User talk:Kurt Shaped Box/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

The Birthday Massacre‎

Yes... that did help. Thank you for clearing it up.--Dr who1975 (talk) 18:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

No worries. :) A reliable source with the band stating what they themselves considered their genre of music to be would be even better, if you can find one... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

"Color Outside the Lines"

I would prefer that Color Outside the Lines remain as a redirect, even though I doubt the title is real, because it decreases the likelihood of people creating an article there. Everyking (talk) 19:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of WP even acknowledging the existence of rumoured titles - as these things often have a habit of being cited elsewhere as 'according to WP' gospel (as I noticed happened recently with a fake Linday Lohan title, complete with home-made, photoshopped CD cover). Still, it wasn't deleted anyway when it came down to it. It's not really that big a deal to me - I'm not going to push the matter... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

After your successful candidacy, I've now granted you admin rights. Have fun with the new tools and continuing to help the project improve. Spend some more time on the admin reading list and with the policies as necessary. I'm sure you'll do well, keep up the good work. Again, congrats! And by the way, cool user name. :) - Taxman Talk 23:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Congratulations! And good luck with the tools, judging from your RfA the community thinks you'll do good work. Cirt (talk) 23:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC).
Congrats, what ever you do, Don't push the red button! ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 23:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much, one and all! Now, let's see what this does... hehehehe... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations. Snowman (talk) 13:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


Client.silabsoft was a usefull page and it was posted why must you delete? Please tell me what i did wrong please sir.. don't do this i didn't tdo anything wrong please but the page back on wikipedia.org please sir please contact me... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plakat9 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

advertise? we weren't trying to advertise.... we just bring in players to play for free no cost.. that is no reason to delete the page. what if their curious and need information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plakat9 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

yes we do have a website moparscape.org but we never gave information, discriptions and warnings and more. wikipedia has a good reputation and i think moparscape will be gratefull for the page client.silabsoft. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plakat9 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

i don't under stand... some one vandalized and prohanitized on me??? what is this all i want is the page back i won't do no more edits please help i need an administartor that can undertsand the cercumtstancess im in.



00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)~Franco robles(moparscape admin)

are you a admin or a bot i need to know i need some one that can undertsand the situation im in please respond

00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)~ Franco Robles(Moparscape/Runescape admin) writer of client.silabsoft

Blogspot is not a reliable source

Blogspot is not a reliable source, so don't add information to 4chan which is using it as a reference. Thank you.--Bestiege23 (talk) 21:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

In this case, I feel that the blogspot link may be permissible, per Wikipedia:SELFPUB. An announcement on the current status of 4chan from the owner of the site as a source of information about the current status of 4chan seems appropriate to me (perhaps the 'presumed attackers' line should be removed). --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
"there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it" - there is no reliable source that the blogspot page is currently edited by the website owner. you edit conflictor--Bestiege23 (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
It's an interesting point. I'm 99% certain that the blogspot page was/is linked from the site itself - but with the site down, there's no way of checking... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Me too, so when the site does come back, we can add it back into the article and note it in the reference. For now, we must just wait.--Bestiege23 (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Heh, when the site comes back, the hacking probably won't even be worth mentioning. Ahh, as is WP... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Moved to Talk:4chan#Blogspot_reliability.--Bestiege23 (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

User: Lil miz sunshine

Hello. If you already haven't done this, can you please tell the user "Lil miz sunshine" to stop spamming the crossover forms by adding bubblegum pop singers? Thanks.

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme

Your userpage pic

Hey, the picture in your userpage is awesome. Do you have any others? --Taraborn (talk) 12:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The Birthday Massacre article

Please, change the genre it back to Synthrock, they are not neither goth nor alternative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.142.218 (talk) 22:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

Can I set up a page about my band MacLaren Brennan? Thanks.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maclarenbrennan (talk • contribs) 00:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Dates

Thanks. AWB vaped my config file and I had to use a backup...From October. D'oh! Rich Farmbrough 20:22 29 December 2007 (UTC).

Is there any need to rollback the affected edits? I can help, if you like... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thanks 'tis done. Rich Farmbrough 20:42 29 December 2007 (UTC).

Excessively deleted backlinks

I noticed you deleted backlinks to Robin White on various articles like 1991 Wimbledon Championships - Women's Singles. I'm not sure that these were referring to the same Robin White. The Robin White who was in all these tennis tournaments should certainly have an article. Is there any way you can revert all of these edits? Thanks, --dantheox (talk) 19:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops. My apologies. I have now restored all the links. The Robin White article I speedily deleted was a recently-created copyvio regarding a completely different Robin White. My script automatically removed everything that linked there. Unless the article exists under a different title, the tennis-playing Robin White doesn't have her own WP entry yet. Still, the redlinks are back for you to do with as you will. Sorry again. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I started an article on the highly notable tennis player - US Open doubles champion, WTA stalwart for a decade etc. Hopefully the links will work now. Nick mallory (talk) 08:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup, looking good so far. Keep up the good work... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Philip Therp

You deleted the article on Philip Therp without discussion and without reading the comments on the articles discussion page. The information in the article is copyright exempt - which you would have known if you had read the discussion or followed the stated sources at the bottom of the page. Good job for deleting the content. You are a dumb ass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.152.167.241 (talk) 00:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Not according to http://www.cstv.com/ot/cs-tos.html . Also, please don't make personal attacks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You are a moron. CSTV.com owns the images on the site the content is owned by the university... which is a public educational institution of the university of California. IF you clicked the copyright tag at the bottom of the soruced website you would also know this. And who give a shit about personal attacks... what are you going to do about it... hit me with your big wooden cyber stick? You are by far the worst wikipedia editor i have come into contact with because you dont do your due diligence and you deleted content without even opening it up to the community for discussion.... just imagine how much quality information you have deleted over the years. You are a dumb ass. and Fuck you you fucking fuck. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucsbgauchoman (talk • contribs) 00:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to take this to Wikipedia:Deletion review for discussion if you believe that the article was incorrectly deleted. As far as I can see, the site in question does not state specifically anywhere that the text is copyright-exempt (per WP:C, all works are copyrighted unless either they fall into the public domain or their copyright is explicitly disclaimed). Hostility and abusive comments will do nothing to aid your arguments, however. Think it over. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Repair

Thanks for the cleanup. This is related to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Primetime#Primetime (13th request). Cheers, ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Northwich Victoria

Please could you change the home strip colour as I requested on its talk page. Unfortunately noone has responded to the request yet. I have provided a link to relevant photos on Altrincham F.C.'s official website (ie. of their away game at Northwich). Thanks,

Oorpt (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Black List Club

An editor has nominated The Black List Club, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Black List Club and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Semi-Protecting my wikipage....

