User talk:Fish and karate/Archive 16
 | This 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. |
| Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
Nice work, Einstein
And when iss my block supposed to pass? You didn't even learn the case, an Administrator, as a judge, shoild listen to both sides befor blocking. You are populist, not than you didn't learn the case, you also blocked a user who contributed to Wikipedia. Enter my page and see for yourself, theres a list there. M.V.E.i.
- Your block will pass on the 31st of February. And I appreciate you have contributed some good to Wikipedia, but by creating a poisonous editing atmosphere through your continual hate speech, you did far more harm than good. Or did you think it was okay to describe people of different races as "Nazis" or "not really human"? Please feel free to continue this dialogue. Neil ╦ 16:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- This is somewhat unorthodox, but could you please look at least cursively at my contributions - and if you spot vandalism, then block me or give me appropriate warnings. Both M.V.E.i. and Beatle Fab Four ([1], [2], [3], [4]) have accused me of vandalism and trolling, so I would like those accusations to be either confirmed or discarded. DLX 17:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't have time to go through all your contributions, but the random sample of 20 or so I looked at (mostly talk page edits) seem fine. I am sure M.V.E.i. will post here again - if he does, perhaps he can produce any diffs of where you were uncivil or carried out vandalism. I could not see any. Neil ╦ 19:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. DLX 03:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't have time to go through all your contributions, but the random sample of 20 or so I looked at (mostly talk page edits) seem fine. I am sure M.V.E.i. will post here again - if he does, perhaps he can produce any diffs of where you were uncivil or carried out vandalism. I could not see any. Neil ╦ 19:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- This is somewhat unorthodox, but could you please look at least cursively at my contributions - and if you spot vandalism, then block me or give me appropriate warnings. Both M.V.E.i. and Beatle Fab Four ([1], [2], [3], [4]) have accused me of vandalism and trolling, so I would like those accusations to be either confirmed or discarded. DLX 17:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edit w/o comment?
The tag I added to Category:Female porn stars seems to me quite legitimate and was done in good faith. How do these women satisfy WP:BIO? Is having sex on film sufficiently noteworthy to merit inclusion in an encyclopedia? Why did you simply revert it as if it were vandalism? 151.203.18.206 18:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Because the tag you used is for articles, not category pages. Note I didn't remove any of the tags you placed on articles. Neil ╦ 18:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for that info. Would you happen to know if there's a similar tag for category pages? 151.203.18.206 19:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't believe so - categories exist because there are articles to populate them. They are an aid to navigation and a convenience for Wikipedia editors and readers. The only ways to eliminate a category is for all the articles in it to be deleted, or for the category to go through the formal deletion process you can find at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. I would strongly urge you, however, that it is exceptionally unlikely that the category would be deleted in that manner. Numerous female porn stars are notable (although probably a lot less than currently have articles on Wikipedia) - not an area of expertise for me, but see, for example, Jenna Jameson, Traci Lords or Marilyn Chambers. Neil ╦ 19:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for that info. Would you happen to know if there's a similar tag for category pages? 151.203.18.206 19:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
YechielMan's RFA
Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.
Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. YechielMan 21:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
AFD - Friday Night Live 2007 (Big Brother Australia)
Just an observation, "Good" to see that you "allow time" for discussion or comments about articles to be deleted. Will remember that for the future for other articles I come across. --Mikecraig 01:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Out of all the news stories in the media
You had to pick the one on the goat. –– Lid(Talk) 15:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello
It's me, M.V.E.i. I wanted to ask you a few questions: 1. Why didn't you reply to the EMail i sent you? 2. If you live me blocked, could you please remove my page from the Temporary Wikipedian userpages and return my page as it was (to return the list of contributions? 3. Could i take part in this Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#.5B.5BUser:M.V.E.i..5D.5D argument and to know my I.P. won't be blocked for that? M.V.E.i.
- 1) Sorry, I don't check my email very often. I don't usually reply as I don't like people I do not know having my personal email address.
- 2) As a blocked user, you lose that right. However, I will restore the list.
- 3) No. That is evading your block, which was placed for very good reasons (much like you have by posting here). That will lead to your IP being blocked, also.
- Hope that helps. If you can pledge on your talk page, logged into your MVEi account - which you will still be able to post to your talk page - do refrain from any hate speech in future, and to avoid harassing other users even if you disagree with their political views, I or another admin will consider reducing the duration of the block. Use the {{unblock}} template to do so. Neil ╦ 07:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of Brian Crecente
I was surprised to see that the "Brian Crecente" article was deleted. There was no clear consensus whatsoever and the iniator of the AfD isn't even a user! How was an AfD created without having to be a user?
I feel that your decision should instead be "no consensus" on this article. Outside of the "voting" itself there are questionable motives behind the AfD.
