has had to strike some of his wrong statements, here: [5].

My first encounter with Nomoskedasticity was when I went to the BLP discussion board for guidance on whether to include Phoenix Jones' real identity at his article. Nomoskedasticity said to my bewilderment there that my position was "preposterous" and that I should "stop taking [them] for fools." Then Nomo. went to the Phoenix Jones article where I had been editing and Nomo. had never been before and started opposing my work there. Before long Nomo. had reported me at WP:AN/ANI for what he or she said was "edit-warring." All of this preceded my criticism of Nomo. as provocateur. Does Worm's theory hold water, that there was insufficient conflict as Colton Cosmic with Nomo. to explain my criticism, and that I therefore was striking out in a new identity at him or here from an old grudge? No! It's ridiculous. He thinks I am so deviously brilliant that I *planned* that Nomo. A) respond to me at the BLP noticeboard, B) follow me back to Phoenix Jones, C) file a complaint on me at WP:AN/ANI? All as a smokescreen to set up my supposed verbal attack? His position is absolutely ridiculous. Not even Nomo. says any of that. Worm nurses a suspicion that he just won't give up on, his thought processes on the point are immune to facts. At the end he says I was "unwilling to abide by cleanstart guidelines." I would LOVE to abide by them. I guess his point is that I was supposed to avoid controversial articles. I *didn't know* Phoenix Jones was controversial. Worm says I "agitated" at WP:SOCK discussion page. What does that even mean? I didn't understand why elements of the policy were so incredibly overbroad, I politely recommended improvements, and was met by a chorus of people who insist all must stay exactly as is. This makes me a bad person? This makes me a disruptive agitator in violation of WP:CLEANSTART? It's ridiculous. I edited for like six years and it's unjustifiable for me to be blocked on these arguments.

Anyhow, Acalamari. Please unblock me, or at least let me know something. It is totally unfair to expect me to win "community consensus to be unblocked" at WP:AN/ANI. I am not *blocked* by any community consensus. I am blocked by Timotheus Canens and his block button. If you see that there is no evidence or that I have been punished long enough, WP:UNBLOCK gives you or any administrator the authority to unblock me. You should however discuss it at my talkpage first. Thank you. This is Colton Cosmic.

I am familiar with you by name due to the amount of administrators you have asked for an unblock; however, I do not know all the specifics. I'm not going to unblock you but I will give you an explanation as to why not.

There might not have been any consensus for you to have been blocked in the first place, but in most cases consensus is not needed to perform a block; however, consensus is often needed for an unblock and at this point in time there is no consensus for you to be unblocked. In fact, consensus is very much against you being unblocked. If I were to unilaterally overturn your block, it would be swiftly re-instated (as can be seen in your block log, this has already happened), the community would be even less sympathetic to you and I would most likely be in trouble for going over its head. Nothing would be achieved.

If you're absolutely serious about getting unblocked and editing constructively, the only way to ever do so is to walk away completely from the project for six months to a year. Don't IP sock and don't keep asking multiple admins to unblock you. Just leave for a while and when you do come back, post an unblock request on your talk page; if you haven't socked for several months, state your commitment to keeping out of trouble (perhaps even agree to being banned from interacting with Nomoskedasticity?) and say you wish to continue editing in a transparent manner under the name Colton Cosmic, your chances of being unblocked would be much greater than by continuing your current behavior.