Yes, that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! AbJ32 (talk) 00:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I have an idea. A few people from a chat room I was previously a member of are the likely suspects, and I've already asked them to please stop, and apparently they didn't listen. Going through my user page, I see they've continued to edit my page, even after I requested they stop. AbJ32 (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Wikipuff

I don't understand why you blocked User:Wikipuff. Can you explain? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Puff = abusive slang term for homosexuals. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, shows what I know about slang. If it has an abusive connotation, I guess it's a good thing to block. Clarifying this kind of thing in the block log could be helpful. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 20:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Fair point - consider it noted. I'm a new-ish admin and I haven't been keeping an eye on UAA for that long. All tips gratefully recieved! --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Lolums

If i were to get a petition by this time next month of 100 signatures or whatever, would i be able to repost my article, about the word used widely in IM conversations??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommy Wilkins (talk • contribs) 00:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tommy. Before recreating the article, you should really read the guidelines at WP:N and WP:V. The term really needs to have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Wikiproman

Cheers, Chris.B 18:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Xrayspex-consciousconsumer-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Xrayspex-consciousconsumer-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 08:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I think I have fixed this (there is a template for album covers). Can you double-check the album cover to confirm that Receiver Records are the copyright holders in the album artwork? Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 08:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Looks fair enough to me, Duncan. Thanks for fixing that up. After turning half the house over trying to find the CD (heh) - yes, I can confirm that Receiver Records are indeed the copyright holders... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

That's at least the second account to target Jack Merridew

Along with We're gonna need an assfootologist stat. HalfShadow (talk) 03:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

So, any idea whose socking it is this time? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
No idea. But then, I don't have the eyes you do. The one you blocked was threatening him directly, this one seems to be reverting Jack's edits. That might just be a fluke, though. HalfShadow (talk) 03:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'll stick his talk/user pages on my watchlist and see if it recurs. It's possible that it's just some angry random vandal he reverted/reported. I've had that sort of thing a few times myself... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Northwich Victoria F.C.

Hi I see that the above article is protected from editing and that you as an admin are able to edit. Blackpool F.C. goalkeeper, Lewis Edge has signed for Northwich on loan for one month (I have added a source to confirm the loan on the player article), would you please therefore add him to the Northwich Victoria current squad for me? Thank you.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 19:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Added him. No worries... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

User:EirWi

You may wish to block User:EirWi as a sock of User:Eir Witt. He has kindly self-identified himself by placing a block notice on his user page. Regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. Thanks very much for bringing it to my attention. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Greetings. User:81.158.6.198 appear also to be User:Eir Witt per his contribution today. Regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I've tagged the IP as a sock. There's probably not much point in blocking it unless EW makes any more disruptive edits with it, as his ISP uses dynamic IPs. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

List of contemporary and crossover baritones

Good catch on this one, as I thought I'd gotten all of them. Any idea why the link to the AFD is showing up as a redlink on the template? AniMate 00:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I just noticed it when I was reviewing the contribs of one of the AFD template blankers. I'm not exactly sure why it's showing up a redlink. They do occasionally do that when the AFD has just been created... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Matt Duke

I noticed that you're the admin who deleted the speedied Matt Duke (musician) article, very briefly before it was deleted I noticed that a user had added a hangon tag to it, so I was quite surprised to find it was deleted. In anycase the talk page Talk:Matt Duke (musician) is still alive with the creators hangon message if that needs to be deleted as well. Just thought I'd let you know. --ImmortalGoddezz 04:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: AfD nomination of List of contemporary and crossover baritones

Ohhh ok. Its cool I guess. Thanks.

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 20:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme


I was working on that 65.11.16.169 (talk) 23:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

User page

I have been an anonymous editor for some time now, and I recently remembered I had a registered username, so I thought I'd edit under that from now on. I frequent all of the Ref Desks and noticed your kick-butt user page in my search for user page ideas, so I basically copied it but implemented a few changes. I hope you don't mind; if it's too similar to yours I can try to be a little more original and change it. Happy editing! --Emery (talk) 04:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Go for it! You're the third person now who's spoken favourably of (and been inspired by) my page. The funny thing is that I didn't even create it myself in the first place... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 13:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

LEAVE THE AAPBN ALONE!

STOP DELETING the PAGE! WE ARE TRYING TO HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aapbn (talk • contribs) 23:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.



Archive
Archives
  1. December 2004 – July 2006
  2. July 2006 – June 2007
  3. June 2007 – December 2007
  4. December 2007 –

Re: User talk:Marah09013

Sorry for the reversion. It does indeed appear that the times have changed... the consensus at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Removing warnings and Wikipedia:Removing warnings is now that such activity is permissible. I wasn't concerned with the removal of the image notifications, it was the spam warnings that caused concern, and I'm not entirely convinced that allowing users to remove such notices from their own talk pages is going to help when dealing with abuse — the user was issued with three separate level-2 spam warnings, which have all now gone from the current page edit. However, clearly the reversion was against the current policy, hence this apology, and I'm sure the spam edits have ceased. Hope to see you around. haz (talk) 14:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I'm hoping that the user has got the message and read up on external link policy by now. He seems to be fairly knowledgeable about parrot harnesses and has uploaded some useful images. I'd like to give him a break and see if I can help him to become a useful contributor and work with him to improve and expand the (currently much too short) harness article... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

2008 in music

Hey man... what's up?! about the 2008 in music article, there's an album re-issue by Beck... should it be added or what?! i left it but i dont know if it should be in those released albums tables :S anyway, have a nice day :) Maged M. Mahfouz (talk) 05:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

That's a very good question. I don't actually know if expanded reissues are supposed to be added to '...in music' articles. I don't personally see why not though, provided it's referenced correctly. Have you tried bringing it up on the talk page? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kum Kleen!