- Please read the top of this talk page. You will need to go to WP:DRV if you are concerned that the deletion process was not carried out fairly. Neil ╦ 07:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I am the nominator and I too was a bit surprised on its speedy deletion. I was expecting more of a debate/consensus to keep it. Although I did nominate it, I would have thought we could have done a major revision or atleast try to make it notable in the first place, as by make, I mean finding real information on the man. If anything I would like it to be fair than biased, so lets see if we can get that debate back up then? 64.231.250.116 10:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- WP:DRV. And deletion is not clean up - if you did not think it should have been deleted, why on earth would you nominate it for deletion? Neil ╦ 10:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- It should have been deleted, it was a mess and had no sources to cite. I just don't want people to think it was for some "evil" reason and question the afd altogether. 64.231.250.116 10:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- To clarify, as I am pedantic, it wasn't a "speedy" deletion :) We have an appeals process, called Wikipedia:Deletion review, I never have a problem with any article I have deleted being reviewed there; I usually encourage it, as it is good to have these discussions in the open. Neil ╦ 10:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- It should have been deleted, it was a mess and had no sources to cite. I just don't want people to think it was for some "evil" reason and question the afd altogether. 64.231.250.116 10:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- WP:DRV. And deletion is not clean up - if you did not think it should have been deleted, why on earth would you nominate it for deletion? Neil ╦ 10:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I am the nominator and I too was a bit surprised on its speedy deletion. I was expecting more of a debate/consensus to keep it. Although I did nominate it, I would have thought we could have done a major revision or atleast try to make it notable in the first place, as by make, I mean finding real information on the man. If anything I would like it to be fair than biased, so lets see if we can get that debate back up then? 64.231.250.116 10:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Neil, I read the talk page previous to contacting you but was attempting to follow proper form by first suggesting the change to you based on WP:DRV"...This should be attempted first - courteously invite the admin to take a second look." If you feel that I've already made the "courteous invite" then I'll be happy to move ahead. Please let me know what your thoughts are. Drew30319 15:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Brian Crecente. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Drew30319 16:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
If the issue is one of "reliable sources" then here are a few of the many out there:
Drew30319 14:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Baseball Players
Do not harass me simply because you do not agree with something. You called me a lunatic in one of your reverts. That is ridiculous and even more trouble considering your status as an ADMIN. Many of those articles were tagged with notability templates for quite some time by others. When you want to get into a reasonable discussion, I welcome it. Until that time, back off. //Tecmobowl 10:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Furthermore, in your brazen actions, you have reverted perfectly reasonable portions of those edits regardless on your view of the CSD issue. If a player has not played in the major leagues, they don't get a major league info box. //Tecmobowl 10:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- You called me a lunatic. That's not civil. That's a personal attack. So back the hell off and get off your high horse. Get over your power trip. //Tecmobowl 10:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not gonna promise you a thing. What I did was not irresponsible nor argumentative. It is a tool put in place by wiki. Many of those articles were created by one person, had one editor, or were tagged for some time with notaritity templates. One of the central concepts to wiki is WP:BOLD. You as an admin should know that. If i cared enough to take this up with someone, I would suggest your status be revoked. Your argument about not calling me a lunatic is a joke. So you called my actions into question as a way to avoid a NPA, it doesn't change a thing. Learn to do a better job in the future and you won't have to deal with this type of response. Leave me alone. //Tecmobowl 10:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Everything that you did upset me. I could care less if you call me a lunatic or whatever. I am a strong believer in WP:BOLD. I will continue to be bold in my edits. I looked through a number of articles and not all of them were nominated for SD. Notability is subjective and I stand behind my decision to nominate those articles. Look through the edit histories, you will notice a number of them were already tagged requesting an editor to make them notable... and the tags were in place for several months. What happened to WP:AGF, your an admin, you should know better than that. had you politely engaged me, even after you had removed all of the edits to ask me why i placed the tags, i would have told you. Instead, you started off with a thinly veiled attempt and bossing me around. I am not digging myself a hole because I have done nothing wrong. I hold people with admin status in a higher regard then most editors. There are a handful of editors that I have been in an ongoing debate with on several subjects. They refuse to use logic and wiki criteria when making their judgements and use a complete double standard. That is to be expected of them, not of an admin. Be more responsible in the future and you won't catch flack from people like me. //Tecmobowl 10:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Okay so you have removed the other template i used... what template would you like to see me use on these pages? //Tecmobowl 10:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not gonna promise you a thing. What I did was not irresponsible nor argumentative. It is a tool put in place by wiki. Many of those articles were created by one person, had one editor, or were tagged for some time with notaritity templates. One of the central concepts to wiki is WP:BOLD. You as an admin should know that. If i cared enough to take this up with someone, I would suggest your status be revoked. Your argument about not calling me a lunatic is a joke. So you called my actions into question as a way to avoid a NPA, it doesn't change a thing. Learn to do a better job in the future and you won't have to deal with this type of response. Leave me alone. //Tecmobowl 10:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- You called me a lunatic. That's not civil. That's a personal attack. So back the hell off and get off your high horse. Get over your power trip. //Tecmobowl 10:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Being bold is fine. Being disruptive is another. I politely asked you to stop, rather than politely engaging you, because you wrongly tagged at least 40 or 50 articles for speedy deletion in a short space of time, and it was imperative you stopped. Now that you have stopped, I more than happy to engage you. Is there anything about the deletion process (speed, prod or AFD) that you don't understand? If I have removed any prod tags, it's because the articles do assert notability of the subject. The next step is the formal deletion process, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Neil ╦ 10:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have copied your comments here so you don't have to jump back to my page. I'm going to share some thoughts with you, and then i'm going to move on. First and foremost, you are calling me disruptive. That is an opinion. From my perspective, I saw a problem with content and went to address it in a manner that is inline with wiki. The importance of a person is not, in my mind, explained by the fact that they were drafted by a Major League team. I can respect the other side of the issue, but I don't think wikipedia is the place to list ever person ever drafted by a team. Then again, if a bunch of other people wanted to...then so be it. You did not politely ask me to stop, you said i was being disruptive *using the word please does not mean you are being polite*. If you had looked at my edit history, you would have seen that I also reworked an entire article in the same time period. The CSD template asks Admins to look at the circumstances before doing anything. Because of that, I do not feel the least bit irresponsible in my marking of those articles. I am not happy to engage you any further because you have shown a blatant disregard for the ideologies you are here to protect and further. Your opinion is that they have asserted notability, that is fine. My opinion was that they did not, so i tagged them. Since I consider all of those articles to be essentially the same (in content and in subject matter), I found it counter productive to open an AFD on each one of them. That is perfectly allowed and reasonable on here. There really isn't anything else here to say. I am floored by your actions and your rationale. That being said, I don't really care. I'm going back to the content. //Tecmobowl 10:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi ... I reverted your removal of the speedy delete tag that Tecmo added to Asdrubal Cabrera and then, after reviewing your exchange with Tecmo, went back and reverted my revert. I'm not clear about the proper process here. It seems to me that the crux of the argument comes down to whether or not baseball players who have played professionally but have never appeared in a major league game have sufficient notability to automatically warrant a WP article. Reasonable people may reasonably disagree about where to set the bar. Tecmo obviously believes that the bar should be higher than you do. How is this type of thing supposed to be resolved? Is it up to WP:WPBB or WP:WPBBP to specify a guideline? If I think a group of articles about minor league baseball players lacks notability, what is the process for nominating them for deletion? Thanks in advance for any guidance. --Sanfranman59 19:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Tecmo Banned Indefinitely. FYI--Tecmo has been banned indefinitely for repeated violations of Wiki policy.--Epeefleche 01:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
New alias & same thing again on the Dalton page, the only good side to this is that the page has been improved quiet a bit in-between revert. --Nate1481(talk/contribs) 12:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- It appears to have been dealt with by another Admin thanks anyway --Nate1481(talk/contribs) 12:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I saw you deleted the db-move tag on this article. There has been a move discussion to change the name of this article to make it inline with the wikiproject Military history naming convention (one operation/campaign, one article). The move proposal is here since january ! And there has been no objection whatsoever since then, I assume this move seems uncontroversial enough.