Writ Keeper, whom I consider to be a fair and level-headed person, wrote a completely reasonable view on your RfC and had some excellent advice for you; if you follow his advice, mine and that of other people who have suggested ways for you to be unblocked, you be able to edit again, but if you keep doing what you've been doing, you'll keep running into walls. Again, I am not going to unilaterally unblock you. Acalamari 16:41, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

I wrote you a nice response in which I try to address some of what I think are your misunderstandings, but Kww is filtering it. I'm pretty sure he's placed your talkpage in his filter. I'm pretty sure he's placed your talkpage in his filter. I am sorry for attracting him to your talkpage. Part of what he does is plug in filter words that he thinks I might use. I said thank you and I will not argue your decision, but you're recommending something that cannot work for me. If you still have patience to hear me out, then u n b l o c k merely my talkpage to me and I'll respond. No offense either way of course, you don't owe me anything. Colton. 11:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi. Would it be possible to semi-protect Beating Heart (song)? An unregistered user is persistently adding unsourced and incorrect information to the page, but their IP address keeps changing every time they perform a new edit, so I figured warning/reporting them wouldn't be of much use. Thanks in advance! SnapSnap 19:01, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done for a week. Acalamari 09:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. SnapSnap 18:27, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Bill Cunningham (talk show host)

Do you think Bill Cunningham (talk show host) could be unprotected? Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

As I protected the article six years ago when it was under a slightly different title, yes, it can be unprotected and I have done just that. Thanks for letting me know about this old protection. Acalamari 09:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Beating Heart

I noticed that you undid the information that a anonymous user added about the song being a pre order track in the US and Canada, could you tell me why this was removed? It was actually released in the US and Canada on February 24, 2014, it wasn't made up. (121.219.13.161 (talk) 07:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC))

If that is the case, then it can be re-added with a source. Using IP socks to re-insert unsourced information isn't the way to go. Acalamari 09:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay, here is the link, http://www.idolator.com/7507078/ellie-goulding-divergent-beating-heart-preview and there is this link but it doesn't show the actual release date of the song becuase it was made available with the album as a pre order track so it shows the release date of the album, It does show the day the song impacted the iTunes Top 100 Chart, which was a day later. http://www.itunescharts.net/can/artists/music/ellie-goulding/songs/beating-heart/ (121.219.13.161 (talk) 10:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC))

@SnapSnap: To be fair here, the most recent IP edit did say pre-order track as opposed to a single, as with the other edits. Acalamari 15:40, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

I've restored the information regarding the song's iTunes pre-order release in North America now that there are reliable sources to back it up. (By the way, both PR Newswire and EW.com state the Divergent album was made available for pre-order starting February 25, not 24.) Other than the lack of sources, the main problem was the pre-order date being used as the first single release date. SnapSnap 19:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

That's good, thanks! Would you say that the article can be unprotected now? If the release date gets changed again, it can be reverted and blocks issued as necessary. Acalamari 19:34, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Fine by me. :) SnapSnap 19:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks! :) Acalamari 19:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that @SnapSnap: and Acalamari (137.147.148.179 (talk) 22:58, 21 March 2014 (UTC))

You're welcome, and thank you for finding a couple of sources. Best. Acalamari 23:12, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome :) (137.147.148.179 (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC))

Weigh in on discussion?

Hi. Would you care to weigh in on this discussion? It concerns whether a particular review quote should be removed from an article. Dan56 (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I would prefer to not give any opinion over there. At any rate, it looks as though you've received quite a bit of participation from others since you posted here. Best. Acalamari 16:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Another block evasion

Hey, sorry to bother you again. Igorro 989 (talk · contribs) was blocked a few days ago due to genre warring at several Depeche Mode-related articles, but this person evaded blocking by creating a sock earlier today, Igor Jakub 6754 (talk · contribs). SnapSnap 02:04, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi SnapSnap, you're not bothering me. :) I've blocked the sock, re-blocked the main account and let Diannaa know about the reset. Best. Acalamari 09:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! SnapSnap 15:57, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) Acalamari 16:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Seems like they're back to messing up Depeche Mode articles: Useless 6789 (talk · contribs) SnapSnap 18:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Blocked and re-blocked the main account as indefinite. Do let me know if any more socks appear. Thanks! Acalamari 19:21, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Will do, thanks! SnapSnap 22:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

RfB shirt

I know I'm late on this, but I must say that the pic of you getting that shirt is quite amusing :P XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Ha ha, thanks, XXSNUGGUMSXX! Yes, I was glad to get one; it's based on the admins' t-shirt and I was the first person to receive one of them! :D Acalamari 16:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