An editor has nominated Kum Kleen!, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kum Kleen! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Squeal Meat Again!

An editor has nominated Squeal Meat Again!, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squeal Meat Again! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of All the Filth!

An editor has nominated All the Filth!, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All the Filth! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pop Stars (EP)

An editor has nominated Pop Stars (EP), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pop Stars (EP) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Themembers-1980-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Themembers-1980-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Themembers-uprhythmdownbeat-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Themembers-uprhythmdownbeat-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Antinowhereleague-liveinyugoslaviacover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Antinowhereleague-liveinyugoslaviacover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ANL-scum-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ANL-scum-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cocksparrer-runningriotin84-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cocksparrer-runningriotin84-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cocksparrer-shocktroops-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cocksparrer-shocktroops-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the block, man. That guy was getting on my nerves. I had no idea you were an admin; I figured there'd be more seagull related articles around the place. ;-) Matt Deres (talk) 00:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Accusations of being a single purpose account are considered bad... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of All the Filth!

An editor has nominated All the Filth!, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All the Filth! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Squeal Meat Again!

An editor has nominated Squeal Meat Again!, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squeal Meat Again! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kum Kleen!

An editor has nominated Kum Kleen!, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kum Kleen! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

You have blocked this IP, 65.115.61.253, and immediatley after being blocked, they began using their vandalism only account. Just thought you would like to know. Happy Editing, Dustitalk 19:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

67.163.215.225's obsession with partial date linking...

...is still ongoing. Just thought I should let you know. best, xenocidic (talk) 01:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. This has gone on for long enough now and he's had enough warnings - it's clear that he has no intention of changing his behaviour. Blocked for 6 months. Hmmm. It's going to take a while to go back through his contribs and fix this mess up... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of that. I accidentally reverted one of your fixes with the comment of "Nonsense edit" - I was referring to 67.xxx's edit, not yours. I re-reverted back to your good edit. Best regards, xenocidic (talk) 15:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Aw man! This stuff goes back months! I have a sneaking suspicion that 67.x has been using some kind of automated formatting script here... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Hehe, i dunno what to say! not sure why he felt that linking dates was a useful or worthwhile way to contribute. xenocidic (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Hello. On the article Bobby Robson I am seeing a big stationary picture of an ejaculating penis. Do you also see this? I cannot find in the edit history when this was added, nor did I immediately see it within the article itself! Okiefromokla questions? 23:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorted it. Someone had inserted the penis pic into Template:PSV Eindhoven managers, which then displayed on Bobby Robson. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Ah. I hadn't even thought of that. I was going through diffs not seeing anything and hoping I didn't have some kind of virus! Thanks. Okiefromokla questions? 23:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Porkdukes-popstarsep-cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Porkdukes-popstarsep-cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Porkdukes-popstarsep-cover.jpg

I have tagged Image:Porkdukes-popstarsep-cover.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. Melesse (talk) 06:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:Sisterlinkqsc

You forgot to put <noinclude> tags around the template, your making the high risk template transclude to all the articles. — Save_Us † 23:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Ooops. Me bad. ;( Should be sorted now... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Quite alright, seems fixed. Thanks, — Save_Us † 23:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of the Clodomiro Picado Twight article

In updating the Spanish version of Dr. Picado's article I noticed you deleted the English version. I have to agree that the English version was in big part a cut and paste from a web article, and it also contained unsuported claims and speculations about the discovery of penicillin. Since the Spanish article is broader and it explains the real role of Dr. Picado in the discovery of Penicillin (he is considered just a precursor), can you tell me the best way to have an English article about him, by creating a new one? or undeleting the one you delete?, but of course with lots of editing, which I am willing to do, beginning with a translation of the Spanish article. I will await your instructions.Mariordo (talk) 15:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm so sorry that I didn't reply to your post sooner. I literally only just noticed it on my page when someone else left me a message. In answer to your question, the best way to create an English article would be to write a completely new one from scratch, with appropriate references from reliable sources. Taking copyrighted text from somewhere else and changing a few words here and there (as was the case with the article I deleted, as I recall) is still a copyright violation. If the Spanish article is good, by all means use a translated version as the basis for the English article. There is no reason at all that WP should be prohibited from having an article on Picado - the issue was purely down to copyright. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Soccermeko/Infostorm

Since Infostorm was blocked as a sock of Soccermeko, doesn't Soccermeko get blocked as well? - Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

If he does that again, or continues to edit war in the manner he has been, I'll certainly seriously consider it. I'm keeping a close eye on the situation. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Dude...

I did nothing wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.201.58 (talk) 00:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Nicole Wray discography and template

why do continue to re-add false information. The links have been sourced confirming the new album and the new single "Stand Up". please stop posting false information like the single "I'm Lookin'". The single hit #66 on US R&B not #76. Nicolefan (talk) 01:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing Hurricane Chris

I had noted the vandalism on the talk page of his most recent album, since attempts to post on the talk page for the artist redirected to the vandal him/herself. I was afraid this would go unnoticed but I see the actions of the "Chimp" were caught in the end. 68.229.184.37 (talk) 07:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

first of all, all these people you claim are sockpuppets you need to stop with this witch hunt crap. second of all, everyone who has added the right information has been from the Nicole Wray Fanatics board. third of all, we trying to help, because people like [Mdsummermsw, Cloudz, KurtBox, and the rest where posting false information just like on the template and the discography page. you can't go around blocking innocent users because they have joined together to stop you from editing the right info and turning it into false and wrong information. so if i were you i would unblock everyone you blocked because to head admin has already block one of you (Cloudz) and he was set straight. 4.154.2.73 (talk) 18:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