I'm not -very- familiar with move, I only know to do it by speedy delete the redirect, can you tell me how to do it ? -- Esurnir 16:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Can you point me towards the discussion, please? There seems to have been some dissension from what I can make out, so I thought the best way would be to take it to WP:RM. If there is a pretty solid consensus behind the move, please do show me and I'll be happy to carry it out. Neil ╦ 16:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I know i shouldn't do this
I know i'm blocked, and still i wrote! Just look here, DLX is spreating lies on me and mixes sentences just to provocate me. Just read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:M.V.E.i.
Did you at least read it?
Did you read the long prove of Fab Four right after DLX's request that proves that you were to harsh with me? Why are you listening only to DLX and not to me? I dint see any logic in what you do. M.V.E.i.
- You were blocked for racism and hate speech. As you have continued to refuse to apologise and pledge to stop, I see no reason why your block should not remain indefinite. Neil ╦ 08:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Corporate Defence
I understand that you were responsible for the final decision to delete "Corporate Defence". I would very much appreciate it if you would constructively outline your decision, for future reference. (Corp Vision 16:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC))
Responded on user's talk page. Neil ╦ 08:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Those Frisian articles...
I came across Haring Harinxma and after digging through your archives, I see that several of the articles you deleted have since been recreated as genuine, despite you deleting them as created by a sock, though there was also discussion about whether they were really a sock or not. Could I possibly ask you to (a) list all the articles you deleted that way (did you keep a record of them somewhere)? and (b) to not delete articles created by a sock unless you are absolutely sure they are a hoax. It would be better to Prod or AfD such articles, or make sure yourself. Anyway, the real reason I am here is to ask for the talk page Talk:Haring Harinxma to be restored, as that had WP-Biography assessment details on it. Would that be possible? Carcharoth 16:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Deletion log: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=Neil&page=
- Talk page restored. Neil ╦ 08:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
My RfA
right|190px|That's me... Dear Fish and karate, thanks for your support in my recent RfA, it was, however, unsuccessful. I am not the type of editor to be disheartened by such a result, and have gained much experience. If you have anything to contribute by way of improvements or comments, please don’t hesitate to tell me.
I will run again. Until then, Cheers, Dfrg.msc 07:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Cite tags in Big Brother
Yeah I was just about to write you to you. I realised I probably shouldn't have reverted the whole thing, but your changes caused the text from your cite to appear throughout the article, so I reverted and was in the process of replacing them with the ref used already for the launch. I have to say I don't agree with some of them though, for example, how can you cite the launch for "Carole got the loudest cheer". Any comparisom of loudness from the tv show would be a POV, surely this would need another source which said the she got the loudest cheer at the launch. John Hayes 11:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think so. If it was obviously the loudest, then the show can be used to reference it. It was not obvious, then it shouldn't be in the article. Neil ╦ 11:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose that's correct. It was pretty obvious. On another note, I requested semi-protection last night, as you have done this, would you mind stating so on WP:RFPP John Hayes 11:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. John Hayes 12:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose that's correct. It was pretty obvious. On another note, I requested semi-protection last night, as you have done this, would you mind stating so on WP:RFPP John Hayes 11:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
M.V.E.i
It looks like this tetragrammaton is all over your talk page. I am sorry, but I have to pollute it even more. I have put some response on the WP:AN/I page. I am sorry I have not contacted you directly, but I was under impression that all the relevant diffs are presented. Whatever incivil and inflammatory things he said he did not call any race subhuman or something. It is almost certainly a misinterpretation. Maybe I have missed something? On the other hand if some edit can be interpreted as a racist hateful speech, might be it is worth to ask the author if the interpretation is correct? M.V.I.e. is not a native English speaker, nor he is particular balanced in his talk. Alex Bakharev 13:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't understand your tetragrammaton comment. As regards M.V.E.i., did you read the diffs I posted to your talk page? In these, he calls a race subhuman ([5]). I don't care how good or how bad his English is, this was not an isolated occasion of racism, or one slip of the tongue - M.V.E.i. has made multiple, numerous personal attacks, accusing, for examples, all Estonians as being descendants of the SS, and exhibited racism against Estonian / Baltic editors in particular (note I am neither a Balt nor an Estonian!). I cannot in good grace accept that this user could be allowed to continue this behaviour, and have asked for further input on WP:AN/I. Neil ╦ 14:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- OK, lets wait for further input. I want to remind that usually the community indefinite blocks are based on the assumption that no admins are willing to unblock, and this is not the case now.
- I still insist that the calling WW2 Nazis non-humans is not racist hate speech. A few of other diffs there are not actually that bad either (e.g. discussion who should be on the eight available slots in the collage on Russians article, so that they better represent the racial type, were great and world-reknown, have some sexual balance, etc might sound weird and racist but in fact it is not). By his circumstances (he is an Israeli, and I guess Jewish) he is not very suitable for the role of Russian Nazi and racist. On the other hand many of the other diffs provided on my page are indeed very inflammatory and incivil. That is why I am arguing for one month block . For the most unbalanced users 1 month block equal to the indefinite block: they have no patience to wait the end of the block, use socks or IP editing, get caught, have their blocks reset or prolonged, violate again and eventually get permablocked. Only reasonably restrained users survive. Alex Bakharev 16:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
M.V.E.i.