User help

The user Filucz2004 continues to change infoboxes and remove content from them without explanation despite repeatedly being asked to provide explanations. Attempts to communicate with this user from myself and others keep being ignored, perhaps an admin like you could help? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 20:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

XX, just please remember to not edit war! I saw you were blocked for it yesterday and a look at the page history on the Madonna article shows you've been edit warring back and forth with a few different editors the past few days. Gloss • talk 21:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I know, Gloss- old habits can be hard to quit..... As you can see, the warring has now gone down, though..... still working on cutting down on that..... Also, admin C.Fred has stepped in though your input could also help. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk)

Smoking is hard to quit.. Edit warring isn't hard to quit at all, and if it continues it'll lead to more/longer blocks. Gloss • talk 21:22, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Valid point, though at least it has gone down..... XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• Hi XXSNUGGUMSXX (and hi Gloss!), C.Fred's actions are sufficient for now and I don't think that an additional warning from me will have any effect, to be honest. Filucz2004 appears to be the type of user who almost never responds to other editors through the talk pages and will almost certainly end up with an indefinite block (I was, however, surprised that they made this edit to your talk page, but it's their only user talk edit that isn't a WikiLove note). Like you said, they have a long history of warnings and questions on their talk, plus two blocks for the same behavior and plenty of other people reverting them...all of which Filucz2004 has replied to via more edit warring and shouting at others in their edit summaries. Such actions will eventually lead to an indefinite block, which will be fairly soon if their next edits are to continue their disruption.

I will admit that this does sound as though I am assuming bad faith, but in my experience, such users don't turn into productive editors, which is unfortunate. The important thing is to not get sucked into their revert wars.

• Now to address Gloss' comment about your recent block, I'll repeat the recommendation I gave you here: stick to a 1RR limit (or even 0RR to completely prevent yourself from falling into old habits). For the most you have cut down on revert-warring and have made massive improvements to your communication, both of which I commend, but even the occasional slip can lead to a block, as you experienced today. If someone reverts you, unless they're an obvious vandal or sockpuppet the best course of action is to ask them on their talk page to explain their edit; it's far more preferable than what happened on the John Schlossberg article. Sorry if I sound patronizing at all, but you've been doing a lot of good work and have demonstrated being able to work with other editors; I don't want you getting blocked! Acalamari 22:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Slipping up can be a bitch, I'll say that now. You don't at all sound patronizing, though, and I'm sure you never would do that to anyone per WP:NPA. I know I still have to work on caution. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Hey, we're all learning all the time. :) At least you acknowledge that you have improvements to make; I've encountered many editors over the years who failed to recognize or admit to their errors - things didn't turn out so well for them in the end. :( Acalamari 23:09, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't surprise me at all that things didn't end well for such editors. I'm now curious: prior to your admin days, what was perhaps your biggest struggle as an editor? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 23:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Oooh, it's been a long time since those days! (I became an admin in July 2007.) Tell you what, I won't be able to give you an answer to that now, but I'll have a think about your question and will ping you when I have a good response for you (likely tomorrow). Is that okay? Acalamari 23:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me, just thought I'd try to get input from long-time editors as a basis for further improvement. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 23:40, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• XXSNUGGUMSXX, right then. My pre-admin problems - or rather, my "pre-first RfA problems", as my issues took place before my first request for adminship - were as follows: 1. My tendency to overreact to vandalism and trolls. 2. My excess interest in searching the new user log for offensive usernames to report. 3. I didn't always listen to people and 4. I was young and immature.
• I didn't get into many editing conflicts, but I did overreact to vandal edits and trolls, especially the latter. When I used to encounter a troll, I would feed that troll rather than ignore them or request that they be blocked. With usernames, again, I would search the new name log for offensive/borderline offensive usernames and not bother talking to the editors who fell into the "borderline" category; I could have spent that time doing something else, such as worked on some more articles. With listening, I didn't listen to people who were telling me that I was overreacting to trolls and spending too much time with usernames. Being immature was the main cause of my problems, and my first request for adminship was unsuccessful for that reason and all the others; as such, I made the effort to improve myself - both as an editor and as a person - and passed RfA three months later. I'm not perfect, but given how there have been few complaints about me over the years (and because I recently passed RfB without anyone opposing! :D), I would assume I've been doing a good job!
• I hope this has provided you with some insight into my Wiki-history and will help you with whatever you're seeking! :) Listening to other people is incredibly important, but I certainly do not advise running for adminship to force yourself to make improvements, though; you'd be better off improving yourself for the sake of becoming a better editor, not because of potential adminship, although to be fair, I don't think that's what you were thinking about when you asked your above question. Let me know if you want to know anything else. Acalamari 16:41, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Very interesting..... I have thought about someday applying for adminship but definitely not anytime soon. Yes I'm just looking to improve for simply the sake of becoming a better editor. It didn't surprise me in the least to see your RfB went completely unopposed, either. Thank you again for input, it does help :D. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