It's funny how all these innocent users write in the same style and edit WP from the same ISP and geographic area, huh? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Outofcontrol2.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Outofcontrol2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Great work with all the vandalism reverts! J.delanoygabsadds 01:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


I stumbled on you while reading User Talk:Example, and looked at your contribs to try to find something. Did you save the joke sockpuppet accusation you made against User:Example way back in September 2007? The page got deleted. J.delanoygabsadds 01:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hugo Watts

Having deleted the article, do you also need to delete the talk page? Thanks. Edison (talk) 22:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind. I deleted it. Edison (talk) 22:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Parenteral Drug Association

Thanks for your help with the deletion of the above article (and subsequent blocking of the user). Booglamay (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Username block note

Hi. I came upon a misplace {{hangon}} tag on User talk:Xunantunich and saw that it had been blocked, presumably as promotional. I know that the user seems to be connected to some entity called the Xunantunich Inn, but I did want to point out that Xunantunich is actually the site of some lovely Mayan ruins. I'm not sure that the name is inherently promotional, given that. :) It seems rather a shame to block the name indefinitely from use by legitimate fans of Mayan culture. If it's appropriate to prevent this user from editing under the name because of the similarity to his commercial interest, perhaps it could be set to expire at some point so that the account could be assumed with more innocent purposes? :) Just a thought. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Moonriddengirl. Unfortunately, now that the name has been used to edit and blocked, no-one else will be able to assume it in the future. Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations *usually* only allows users to adopt names that have been registered and never used. The fact that the account has been blocked (even if I were to lift it now) would also likely be another reason for the bureaucrat handling the decision to refuse the usurpation. Sorry about that. Try if you like, though (you never can tell)... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I will bow to your experience. :) I'm much more active in the deletion arena than the blocking arena. I suppose future Wikipedians with a penchant for Mayan ruins will have to find another site. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
User:Xunantunich Ruins, User:Xunantunich Fanboi or similar? ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
LOL! Looks like Chichen Itza is still available, too. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Pagemove hell

Wasn't there an article at The Best Damn tour (maybe something similar) about the tour, before all the pagemove crap? --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 09:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I was looking for the damn thing (heh!) myself - but as far as I can tell, it was merged and redirected to The Best Damn Thing per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Best Damn Tour. The Best Damn Tour is currently a redirect, with all the relevant history - so I don't think that anything of value has been lost in the cleanup. Have you seen anything I missed? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 09:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I didn't know the pages where merged. I saw The Best Damn Tour (with two spaces since that link won't work) before it was deleted and was wondering if there was an article about the tour itself. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 09:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
What was there on those misnamed pages was copy-pasted from here, as far as I could determine. There will probably be enough coverage in reliable, third party sources to recreate the thing once the tour gets underway, btw. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 09:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Well alright, just wanted to make sure it didn't get overlooked. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 09:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi: You put a comment on my Talk page asking me not to add unsourced material as I did to the article on Jonathan Knight. You must be mistaken. I have no idea who Jonathan Knight is, have never looked at the article on him, and have no interest in the subject. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.74.61.67 (talk) 21:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The figure of speech "Paraprosdokian" should be "paraprosdokia"; I was trying to change the entry heading at the individual entry for Paraprosdokian to -kia (without the "n").

Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traillspencelow (talk • contribs) 18:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Bep-and-matt

Bep-and-matt (talk · contribs) has a history of uploading fake album covers, so you might want to check out this one; it looks fake to me. An image search turned up no valid image for that album's cover, and the text looks like it was done up in MSPaint or something. Since you warned this user before for uploading fake covers, I thought you might want to take a look at it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 12:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that one seems to be real. I remember checking it out a while back myself because I thought that it looked homemade too. Just a really crappy cover, I guess. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Destry11 has requested unblock

Of course, he denies sockpuppetry. Can't find the sockpuppetry case. Says he jsut shares an IP. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 03:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a reasonably tricky one to explain as some of the edits in question have been oversighted. Basically, socks and IPs of The Blizzard King have been vandalizing my user pages and those of others (just the typical 'he's gay/he's a rapist/he's a paedo' internet trash talk stuff) ever since I indef blocked him - *and* removing a certain image from the Gull article (possibly because I have it on my userpage and he believes that it will irritate me).
Anyway, diffs:
Also note the similarity of the usernames in question.
It took me a while to work out what was going on - but it's pretty clearcut. HTH. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 09:25, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. Dlohcierekim 14:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Death threat

Call the cops in your area. If you think you know where the sender is, call the there. Cops can get further tracking an IP or email than we can. Jeez. That's why I stopped using my real name, cause someone could make a threat like that. Dlohcierekim 22:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Copied from Ref Desk archive

"I just saw a wildlife program on PBS that mentioned that gulls can kill tiny seal pops.[1] "

I'm sure that if you can find a gull expert they can tell you a lot more. Imagine Reason (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sallyrogers.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sallyrogers.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 13:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Defaultsort

I have noticed that user:Betacommand has been adding Defaultsort to a lot of articles, but this does not work for species because it does not work for the genus; see "Category:Pyrrhura". I noticed that you have edited "Green-cheeked Conure", but you may not have noticed what the edit prior to your edit changed. I have left a message with user:Betacommand, and you may like to comment too. Snowman (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

If they were all Defaultsorted, would all the species in the genus cat thus appear under 'P' or 'C'? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
See Category:Colibri and many others. The species in a genus would all be sorted into the same letter, except where there are different names like conure and parakeet. Snowman (talk) 23:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

rahhhhhhhh

talk then ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.73.89 (talk) 00:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey. Who's this? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Antinowhereleague-liveinyugoslaviacover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Antinowhereleague-liveinyugoslaviacover.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --12:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

2008 in music

Thanks for fixing this and sorry for the problem. I have no idea why Twinkle behaved that way suddenly especially since it has always worked properly and that I've requested unlinking the article on her album but automatically removed entire stuff completely unrelated. It must have been an isolated bug.JForget 02:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I'd guess that the error may have had something to do with the length of the article and/or the complexity of some of the formatting used within... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:RD/H removal