Please note that I asked not to make a rushed decision, and to allow time for consensus to build. The twenty minutes you waited before announcing you were going to unblock in 15 minutes is not what I was thinking. Please allow a little more time, I want to see a consensus to reduce the length of the block, not you and Nick. As the user will remain blocked either way, waiting a few hours will make no difference. Neil ╦ 17:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sure Neil. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 17:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Please refer me to a relevant passage in WP:BLOCK or WP:BAN which leads you to discard my opinion as null and void. If you can't, I consider this comment rather incivil and would welcome apologies. --Ghirla-трёп- 18:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
  |
Thanks... | |
| Thank you for showing your support in my recent RfA. Unfortunately, consensus was not really going my way, so I decided to withdraw my self-nomination last night. The final vote tally was (15/7/10). Your support does mean a lot to me, and I will certainly let you know when I go for my next RfA, most likely in a few month's time. Thank you again, and happy editing! Hersfold (talk/work) 17:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
Thanks
I have responded on the RFA review page. YechielMan 21:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: List of companies that make organic food
Neil, thanks so much for your help - it is much appreciated. I hope that in the future, however, you can be less deprecating in your admonishments. But I'm sure that I just caught you on a bad day! Again, I appreciate the help. Bradybd 22:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
HHO
despite the gas itself being a probable hoax, the furore around the hoax itself is notable
- Is that meant to imply that hoaxes without furore are not notable for inclusion in Wikipedia? That seems to be a common sentiment on this AfD, but I can't fathom why. - Omegatron 00:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- No, many hoaxes have no fuss, but have other references (debunking in journals etc). As this has no sources of that type, we have to fall back on the coverage of the furore to give the article the attribution that articles must have. Neil ╦ 01:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- I contest your theory that most of our articles about hoaxes rely on debunking in peer-reviewed journals. :-) All that we need to do for a neutral point of view is attribute the claims to reliable sources (like the news reports), provide criticism and debunking of those claims, and attribute the criticism and debunking to reliable sources (like the same news articles and the critics' articles). — Omegatron 14:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
HHO gas and Brown's gas were deleted, despite a majority of editors voting to keep. As an admin who voted in the AfD, can you comment on the deletion review? — Omegatron 14:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Daimonin
Thanks for userfying it. I expect the Daimonin community will work on it off WP on their own comps. I'll keep a copy locally to check against, should it be brought back here (and/or to work on in that golden day when I finish working on fishing stuff,) so I expect to be requesting deletion on it shortly. Also wanted to pass a word of thanks-in-general for clearing the whole backlog of Content Review. :) LaughingVulcan 04:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 19:55, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Beverley Craven? Seriously? You are awesomely random, SuggestBot. Neil ╦ 21:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Lehigh Trivia
I'm totally confused by your last post. I asked for the Lehigh Trivia page ten days ago, was given it nine days ago, saved it to my hard drive and marked it for deletion on Wikipedia. Why are you restoring it again now?? 20:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Because I went mental, sorry. See your talk page.. Neil ╦ 21:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
My bad...
Sorry about that. I thought the warning above mine was for a different piece of vandalism; it is hard to tell when the editor doing the warning doesn't include the article name in their warning. I'll try and be more alert to that from now on. Thanks. Wikipediarules2221 21:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
WP:AIV
Hi, I saw your edit summary: "rm IP - how the fuck did he get a final warning after one edit?!" It does appear that the IP was rather over-zealously warned. There'd be no harm at all in speaking to the editors who gave the warnings I think, and if you don't want to, I probably will. However, I think it'll be an honest mistake, WP:AGF and all that. Best wishes, --John 21:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Already discussed with the warner, and he's promised to be more attentive (see just above!). So resolved! But thanks. Neil ╦ 21:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't read the thread above. --John 21:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- To clarify, I didn't give the final warning. That was somebody else. I gave a generic warning and reported the IP after I saw that somebody else had issued a final warning. Wikipediarules2221 21:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
gvd[...]jhg
You shouldn't use edit summaries of this sort. It may lead people to accidentally rollback. Consider this your very last warning. Marskell 23:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
M.V.E.i
I think I should agree on your offer on compromise, I really do not to go to the wheel warring over the issue. On the other hand, if you are comfortable with a shorter block I would suggest the later. My own experience show that one month is the longest time we could expect fragile users not to use sockpuppets. The Israeli Bezeq Internet provider (that M.V.E.i. seems to use) changes IP of users every few hours that makes fighting a determined sockpupeteer a full time job), see our efforts to stop User:Roitr as an example. I hope MVEi to be smarter than that and sit his block without cheating. Alex Bakharev 10:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'll reduce the block to two months from when M.V.E.i. was first blocked (so it has around 7 weeks to run). Neil ╦ 10:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
My User Page
Thanks mate! ExtraDry 10:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- No worries. If it keeps getting recreated, WP:RFPP might be of help (or just drop a note here). Neil ╦ 10:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Is it possible to get my talk page protected? This guy User:Castlemate wont leave me alone. Thanks ExtraDry 11:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, for doing my user page. Is it possible to get my talk page protected also? ExtraDry 11:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough, I will just keep removing his comments and hopefully he will give up. ExtraDry 11:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Is it possible for someone to ask for a proper explanation as to why someone isn't notable when he is the vice-chancellor of an Australian University and there are numerous sources to support this. The article has been removed by ExtraDry with no discussion or explanation. This users behaviour is most inappropriate. Please help me. Thank you.Castlemate 11:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to have you dragged you into this. The article was was deleted due to {{db-bio}} ExtraDry 11:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- told Castlemate to stop annoying ExtraDry. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Is there anyway to stop Castlemate harrassing me? ExtraDry 14:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I added it to Wikipedia:Protected titles/June 2007/List. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Naim Ateek
Hi Neil, I thought this part After 30 years of parish ministry, Naim took an early retirement and dedicated his time to the ministry of Sabeel, the Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center that he helped to found at the beginning of the 1990’s. As the president and director of Sabeel, he expanded Sabeel’s ministry both inside the country as well as abroad. In addition to the work of justice and peace, it includes the ecumenical ministry within the Christian community and the inter-faith work between Christians and Muslims.
and this part Naim Ateek had just turned eleven when his town of Beisan (Beth Shean) twenty miles south of the Sea of Galilee was occupied by Israeli soldiers on May 12, 1948 during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. The Ateek family, with Naim, were Christians in a predominantly Muslim community. For two weeks they lived under occupation when finally the military commander informed his father that unless the family left straightaway, they would be killed. All the Christians were relocated to Nazareth and the Muslims were deported to Jordan. This traumatic and sudden dislocation was the Ateek family's personal version of the event the Arabs call, the "Nakba" (the catastrophe).
were identical. It says "All rights reserved" on their page, but how can I tell if they copied wp or if wp copied them? Stellatomailing 13:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC) Thanks! Stellatomailing 13:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Kieran Collins MSYP
Hi Neil, I'm a bit confused as to why an elected member of the Scottish Youth Parliament representing over 18,780 people is not able to published on wikipedia?