In regards to admiship, I'll be blunt: even though your most recent block was overturned, that you were even blocked pretty much ensures that any RfA you'd attempt for the next year would be unsuccessful. Back in the " good ol' days", you could get away with running a few months after a block, but those days are gone and have been for a long time. People are much more stringent now.

Heh, thanks for the compliment. I think I'm the only person who is surprised I got through unopposed! :D

You're welcome! I'm happy to help; in fact, that you're not afraid to ask for help is a good thing! :) Acalamari 17:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

I am well aware of how chances are I'd be quickly rejected, which is why I noted "not anytime soon". I'm working on maintaining a cleaner record, which of course is going to take a while. Of course, I'll ask for more general input on things from users (including admins such as yourself, C.Fred, and Kww) from time to time. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 19:32, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Heh, don't worry, I wasn't saying you weren't aware; I just thought it would be irresponsible of me to not keep you informed. :) Acalamari 23:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

E-mail

Also, check your inbox, sir! Gloss • talk 22:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Replied! :) Acalamari 23:09, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry

About that. An occupational hazard of being a 'crat! SmartSE (talk) 14:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

@Smartse: Thanks for the apology; in fact, I'm sorry, too, as it was highly discourteous of me to revert without modifying the default undo edit summary. You're entirely correct: this comes with the job (and I should expect the occasional thing like this), although this was the first time! :) Acalamari 14:39, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Christina Aguilera talk pages

Think you could take care of the persistent IP who insists that Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christmas are not studio albums? I do not reliable third sources to back them up. Thanks. Erick (talk) 21:52, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Lil-unique1 has left a message at the talk page for Lotus. The IP in question appears to be another person who thinks that Christmas albums and non-English albums released by musicians who primarily sing in English don't count as studio albums. Acalamari 08:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Ashley Benson

An IP hopper has been persistently boldfacing city names at Ashley Benson for no apparent reason. Would you mind semi-protecting the page? Thanks! SnapSnap 19:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Acalamari 19:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

The IP hopper is back [6][7]. SnapSnap 18:52, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a month. Acalamari 19:45, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Yo!

Hey! Got some time to close Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Little Mountain 5?? Best, ///EuroCarGT 23:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Just realized you were the co-nom., then scratch that off. ///EuroCarGT 23:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi EuroCarGT! I was online after the closing time, but yes, it would be an unpopular action for a bureaucrat to close an RfA/B where they (co-)nominated the candidate. :P Acalamari 08:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Name change

I have requested my current user name be changed from "Fairfax Geographer" to "Price Morse Collins". You have stalled the request asking "Are your aware..."