Hello, Kurt. I restored the post by Xn4 you had removed here. I'm assuming you intended to delete one of Terror toad's posts which, in that case, might still be floating around. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, Adam removed it now (edit summary: "hilarious"). Thank you both for trying to nip the sprouting nonsense in the bud(s)! ---Sluzzelin talk 13:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Oops. Sorry about that. I think I must've clicked the wrong 'undo' button. Thanks for reverting me... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
My word, someone has a sharp eye! Thanks, Sluzzelin, and never mind, Kurt. Xn4 22:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Fat budgie help needed

Hi Kurt, do you know about fat budgies? Help needed here[2] at the sci desk. Thanks, Julia Rossi (talk) 02:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Mistake on Ashlee Simpson

There was no move button on said page. --Jack Cox (talk) 22:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ahhh. I see that the page is currently move-protected. If you are ever in this situation again, please make a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves instead of just cutting and pasting the content to the new name. Thanks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Socks of hard-banned user

Hi, KSB. Could I impose on you to block the following Lyle123 sockpuppets? They are:

The "AmericanLegends" sock created an nearly contentless article about a legit film...but what little info he'd placed was almost totally wrong. His attempts at misdirection and nonsense when it comes to Disney films and the like are what got him banned in the first place. I'd like to see the article deleted as a contribution by a banned user; it's an A1 or A3 at the very least. If this film deserves an article, I feel it should be done under the correct title and without a banned user in the edit history as its creator. Thanks! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, looks like clear-cut enough case to me. All blocked, article speedied. Feel free to recreate the article legitimately... Good luck. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Done and done. Not much to say about the video release (it wasn't a film), but I've written a new stub. Best of all, he isn't in the edit history. You da man. Thank you! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hihi, could someone check the image that was attached to that article? I just realized that he claimed it was his own image when it's a box cover. (yup, not a full length feature, but a reissue of some of the early Disney shorts relating to american folk heroes ;) LegoTech·(t)·(c) 03:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
He uploaded the image to Commons with a PD tag. I've nominated it for speedy deletion there. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Staticj

His contributions probably aren't worthy spending too much effort on. Once the checkuser comes back, we'll probably be deleting everything anyway.
Kww (talk) 20:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Given this latest edit that you pointed out, I would fully support it if you just declared him an obvious sock and blocked him. I just should have waited a few minutes. He always says I am not a sockpuppet out of the blue. It's nearly his defining characteristic.
Kww (talk) 21:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd prefer to wait until the checkuser results come in (barring any more obvious SM-type behaviour in the meantime). I'm not going to be the guy who blocks some innocent kid on an 'educated guess'. Sure, Soccermeko's puppets have done the whole 'I'm not a sock!' thing in the past - but in this case, it's conceivable that Staticj is just someone who is aware of the past drama and is trying to justify his making good-faith edits to a heavily-watched article before he gets pounced on. His/her style seems different to SM, from what I can see. I'm 50/50 on it, if I'm honest. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

Thank you for your help in resolving my being blocked issue. 71.141.114.187 (talk) 03:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Pokemon & Sonic Explorers of Time

I see you deleted the Pokemon & Sonic Explorers of Time article. While I have no real interest in the article itself, I wonder if you've seen this?-- JediLofty UserTalk 14:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I saw that RPP post and decided to investigate further. Upon determining that the article was an blatant hoax, I saw little point in it (and the other three hoax articles he'd created) remaining around long enough to cause further drama. Judging from all the IP activity, I guess that someone had linked it elsewhere on the web and requested 'input'. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello there, you may recall I was mistakenly blocked from editing the other day, due to suspected vandalism. I'm now asking if you can tell me how one goes about alerting or contacting a Wikipedia administrator of vandalism being done by another editor. Specifically, in this instance, IP 193.120.116.178 (please see my history for my reverts of vandalism by this user done today). As you will see, this user has a long history of vandalism, and I am concerned that this user will continue to vandalize Wikipedia. As such, in the future, I would like to be able to alert an administrator when this activity is taking place, if you can advise me of how to do this.

Further . . . I sent a message to this user stating "I have requested that you be permanently blocked from ever editing Wikipedia pages, due to your destructive and juvenile vandalism of pages. Until such time as you are permanently blocked, I will monitor each and every edit you make, and revert said edits unless you immediately provide verifiable reference source to justify your edits." This user has just left a message on my talk page as follows: My Worthy Foe - I accept your challenge. Give me a few moments and then the games will begin. 193.120.116.178 (talk) 22:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC). Thank you in advance for your reply. 71.141.114.187 (talk) 22:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Mybiggestfan123

This user has vandalized the article once again. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 04:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

and yet again. the second time after being blocked. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Looks like he has been blocked for three days now. I've got the article watchlisted but let me know if you notice him reinserting those edits again after the block expires. Thanks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

packet one

I'm adding company information,such as mission, objective and CEO profile. Please advice me what is wrong with my content.Thanks.--Toddchong (talk) 08:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. Your edits were reverted because they failed WP:NOTADVERTISING and WP:NPOV. They read as promotional edits for the company in question. Article content must be written in a neutral, objective style and must not read as though it has been placed there in an attempt to advertise the subject. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Cartoonzaq

Looks like he didn't get the point.
Kww (talk) 18:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Blocked indef. He'll either read up on policy and understand where he's been going wrong and request an unblock with assurances as to his future behaviour - or he won't. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Britney Spears ...again

I have a notability and RS issue with User:Horsemen4lifes recent addition to the article, but in his own words, he will only listen to an administrator. The addition and its source are quite ridiculous in my opinion. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:20, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

poke

User talk:216.9.106.106. FWIW, if I had made the block, I would accept his request, and then keep an eye on him. J.delanoygabsadds 01:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Done - and will do. Thanks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Soccermeko

I was leaving the WP:AN edit that you reverted ... I think his outburst makes a great case for the range block.Kww (talk) 17:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Put it back, if you wish - I don't have a problem with you doing that. It's a reasonable point... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

THE WRITING CAMP

WHY DID YOU DELETE THIS PAGE? WE HAVE A TRADEMARK ON THE NAME WITH US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE AND HAVE BEEN USING AT AS BUSINESS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.233.2.32 (talk) 00:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for cleaning the Tanoli spam on my talk page. De728631 (talk) 11:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Northwich Victoria F.C.