Anychance you could help me out on this matter?
Cheers,
Kieran
Fair point, but you really don't give enough time for any information to appear before it is deleted to be honest. Sometime to complete a page before its deletion would be nice me thinks.
Cheers,
Kieran
It having been determined that the previous image did not meet the WP:NFCC for use in that article, User:Sceptre has now decided to start adding a similar image (very much the same, apart from the presence of a cup), which clearly also does not meet WP:NFCC. I have tried to point out this fact, and have been ignored (again). Would you be willing to look further into this? 81.104.175.145 15:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Microformats
You have two answers to your recent questions on microformats. Did mine help you or do you need more? What are your views, now? Andy Mabbett 16:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think they are fine, but I don't think I'm technical enough (or have the time) to fully grasp them. I don't see what thje problem is, as long as they don't clutter up the editing window and stay within appropriate templates. Neil ╦ 21:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Evanescence_-_Bring_Me_to_Life.ogg
Is it procedure to delete things at will? Without notifying the uploader or without reaching a concensus on whether or not it is free will. Also its generally just good manners to tell someone when you delete something they have uploaded so they dont wonder where it disappeared to. --Childzy (Talk|Contribs) 20:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
He he
Sorry boss. But you did say you wanted to annnnnnnnnoy timmmmmmmmmmmm. Do you really want to protect the TFA? I just had one up yesterday, and it was completely insane. But. But anyone can edit and all that. I think a lot of people learn that in practice for the first time on mainpage article. Marskell 10:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Isn't Raul still opposed to it? It may just be a waste of people's time to edit a guideline he'll ultimately refuse. (Not that he has a total veto.) Marskell 10:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Placeholder
Please do not delete the placeholder comments that I put on some pages. They are there for good reason. Thanks. David.Monniaux 15:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Placeholder
The placeholder was put in place so as to prevent the display of a demeaning deletion comment, following from a complaint on m:OTRS. David.Monniaux 16:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Uncivil Comments
Per this edit, "read the fucking AfD" is very uncivil and does not reflect behavior which is exemplary of administrators. Please don't do it again. Miranda 18:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
improper license?
Hi, I recently looked into User:Zlatko "self made" GFDL photo contributions. I just can't imagine how he possibly could take eg. this photo. Bruno Bušić died in 1978 (User:Zlatko was born in 1984. I suggest you look closer. Regards. OldEnt § 19:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. I will look into it! Neil - to the bat pole! Neil ╦ 19:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that
It seem some dont believe it SatuSuro 00:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
User:Tyrael15's images
Copied over from talk page: Great, thanks. I tagged a few of his images some days ago, and raised the issue on this talk page, but he didn't respond. So I figured I'd go through the images and tag most of the rest of those that are obviously not his, giving him a fair amount of benefit of the doubt where necessary. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Copied over from talk page: Indeed. Many thanks for this. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Meanhile, in the case of Image:Dsc00068iv1.jpg and a few others, he declares the copyright has been granted, but I'm not sure on what basis. I haven't tagged these ones, but feel rather dubious about them, too. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
GFDL
I was born in 1983, the man who took the image didnt care as to whether or not i put it up, i asked him if i could upload it to wikipedia, and he said yes. I didnt want to take the time to shuffle through the available image licences. GFDL, no one asks questions, and i dont have the time to explain things. The image = Legit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zlatko (talk • contribs)
Every single image that i've uploaded is legitimate. In that i mean, either was scanned by myself personally, created myself personally, have written, proof and consent by the actual creator for use on wikipedia. So in that respect, every picture is good to go. Zlatko 18:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
33 Portland Place
G'day Neil,
you speedied 33 Portland Place the other day as "A7", even though A7 clearly did not apply. I have restored the article. I don't intend to wheel war with you, so if you want to delete it again, I will take it to DRV instead. In general, though, I'd ask you not to be quite so broad in your application of A7 in future. It would also be tops if you'd check the page history before speedying. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 09:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- It would be more tops if you didn't restore clearly crap articles. I've AFD'd it -Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/33 Portland Place. Neil ╦ 10:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Wow, that was quick. Please undelete it. I thought the notability was obvious from the content (several released albums, including a tribute album). Try the google test[7]. They have played at Hultsfred Festival (1993) too. I also managed to find a media reference in a print magazine[8], but Onkel Kånkel is only mentioned in the intro. Ah, I managed to find some media references[9][10] So... // Liftarn
User:EliasAlucard
Hi, you may want to re review the behaviour of this user. -- Cat chi? 20:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- First of all, blocking me like that was not right. You should take into consideration of what I have to say. If I believe this guy has racist intentions in what he's doing, am I not allowed to point that out? Do you, Neil, know anything about Turkish-Assyrian relations? Did you know that they've committed genocide on our people (Assyrian Genocide) and that they continue to deny it to this day? There's a good reason why he want those Assyrian political user boxes deleted, it's because he sees it as a threat to his country. Please, understand, what I'm saying is not personal attacks, I believe he has a something against Assyrians (and Kurds), because he's Turkish. The fact that he's trying to limit our right to freely express ourselves politically and delete our political standpoints, is not something that should be taken lightly. I'm not the one out of line here. EliasAlucard|Talk 22:34, 13 Jun, 2007 (UTC)
- I hoped 24 hours would have been enough. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. It is not the place for you to express yourself politically. This is an encyclopaedia. It is not the place to accuse those who do not share your opinion as being "racists". Please calm down and stop causing trouble. Neil ╦ 22:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Neil. I think we've responded to your comments now. Any further thoughts? Best regards, -- Ssilvers 03:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
New Reference for Matrixism Article