Please complete the request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairfax Geographer (talk • contribs) 15:46, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

@Fairfax Geographer: While I did not decline your request, I did indeed ask you if you were aware of the possible risks of using your real name to edit. If you're happy with using your real name (assuming you are asking to use your real name), then I'll complete the request. Acalamari 15:53, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring Derwick Associates

I need an administrator to enter into Derwick Associates article to solve the edit warring that is taking place right now. Thank you. --Majogomezsz (talk) 12:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Given that no edit warring has taken place for over three days, there is nothing for me to do at this time. Acalamari 13:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

A question

Hi Acalamari, You are an admin with lots of music related contributions, I need your input. I want to add a sentence to the end of This Article, the sentence is: "Chamuel will perform several shows in May and June of 2014 in New York City, Ireland and Michigan." The 3 citations that I have are 1, 2, 3. Looking at other articles, for example this one and this one, touring activity is relevant content. I think the sentence meets WP guidelines, but I am not sure if the 3 citations are good enough to support it. What do you think? (FYI, citation 1 show is sold out, citation 2 is almost self-published, citation 3 performance is as a member of S/HE) Bammesk (talk) 03:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Here's my 2 ¢: if possible, use a reliable third-party (secondary, therefore not self-published) source talking about all three dates. Primary (self-published) sources containing all three are also fine, but for some reason Wikipedia generally prefers secondary sources when available (Acalamari could probably go more in-depth than me as to why). So far, I'm only seeing one date in the first link you provided, and the other two don't seem to give dates supporting what you seek to add. You have the right idea, just need different sourcing. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree with XXSNUGGUMSXX that one third-party source for all dates would be best, if it's possible. Acalamari 13:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the two feedbacks. Regarding performance dates: Citation 2 lists the dates in day/month/year format, the first one is 22/05/2014 and so on. Citation 3 lists the date on top of the page below Electric Forest as June 26-29, 2014. Regarding "one third-party source", I agree, I would definitely use one if there was one, but this is what I have. About citation 2 being self-published, I found this substitute 4, it is not self-published and it lists performance dates in the text. Would that do? Bammesk (talk) 01:52, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Seems okay, unless I'm missing something. By the way, some editors remove content about smaller musical performances, so keep that in mind when adding this. Best. Acalamari 15:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I understand your point about small musical performances. Thank you and also XXSNUGGUMSXX for the inputs. Bammesk (talk) 16:37, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:!/doc

Can you unprotect Template:!/doc? I don't see any reason it needs protection. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. It's been several years since I protected that template...I don't even recall doing it! Acalamari 19:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

User:72.219.209.65

Hello Acalamari and trust all is well with you. Could I please bring to your attention the antics of the above user? This unregistered IP editor is, in spite of many warnings and one short block, inserting unsourced and irrelevent information to articles. The latest is World Trade Center Two. I reverted the edits, which refer to the original building, which were immediately reverted again - without reason. It seems that this person does not want to abide by Wikipedia conventions, or explain their disruptive edits. Your advice/action, would be appreciated. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for 72 hours. Acalamari 19:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Acalamari, in spite of your temporary block, they have started again with vandalism to Three World Trade Center. I don't think that they will learn. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

This also applies to Two World Trade Center where previously deleted edits, by other users - as well as myself have again been reinstated. David J Johnson (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

They've now been blocked for a week for continuing the behavior that led to their previous block: unsourced editing. Acalamari 20:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Acalamari, I very much regret to say that this unregistered IP editor has started-up again with their unsourced editing in at least three articles (at the time of writing) on the World Trade Center. I don't think they are listening to our requests for sourced editing and will carry on each time their block has expired. With best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocked again, this time for a month. This is the best course of action given that they continue to ignore talk pages messages and because it would be impractical to protect all the pages they edit. Acalamari 20:01, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for all your help. Best, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Acalamari - Pussycat dolls