Thank you for blocking the user, and for fixing my user page. After today's sockpuppets, the page's recent history is full of reverted edits (maybe there wouldn't have been as many if I had formatted my first AIV report correctly). The reverts do not add anything to the article (at least those following the semi-protection), so do they need to remain in the history, or should they be deleted, like the vandalism on Torrisholme was? --Snigbrook (talk) 23:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep, not a bad idea. I'll get right on it. I'd lost track of how long all this stuff went back... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay, all done. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

RentPlanet.ca

Um, did you really need to block that person? I was clearly in communication with them. John Reaves 01:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I saw your comment on the talk page (after seeing the user listed at UAA) and interpreted it as a general 'your username is unaccaptable' comment. I didn't realize that you were attempting to engage the user in dialogue. I didn't mean to step on your toes - you have my full apologies if it came across that way... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:44, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Oky103

Judging from the "It is expected that ..." part of this edit, it's clear to me that Oky103 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) doesn't comprehend why she was blocked. Given her edit timing and the scant evidence that she reads her talk page, it's even possible that she is unaware that she was blocked.Kww (talk) 03:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, if she does it again, I'll block her again - for longer (I'm not going to block right away as her last edit was more than 12 hours ago and I'd like to AGF and think that she's taken the time to familiarize herself with policy now). After the block notice and your last comment on her page, she cannot reasonably be expected not to understand that she's at least doing something wrong. Leave me another message if you see her adding more rumours/speculation before I do... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:07, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Any editor without her history, those would be borderline, at worst.Kww (talk) 13:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I've blocked her for a week. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Snowball, the Cockatoo

I created the article on Eleonora Cockatoos. Thanks for adding the picture – I was unable to find one in the public domain so I left it empty. And thanks for adding the mention of Snowball, and creating the article for him.

How do you know so much about Snowball? Do you know the previous owners, or Irena? I never saw it mentioned anywhere else that he was acquired from a bird show – do you know where it was?

We have an eight year old E2 (like Snowball) named Jazzy who also loves to dance, but he doesn't lift his feet. We've had him for about a year. We're probably his fifth owners – we were told he was part of a bird show (three owners ago) at the Tropicana in Las Vegas, until it stopped in 2004.

Thanks again. Eegorr (talk) 22:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't personally know Snowball's owners. I'd previously seen the Snowball video on YouTube (like a lot of people, I guess) and had pretty much forgotten about it, until I saw an entry on CityParrots about the scientific investigation into Snowball's dancing skills. The only facts I'm aware of WRT this are the ones I discovered when researching the article - Dr. Patel's paper (linked as PDF in the article) mentions that Snowball was acquired from a bird show by his previous owner.
Would it be possible for you to take a hi-res photo of Jazzy and add it to the E2 article? The image I found was literally the only CC-licensed image on Flickr - and it's not particularly brilliant in terms of being a lead image, with the aviary bars in the foreground. It would be fantastic if you could.
Heh, I've always wanted a Moluccan myself. Or a large macaw. Unfortunately, the space and financial concerns keep getting in my way... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Miss Independent (album)

I draw your attention to MSoldi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), creator of hoax album Miss Independent (album), hoax album Autumn Goodbye (a fresh redirect was created today to point at this hoax, see [5] for the original), and a hoax album cover. I left him a "final warning" today, but I really felt more like some admin should be drop-kicking him across the internet.Kww (talk) 23:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Having reviewed his/her deleted contribs, it is apparent to me that this user is a serial hoaxer (especially WRT fake album covers) who attempts to hide their misinformation with a smattering of reasonable edits. Blocked indef. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Block evasion by Oky103

I would be extremely surprised if Oky123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) isn't Oky103 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) getting around her one week block. Wouldn't surprise me if she thinks the orange bar that says "You have new messages" is just a part of the site layout, and hasn't seen a single warning or block message. Kww (talk) 03:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Jossi noticed and blocked the sock, but did nothing with Oky103's original block. I'm happy enough not extending the original block for the first offense, but it's your call, not mine.Kww (talk) 04:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Erection

A vandal moved Erection to a different page title (on 2008 August 13), and violated WP:PRIVACY in the title. WP:PRIVACY states: "Edits attempting to out someone should be promptly reverted, and an oversighter brought in to permanently delete them from the public record.". You deleted the offending page, but it still appears in logs. I made an oversight request and haven't received a response yet, so I don't know if you did the same, but I wanted to point out the guideline in case you weren't aware of it. --DocumentN (talk) 00:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I'd actually completely forgotten about that incident. My only involvement in that situation was noticing that the vandalized title was a bluelink on my watchlist and CSD G3-ing it. I honestly can't remember if I sent an oversight req. for it now or not (though it's something I would normally do in cases where attempts have been made to 'out' individuals - so I guess that I did). Coincidentally (I was just reading it!), Wikipedia:ANI#How_to_remove_things_from_a_Deletion_Log would suggest that such log entries cannot actually be oversighted. Would you like me to bring this up at ANI anyhow? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
The thread seems inconclusive as to what the procedure is, but it probably couldn't hurt. I should do it myself, or figure out what else to do, but I'm trying to prioritize my time better. --DocumentN (talk) 01:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Looking at the logs, the entry seems to be gone now. I sent an oversight request myself after you raised the issue with me. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm not seeing it disappeared from anywhere. Links emailed. --DocumentN (talk) 16:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

edit war

there appears to be an on going edit war on the Pashtun FA and it appears several editors have violated the 3RR--Wikiscribe (talk) 04:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Kiki Sheard