Hi, Neil. I found another magazine article that talks about Matrixism. The problem is that the article is wrtitten in Dutch. It is a very short piece and I am hoping you can find some way to translate it. The article in question, in the Dutch version of Esquire magazine, can be found here http://www.esquire.nl/lifestyle/article.aspx?aid=149. Also I am not quite sure how to add this source to the working Matrixism article user:Xoloz/Matrixism. I hope you can help with this. 71.36.35.76 09:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi 71. It loosely translates as "Because there is nothing more fun than discussing a film, 1400 fans of the film have set up a new religion, Matrixism (not to be confused with Marxism). Just like their hero Neo from The Matrix, they release themselves from The Matrix with a red pill." I'm not sure it's enough for a reference, there's nothing not already in the article - it just links to the Matrixism Geocities page. I'll add it in there as an external link, though. Neil ╦ 12:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
A similar article describing Matrixism also appeared earlier this year in the UK version of Esquire Magazine [12]. Perhaps this reference should be added also since notability seems to be the main concern during deletion reviews. What do you think? 206.188.56.24 18:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
The MacOS image you just deleted
I was checking it at the same time, you might want to address the user's question at WP:AN#Quick_Image_question. :) -- lucasbfr talk 15:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
My recent RfA
Thanks for your support in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. Also, you weren't the only person who found that funny. IvoShandor 16:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Don't worry, give it a few months and you'll sail through (just avoid mixing booze and editing). Neil ╦ 09:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Could you explain your deletion of Template:Removewarn? It was a useful template, but you deleted it under G4 and T1. It has never been deleted before, and it doesn't seem divisive or inflammatory. Thanks. -- King of Hearts 05:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- It was hardly used (which shows, given that it was deleted on Feb 1 and this is the first I've heard back about it, 4 1/2 months later). It was also expressly designed to shout at users for removing warning templates, something which all users are allowed to do. Neil ╦ 09:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Users are not allowed to remove new warnings, as this might cover up their vandalism. For example, a user could get a test1, and suppose they removed it and an admin reverwasn't vandalism, and if the admin left, they could vandalize elsewhere and get the same test1 instead of a higher ted it. They could remove it again, thinking that warning removal test2. This template has been used by me and others; it just doesn't show up because it's always substituted. Several months ago, I had tried to use this template and it came up red, so I thought I'd typed in the wrong name instead of the template being deleted; I only discovered this deletion recently. This template does not shout; it should at least get a TFD. -- King of Hearts 20:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Users can remove warnings whenever they like. See WP:USER#Removal_of_warnings. The people warning them are expected to check the edit history. Neil ╦ 23:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Users are not allowed to remove new warnings, as this might cover up their vandalism. For example, a user could get a test1, and suppose they removed it and an admin reverwasn't vandalism, and if the admin left, they could vandalize elsewhere and get the same test1 instead of a higher ted it. They could remove it again, thinking that warning removal test2. This template has been used by me and others; it just doesn't show up because it's always substituted. Several months ago, I had tried to use this template and it came up red, so I thought I'd typed in the wrong name instead of the template being deleted; I only discovered this deletion recently. This template does not shout; it should at least get a TFD. -- King of Hearts 20:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Number fixing at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CharlotteWebb - TA!
Thanks matey - I was just trying to do that as I'd realised I'd forgottn the hash mark, it edit conflicted, and I see you sorted it. Thanks again! Pedro | Chat 08:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Mac OS 10.5 images
Well maybe you should be thorough and do your job and also get the image Image:Windows_Neptune_Desktop.jpg. I know it was too much to take a minute and read above, but I am getting in contact with Apple to get use of some or all of these images since you feel obliged to create a new definition for screen-shots. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, however what about that image I linked to? It says in its summary that it was saved and re-uploaded off a website. Cheers. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 13:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, thank you for looking into it. It's the same situation to me. If an image from a website is illegal, then this is no exception in my opinion. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 13:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure why these don't come under "fair use", when it comes to the Mac OS articles (as given by Template:Non-free_software_screenshot? Mdwh 23:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Yet Another Source for the Matrixism Article
I found another source, this time a scholarly journal, that refers to Matrixism. On page 105 of Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, Volume 10, Issue 4, ISSN 1092-6690 (print), 1541-8480 (electronic), Copyright 2007 by The Regents of the University of California, Matrixism and its website's URL are listed among eight other esoteric new religions in an article titled "Perspective New New Religions: Revisiting a Concept" by J. Gordon Melton. 206.188.56.24 20:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Already been added by User:Addhoc. How do you find these?! Neil ╦ 23:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- I find sources through internet searches combined with the resources of the local library. I'm motivated because I feel that people are unfairly seeking to repress this article in order to preserve their own religous perspectives. I sincerely hope that this tug-of-war ends soon and in a just manner. It is hard for me to consider moving forward as a Wikipedia contributor if I am not confident in the community or its process. 206.188.56.24 03:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the book The Joy of Sects is the one publication that I have not been able to get a hold of through my local library. Apparently it was published in the United Kingdom but not the United States. 206.188.56.94 02:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Have you had any luck finding this book? 206.188.56.24 18:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Is this just a recreation of the AfD'd Anthony John Bailey, or is there significant difference? Corvus cornix 21:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's identical. Neil ╦ 23:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thought as much. Corvus cornix 02:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Could you copyedit Karmichael Hunt
It would be much appreciated.