Hi there! Would you like to try and fix some recent edits at Pussycat dolls? I am just too tired right now! User:nicolesherzingerfan has removed a large section about the transition from PCD to. GRL. Also another user removed the infobox about the burlesque troupe which was still going in 2006. I'm not sure if and when the burlesque troupe stopped in LA or Las Vegas. Thnaks Design (talk) 00:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid that beyond small edits, I don't really contribute to this article much now. The band in its main musical form has been defunct for several years and I don't follow it anymore. Best. Acalamari 15:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Calvin Harris

Hi. I've got caught up in a silly edit war with Erzan (talk · contribs), who insists on adding unnecessary info to Calvin Harris and provides little to no explanation to their edits. The user in question has been blocked once before for edit warring. Even though another editor gave them a final warning, I wasn't sure if I should take it to WP:AIV. SnapSnap 04:01, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Would the location of someones sovereign state and country, which in the case of Calvin Harris is The United Kingdom be unnecessary information? It seems any edit is faced with warnings that include advice on discussing the disagreement, but no such attempt is made. I have often left messages on talk pages but it is rarely responded to. Will keep trying. --Erzan (talk) 04:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

SnapSnap, clear-cut breaches of 3RR can be reported to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring; AIV would be inappropriate given that Erzan is not a vandal. Erzan, to be honest, UK locations in infoboxes are often edit-warred over; I don't have any solution to fixing it. That being said, you've reverted multiple times on that page; if you revert again, there's a strong possibility that you'll be blocked (SnapSnap and IPadPerson should be careful of this, too). I recommend that both of you, plus IPadPerson, discuss this on the article's talk page if discussions elsewhere are going nowhere; a centralized discussion often helps. It would be ideal if page protection and blocks weren't necessary. Acalamari 15:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I apologize for my part in the edit war. However accusations of vandalism have been leveled towards me and despite asking how my edit constitutes vandalism, no explanation has been given from either users. In fact SnapSnap six edits have been justified on the basis my edits are vandalism, which again I have asked how. I will create a talk page to reach a consensus with IPadPerson and SnapSnap by asking to have both Scotland and the UK mentioned as a starting point. --Erzan (talk) 15:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I should've known better than edit warring, too. Erzan, you didn't provide an explanation for most of your reversions, which made it seem like you were reverting my edits just because, especially considering your past warnings regarding the same edit-warring issue. Although the United Kingdom article does describe it as both a sovereign state and a country, I still think adding "UK" or "United Kingdom" to the infobox is completely unnecessary and redundant. The addition or absence of "UK" to Harris's birthplace has never been a major issue before, and I don't see why it should be now. Also, Erzan, you probably shouldn't have restored it without a consensus first. SnapSnap 16:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

SnapSnap I never provided explanation at the start because as you have mentioned, I did not believe adding the UK would be an issue. It is after all Calvin Harris birth place and by adding two words or two letters did not honestly believe it would lead to a problem, least not accusations of vandalism. However suggesting it is completely unnecessary and redundant to add the UK could be used to stop a lot of edits. Anyone could use that line of reasoning not to have Scotland or any subdivision of a country/sovereign-state a mention. You obviously want Scotland to be mentioned, which I completely understand and I'd like the UK to be mentioned. Is Dumfries, Scotland, UK not an acceptable compromise? --Erzan (talk) 17:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry

Hi! I'm really sorry for this. I thought I undid this. I should have reloaded the page before reverting. Please forgive my careless mistake. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 10:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@Oda Mari: Your apology is accepted and appreciated. :) No harm done. Keep up the good work! Acalamari 10:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Rename/edit collision

Hi. I'm not sure how renaming works, but it looks to me like OGmuthafkkinDoc (talk · contribs) was still logged in and busily editing after you moved the contribution history to the new account User:OriginalDoc, leaving the old account with some remnant un-renamed edits. This caused some confusion briefly over at WP:AIV (which should have been reported at WP:UAA. If possible, would you re-attribute the remaining OGmuthafkkinDoc edits to OriginalDoc? ~Amatulić (talk) 15:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Amatulic, this isn't an uncommon problem. What has happened is that after the rename, OriginalDoc accidentally logged back in as OGmuthafkkinDoc and is editing under their old name again (post-rename re-creation here); no edits have been left behind - they've made those edits since the rename and haven't realized that they've been renamed. OGmuthafkkinDoc needs to be informed that they should permanently log out of the former name and log in from now on as OriginalDoc; if they ignore a request to edit from the renamed account, the recreated account should be soft-blocked.