BlueBoy96 isn't particularly talkative, but I would be interested in hearing your response to the questions I left over on his talk page.—Kww(talk) 21:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Scooby's All-Star Laff-A-Lympics vandalism

Need help with the 'Scooby's All-Star Laff-A-Lympics' series article, as someone is trying to convert it into an article about a Scrappy Doo movie. It would also seem that some of the other H-B shows/program blocks are having the same problem. Please help. Thank you.--Halls452 (talk) 12:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've sorted that one now (and the other articles that the IP vandalized). Any more that I need to take a look at? There appears to be some kind of concerted effort to add misinformation to H-B/Disney articles occurring at present. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
That's all I can see so far. I'll let you know if I find any more. Thanks--Halls452 (talk) 13:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I've found some more in the following articles: "The Pink Panther Show", Disney film "The Sword in the Stone" and the "Winnie The Pooh" films. --Halls452 (talk) 22:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted the Pink Panther stuff. Where exactly is the vandalism in the other articles? Thanks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for taking so long to get back with you. It seems the other Administrators took care of them already. Thanks again. But why have so many articles gotten vandalize in the past few weeks? --Halls452 (talk) 23:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Heyheyi'moutboy

Heyheyi'moutboy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is approaching long term block status. CSD notice for first fake album, AFD notice for second fake album, and now, a very explicit final warning from me about his third fake album. Just keeping you informed so it's not a surprise when I come requesting a block later. Life would certainly be easier if my RFA had gone a little more smoothly ... then I could do this crap myself.—Kww(talk) 19:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

MSoldi

You blocked MSoldi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) a month ago as a serial hoaxer. Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/MSoldi just closed, and one account, Yoelmo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), that I strongly suspected of being a sock was deemed not a sock based on IP evidence. Still, both accounts created the same hoax article: Autumn Goodbye (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Could you look at the two copies of the article (or userfy them into my space, if you would prefer) and tell me whether you think they are independent creations of the same hoax? I just think we are encountering one of those cases where checkuser returns a false negative.—Kww(talk) 12:37, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

BTW, Heyheyit'moutboy (the account I was complaining about in the previous message) got caught up in this checkuser.—Kww(talk) 12:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Just had a look at the deleted contribs. MSoldi's version is different to Yoelmo's (well as different as an infobox, tracklisting and a couple of sentences can be). That's not to say that there's no connection between the two users. I do find it suspicious myself... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
The day gets curiouser and curiouser. I mentioned this one to Jayron32, but he doesn't seem to be around right now. A loud quacking sound has reached my ears. Every creator of Interpersonal (Aliana Lohan Album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) got blocked today as a result of this RFCU. Within hours, MelissaSnider (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), an account which has been inactive for over two months, pops up and creates Interpersonal (Aliana Lohan album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (note the capitalization difference). I can see no reason to believe that this isn't another sock of Ohmygod1234. Care to block, or should I go back through checkuser again?—Kww(talk) 22:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Yep. I hear the ducks too. Blocked as a sockpuppet (user's deleted contribs are full of what can only be described as 'made-up crap' too), article speedied. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
The quacking is getting deafening: take a look at Mileyfanhello (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)—Kww(talk) 00:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Is there any edit in particular that I need to be looking at? I see yet another user creating speculative articles and entries on nn musicians (deleted edits) but I don't really see anything concrete to link him/her with the above sockfarm... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
You're probably right that I'm seeing ghosts in the closet. I remembered Voices4ever as being a big Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus editor, but when I go back through her history, it was always negative ... removing chart info, removing praise, trying to make sure that Miley didn't look quite as good as her preferred Disney stars. I'll just drop an unsourced information warning on this editor's talk page.—Kww(talk) 01:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Radix38

Hello Kurt. You might be interested in this unblock request: User talk:Radix38#Unblock, where you're named as the original blocking admin. This editor was hit by the autoblock that you placed earlier on a vandal-only account. EdJohnston (talk) 04:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Lovebird

Hi KurtSB, I was wondering if birds like even having a few quails in the place the way horses get company and settle happily with a goat or two around. Sorry to hear your friend's fortunes dropped through circumstances. Hope they pick up again soon, Julia Rossi (talk) 23:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not a good idea to keep Lovebirds (and budgies) with quail. Both species are known for being 'scrappers' and can bully more placid birds (you wouldn't think it to look at them but lovebirds have a real temper on them). Lovebirds will try to start fights with much larger parrots too - often leading to the dreaded 'big bird, little bird, little bird lost' scenario when the Macaw (for example) finally gets tired of having its feet bitten. Thanks muchly for the help, btw. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
That's okay, the birdworld is constantly suprising and I stand fooled by appearances, :) Julia Rossi (talk) 08:05, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Circus (Britney Spears album)

Thanx, it's difficult for mere mortals such as myself to keep control of that article. — Realist2 01:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Semiprotecting the article until the album's release date should head off the worst of it. I hope... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Please, this is Britney Spears we are on about. There are still POV edit wars over her last album lol! I've also never seen so many user names devoted to her. Oh well, let the fun begin. — Realist2 01:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
That editor uploaded the same image again, despite it being speedy deleted as a copyright violation. I noticed you warned him before, you might like to take care of it. He also tried to label it as a music video, hoping to claim fair use perhaps?. No music video by Spears exists like that. Something sneaky me feels. — Realist2 21:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I've blocked him for 48 hours and linked him to WP's non-free content guidelines. I notice that he's been doing a similar kind of thing on Commons too - though he's been claiming that the images are public domain there. With any luck, he might use this time in order to figure out what he's been doing wrong... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there are some commons images that I've tagged to, although I'm not sure anything will be done about it unless commons is told about it? — Realist2 22:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I tagged this one which commons then deleted. Shouldn't an admin on Wikipedia now delete the page? — Realist2 22:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I see that he was blocked (on Commons) back in September for uploading unfree images. As it stands now, all his bad uploads have been deleted - but if I notice that he's started up again with it there (he might not), I'll certainly bring it to the attention of the admins. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted that empty image page too. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. Thank you for your help. — Realist2 22:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