SpecialWindler 04:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Why did you change those templates. In my opinion, the ones you replaced them with look as "ugly as hell" SpecialWindler 21:29, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- I changed them, differently to what they were originally and your edits, are they better (in your opinion), have you finished your copyediting, enough to remove the {{copyedit}} sign. Thanks anyway. SpecialWindler talk 10:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmm
"11:09, 13 June 2007 Neil (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:WED-2007-LOGO-E-LARGE.jpg" (Now commons)". Can you supply me with the name of the Commons image please? -N 19:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Had to undelete it temporarily to figure it out - it appears to have been also deleted from Commons (where it was "Image:WED-2007-LOGO.jpg") ... presumably as a copyvio, which it is. Neil ╦ 19:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not quite a copyvio, it was actually uploaded by the United Nations itself, but released under a non-free-enough license without fair use (and they never bothered to add it to the right article). Thanks -N 20:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Addition
I add two articles in your User:Neil/gc page, I hope thats ok. They are listed under the "watch them (keep them red)" section. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- That's fine, thanks Tom. Feel free to add whatever you like! Neil ╦ 19:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- whew, thats a load off (some poeple get anal when you edit their userpages). As fair warning, those to added pages are likely going to spring back to life sooner or later becuase a butload of people eager to edit the StarCraft II article are not reading through WP:NOT, so you may end up going cambodian on these two pages' butts again in the near future. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:47, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
!
Neil, just because you can protect a page doesn't mean you should, especially as the edits were taking place for a very good reason. Please use the talk page, or requests for protection, before doing anything as nonsensical as icing out contributors. Furthermore, please address why each of the edits you wish to revert (after the protection) should be reverted. Above all, do not speak imperiously unless absolutely necessary -- it's fairly "incivil." Geogre 21:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's because the people were admins that I wouldn't protect. Seriously. My attitude has been that those indicate fissures that need to be addressed openly. What I'd generally prefer in circumstances like that is an RFC. In this case, one side has been on the talk page, and one side hasn't. Before there is a case for protection, I need to see genuine frustration on the talk pages, and if one side isn't using the talk page, I favor the side that is. This is if I really don't care about the page.
- In this case, David Gerrard wrote a little too full of his own praise. Giano wrote too full of condemnation. Users of the channel have been silently (without comment) reverting, while people who have 1) objected to the page's existence and 2) objected to the tone of the page have been on the talk page. I'm sure that there is a great deal of discussion of the situation going on somewhere, but it isn't on-wiki.
- I engaged in some modifications, myself, precisely so that there would be the next logical step: an open discussion on AN, rather than group OWNership. I agree with Friday that the page simply shouldn't exist unless the channel is officially ruled by WikiMedia. It isn't, and therefore a how-to about it is no more legitimate than a how-to for GameFAQs. If it must exist, then it should reflect consensus about how people should behave, use, and not use the channel. The closest thing I'm aware of to such a discussion occurred around that IRC considered essay I wrote some time ago.
- At any rate, half of what you removed was slagging off, and half of it wasn't. All or nothing editing left me with little choice but an "all" vote. Geogre 21:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the effort
Thanks for trying to do the right thing. You are going to catch hell for it, everyone who gets involved in this mess does. I hope it doesn't get you down. --Ideogram 21:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks Neil, for your note of support at my RfA. Let me know if I can help or if I am going astray with the tools. Shyamal 03:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Re a user
I saw that you had a message at User talk:EliasAlucard about personal attacks. You might be interested in my most recent post there: [13] --Coppertwig 10:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Ck lostsword's RfA - Thanks
|
|
Thanks very much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed successfully at 40/2/1, making me Wikipedia's 1,250th administrator. Your comments were much appreciated, and I will endeavour to fulfil your expectations as an admin.
|
| File:Ck lostsword copy.png |
ck lostsword • T • C 17:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Smile
†Sir James Paul† 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.
Articles for Deletion: List of British words not widely used in the United States
Since you previously nominated that article for deletion, you might want to know that it has been nominated again: see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_words_having_different_meanings_in_British_and_American_English. ---The user formerly known as JackLumber 18:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
About your change to {{Master Stories}}
I reverted it - basically because of the consensus formed here to bring the project inline with WP:MOS-T - I think the matter of consistency was addressed during that discussion. Will (talk) 19:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you X 100
 |
Help - English/British
As someone who previously supported using English on the Daniel Craig page, I would very much like your help. I am having great problems at the Bernard Manning talk page, with one user who states Manning cannot be English, mainly because he has Irish and Jewish ancestry. He fails to see that it is a unwritten consensus that we use English/Scottish/Welsh, and to be honest I feel that he and I arguing each other is getting no where. He also fails to accept the comprimse a third user suggested. Anyway, I would be very grateful if you could help out, I could do with some support! --UpDown 15:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Ponerology
Hi - You've deleted an article on ponerology, saying that it was "nonsense". Could you please explain what you meant by that, and what Wikipedia principles this article might have broken? My feeling is that an article on ponerology would be really useful, and I'd like to help in building something worthwhile under this heading. Ottershrew 15:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of Turkmeneli
Is there any logical reason about deletion of the Turkmeneli Article. I couldn’t follow it in Wikipedia:Deletion review --User:Jeune_Zuercher 02:05, 23 June 2007
NowCommons
I reverted your removal of the NowCommons template on various images; the purpose of the 7 day wait is to fix all of the issues with the move to commons, and by untagging the image, people won't know to fix the concerns. —METS501 (talk) 13:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Then why not fix the concerns before tagging them for speedy deletion? You know, like you're supposed to? Neil ╦ 15:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Adopt
I wouldn't mind being adopted, im on ALOT and theres still alot I want to learn about wiki. Warrush 16:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry buddy, I'm full up at the moment. There are lots of editors with spaces at the moment, though - see WP:ADOPT. Neil ╦ 15:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Question
I have a question. On June 2,2007 you blocked User:Kermanshahi for being a sockpuppet. I'm just curious, what evidence do you have? RuneWiki777 12:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
He had much contacts to known vandals and sockpuppets. Check WP:ANI, for example. Randalph P. Williams 12:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