As for transferring edits from one account to another, bureaucrats cannot do this; the best solution here is for OriginalDoc to edit from the OriginalDoc account. The edits they've since made as OGmuthafkkinDoc since the rename will have to stay where they are. Best. Acalamari 15:34, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I was about to leave a note on his talk page but I see you've already done so. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:45, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. Yes, I thought it best to leave them a note given that I am the bureaucrat who carried out the rename; it seemed pointless waiting for you or someone else to do it! Best. Acalamari 17:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

User Jo79‎

I wouldn't call this user a vandalism-only account, but seems to be a persistent single-purpose account with the addition of trivial glitches in the video for Dark Horse (Katy Perry song). I've left a note on the user's talk page, and am keeping a close watch on the page. Is it too soon to be concerned with the account? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 23:48, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

It's never too soon to at least be concerned. Your warning is sufficient for now but if Jo79 continues to re-insert the unsourced and irrelevant content into the article, then they'll end up with a block for unsourced editing and disruption. Acalamari 07:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I figured so. On another note, I'm finally going to nominate this for GA soon after being delisted a while ago. Our peer reviewer Jenn also gave it a last look and some adjustments beforehand, and I've just finished the polishing touches. She also wishes us luck :). XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 02:10, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: Yay! :) As for "us", if the Katy Perry article does achieve GA status, while it has been a collaborative effort I think the vast majority of the credit should go to you and JennKR: JennKR for reviewing the article and you for all the work you've put into it during the past few months - over 600 edits! I haven't done much to the article since I became a bureaucrat. Good luck with the GA nomination! :D Acalamari 11:27, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Never knew I had edited it more than any other editor, turns out I am currently the only one with more edits on it than you. Edit count aside, Samjohnzon also substantially expanded and built upon the article, so he deserves lots of credit. Here we go..... XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that he deserves significant credit, too. :) Good luck! Acalamari 14:45, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for removing vandalism from my talk page - Enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 08:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) Acalamari 08:28, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Strange user talk page move

Hi Acalamari, I'm confused by something: This user's talk page was moved, it appears to User talk:Cartman810. Your edit summary makes perfect sense to me, that it was moved because the user requested a name change (which I found here). So far, no probs. But I'm confused how the user is still editing with his old name Special:Contributions/Jake_Uniacke. It appears he effectively now has two accounts, with most of the account warnings intended for Uniacke on the Cartman account now. ?? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:05, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cyphoidbomb, this isn't an uncommon issue with renames. What has happened is that Cartman810 has accidentally re-created his old account name by logging back into it and he hasn't realized that his original account (now "Cartman810") has been renamed; Cartman810 needs to abandon the Uniacke account and log into and edit as "Cartman810". Also see these two discussions on my talk page. Hope that explains everything. Best. Acalamari 22:20, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Ah, perfect, thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:55, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Soliciting comment...

Hi! Would you care to review or comment/vote (support/oppose) at my FA nomination for the article New York Dolls (album)? Information on reviewing an FA nomination's criteria is available at WP:FACR. If not, feel free to ignore this message. Cheers! Dan56 (talk) 22:08, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, but as I don't participate in FAs, my involvement there would be out of place. Acalamari 22:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of resysopped users

Hello Acalamari. This page used to be at Wikipedia:List of users resysopped by a bureaucrat but was moved per Wikipedia talk:List of resysopped users#Requested move. Am notifying you in case this was a bad idea :-). Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

That move looks good to me! :) Seems like a much simpler title. Thanks for letting me know. Acalamari 22:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)