There wa no proof, I've been unblocked soon after that so it doesn't really matter. As for Randalph P. Williams, good job he's been banned and neil I'd like to stay out of all these troubles, I just want to contribute. The Honorable Kermanshahi 09:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
More incivility from EliasAlucard
I questioned EliasAlucard (talk · contribs) over his creation of the article Ashurism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). On that talk page, he has three recent posts that make personal remarks against me. As you have blocked this user twice for harassment, and as it would be inappropriate for me to act, could you apply your own judgment to this case. Thank you. — Gareth Hughes 14:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Gareth. I don't see anything there that could be considered seriously over the line; the comments I noticed that were potentially incivil were "Damn Garzo, no offence, and I do mean this in a positive way, but you're truly a pain in the ass :)", "You are obviously, like most Wikipedians, an enemy of Freedom of Speech, you have issues with someone questioning your motives, and you are also a hypocrite", and "That's really, because you are an old man, Garzo. You know, a little stiff. Again, no offence, but you should stop taking yourself too seriously, you know, be a little bit more humble. ". While none of these are, taken in context, especially offensive, the tone is flippant and unhelpful. I'll have a word with him. Neil ╦ 14:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, Neil. You are right that all of these are little slights, but this user simply fails to get the message that no personal attacks are acceptable after being blocked twice. His accusatory rant has continued over at Talk:Ashurism. It may be low level offensiveness, but it's constant. — Gareth Hughes 17:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Need a favor
Hi, Neil, can ask a favor? Image:Alex Louis Armstrong flexs (FMA).JPG was incorrectly named, this was brought to my attention and I uploaded a correctly anmed version. Unfortunetly, the one linked here is now redundent; and as a fair-use claimed image I would rather not wait for the bots to nag me about fixing it. Could you delete it for me? TomStar81 (Talk) 00:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Toe jam shouldn't be a redirect
Neil, I notice you protected the Toe jam redirect page. This should really be a disambiguation page; it makes no sense for Toe jam to redirect to a video game. The disambiguation page should look something like this:
Toe jam can refer to:
- Toe jam - a substance accumulating between toes
- A video game called ToeJam & Earl
- A 2004 pornographic film starring Bishop (porn star)
- A song on the Dance Dance Revolution STR!KE video game for the PlayStation 2
- A song by Mount Rushmore (band)
I'm sure there are others. Would you please unprotect this page so that a proper disambiguation page can be created? =Axlq 21:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- Done. It was a protected redirect because it was a page being used for vandalism. Neil ╦ 22:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just created the disambiguation page. =Axlq 23:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Adoption
Hi.
I stumbled across you at the list of people seeking to adopt new users, and wondered if you could help me out. I'm a recent "graduate" of WP:AAU, though there's more stuff I'd like to learn before I pick up my wikiSword and venture out into the world. Right now my main goal would be assisting in writing in a Featured Article, but other stuff would be nice too.
That said, I'm afraid I'm rather inactive right now: I'm living in Paris until the end of August, at which point I'll move back home to a computer that hasn't recently been reported stolen from an antiques museum. Since you seem to be adopting, however, I figured I'd pounce now. --CA387Talk 17:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. As the link was to a report on a match between Southampton and their arch-rivals Portsmouth, won convincingly by the latter, I thought that your edit was some sort of joke, although I couldn't really see what the joke was. On re-reading the article you linked to, I note that there is a passing reference to the then Portsmouth player Arjan de Zeeuw (not Niemi) "studying for a postgraduate degree in infectious diseases" - It seems to me therefore that your edit is incorrect and should be deleted.
As regards the lack of edit summary, my apologies but I was rather busy and have seen a lot of malicious edits recently, that I didn't really feel like explaining myself. Mea culpa. Daemonic Kangaroo 18:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:GBAMap.jpg
Greetings, Neil. I notice that you deleted Image:GBAMap.jpg on November 22, 2006. Do you know if the local image is the same as the image at Commons? If so, could you provide the source, copyright status, and any other relevant information as provided in the last revision prior to it being deleted? Thanks, Iamunknown 19:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- It was deleted from Wikipedia for being a replaceable fair use image (as it's just a map). The information said:
- Kushan Map
- Boundary of the Kushan empire at its greatest extent, ca. 150 A.D.
- Copyright Metropolitan Museum of Art http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/kush/hd_kush_d1map.htm
- Fair use for non commercial purposes as described in
- http://www.metmuseum.org/copyright.htm
- {{noncommercial}}
- {{Replaceable fair use}}
- {{badJPEG}}
- It would appear that it remains a copyvio. But it's on Commons, so this humble Wikipedia admin can do nothing about it. People use Commons to circumvent copyright a lot. Neil ╦ 08:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Nashism
Seems the originator of the AfD юзырь:mikka has recreated the article nashism shortly after it was deleted. If he wasn't happy with the content, why didn't he just simply edit it rather than waste our time in the AfD process? Martintg 00:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Why are you asking me? Ask Mikkalai. And it's not a recreation, the article is substantially different. Neil ╦ 08:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
British English vs American English
I was hoping to get your opinion on something. Freemasonry came up for GA/R review and I've began nitpicking it. It's currently written in American English, but, considering its origins, I thought it should be written in British English. I brought this up to the custodians of the article and was told that they had debated this before and were split in half. Although it originated in Europe, the majority of members are now American. So do you go with the origin or the current numbers? Or does it not really matter? LaraLoveT/C 13:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks in part to your support, I am Wikipedia's newest bureaucrat. I will do my best to live up to your confidence and kind words. Andre (talk) 09:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| I'm awarding you this barnstar for your great work on Wikipedia! Wikidudeman (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC) |
Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. I look forward to serving the community in a new way. Take care! -- But|seriously|folks 08:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Just as a note, it would be nice if you could explain deletions of articles, especially when, disregarding the obvious sockage, the majority of !voters were calling for keep. While I note it's an admin's prerogative to go against consensus, it seems to be somewhat WP:BITEy to do so without explanation, controversially (the creator of the company put a lot into responding), and the only delete arguments were saying that COI is the problem. Thanks. The Evil Spartan 17:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- As per the big writing at the top of the page, deletion review is that way. Neil ╦ 18:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Barnraisers. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Pan Dan 15:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you very much for your support in my recent unsuccessful RfA. I am grateful for all of the advice, and hope that it will help me grow as an editor. Sincerely, Neranei T/C 11:22, 15 July 2007 (UTC)