User:BlassFamily is still uploading very questionable images that have no warranted fair use claim. — Realist2 19:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for helping to deal with the harassment by IP # 67. Hopefully, this block will be the end of the abuse, but I'm going to keep an eye on pages I've edited and so forth. I believe this is one user who uses several different IP addresses as sock puppets, so if the abuse continues I will let you know. Again, thank you for your assistance. 98.220.43.195 (talk) 19:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, no worries. It's quite likely that he'll be back with a new IP to carry this on - just let me know if he causes you any more problems. Or leave a message at WP:ANI. Or WP:AIV if it's particularly blatant. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Sigh. 66.30.38.18 is messing with my talk page again, and also vandalizing other pages by undoing legitimate edits I mad. Time to block this IP, too? 98.220.43.195 (talk) 21:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

StourportDivers

I saw your block on User Talk:StourportDivers. You have blocked the new user after one edit using a template related to spamming. Although I agree completely that the username in question violates naming rules and should be blocked for that reason, I strongly disagree with the chilling effect that blocking for spam could have on this new editor. I have done my best to explain on the user's talk page, but I would respectfully request that you reconsider and remove this inappropriate block. By all means, re-block on the grounds of username. I would hate to lose an editor simply because they were blocked using the wrong template. Regards --RexxS (talk) 04:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

The way I see it (and yes, I know that this is a judgement call), we have an account apparently named after an organization, the very first edit from which was to add an external link to said organization. When this was reverted by User:Nja247, the user immediately re-added it (it wasn't only the one edit). I feel that the block was entirely appropriate in this case. It's never my intention to BITE new users - but in this case, it seemed about as blatant as violation of the spam and relevant part of the username policy as blatant can be. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 07:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply and I can understand your reasoning. From the point of view of the new editor, they spotted an EL to another club in that article (since removed); created an account and added a similar link for their own club (took 2 attempts); had their addition removed (edit summary: removing EL spam); so they put it back again! After Nja247 re-removed it, he then put a note on their talk page. I guess you can see how confusing that would be for a newbie. I'm sure you wouldn't have indef blocked (with account creation disabled) a newbie just for that spam, but I can see that the username issue means an indef block on the name is correct. I just hope we haven't lost an editor. As I know the folks at that club, I'll have a word in person with whoever it was and encourage them to make a new account and do some constructive editing. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Freddy Deeb

Great minds think alike :)... Black Kite 02:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Simmering problem

When I get to this stage with an editor, I like to let an admin or two know just so that I'm not the only one keeping an eye on him. MaxPerry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has come up to final warning stage on my radar. A quick look at his talk page history shows the problem:

I don't see much hope for productivity here, and it always amazes me how people with warning histories like this can have a clean block log.—Kww(talk) 18:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll keep an eye out for more bad edits from him. I'd probably be inclined to agree with your assessment though.
Thanks for the revert to my talk page last night, btw. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 07:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
He was trouble again last night, and NrDg took care of him. Blocked, two sock accounts (Maxsilva and VANESSALOPEZ) confirmed by checkuser and indef'ed, Maxkito indefed on suspicion.—Kww(talk) 10:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

"[...] repeated abuse of editing privileges."

As far as I can tell, WindiDanni only made one contribution. Is this block notice really the most appropriate one, or am I missing something? :S — neuro(talk) 23:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops. I selected the wrong template in Twinkle. I have now left a more appropriate one. My mistake. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
You ding-a-ling :P — neuro(talk) 23:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Yup, that sounds about right. Maybe that's what happens when you don't forward those pesky chain letters... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Notifications about Page Unlocks

There is currently a discussion going on at WP:RFPP about whether to unprotect several articles. As the protecting administrator of Northwich Victoria F.C. and Witton Albion F.C., you are invited to come join the discussion. NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 02:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

blocked IP

you appear to have blocked a series of IP addresses because, if I read it correctly, you believe a bunch of scurrilous or mischievous emails or entries come from that vicinity. That punishes the innocent as well as the guilty. I'm a white hat wearing Good Guy and want to edit something on the Pete Stark background section, something entirely innocuous, but can't thanks to your blanket block.

How about lifting it for me? Or including the following correction:

Pete Stark started Security National Bank in Walnut Creek CA in 1963. He angered the conservative "City Fathers" of Walnut Creek some time later when, after building an 8 story tall office building with a bank branch on the first floor, he placed a peace Symbol on the outer wall of the building at or about the 8th floor. Since the Security National Bank Building was then the tallest in the entire city the Peace Symbol was widely visible.

The City Council tried to force him to remove the symbol but lost in court when Pete's defense, that it was a decoration and not a (prohibited) sign , won the judge's support.

Eventually he sold the bank to Adnan Kashoggi, a Saudi citizen, around the time or not long after he won his Congressional seat. The bank was then merged into Hibernia National Bank which was later acquired by Security Pacific Bank, then became part of Bank of America when Security Pacific was bought by B of A.

Security National's charter account holders enjoyed free checking accounts even continuing after the bank disappeared into the clutches of subsequent ownerships, I being one of them. Free checking was an innovation of Pete Stark's because his accounts did not require a minimum balance whereas competing banks did provide fee-free accounts provided minimum balances were maintained.

Deejayii (talk) 21:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Headstrong neiva is back

You blocked Headstrong neiva (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) indefinitely. Take a look at Willian-neiva-2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).—Kww(talk) 14:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I agree. Blocked. Thanks for pointing him out... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 15:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Charlie Brown Edits

For the last time Kurt Shaped Box, i am doing these Charlie Brown edits becuase i am specifying a few things that are not specified in the Peanuts universe (for example the circus Snoopy joins in Life is a Circus Charlie Brown, What circus do you think it is? Ringling Brothers?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.210.238 (talk) 20:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wrong. The majority of your edits have been adding completely incorrect information, or at best speculation and original research. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 05:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Northwich Victoria F.C.

I think we could try semi-protection on this again for a while; it's been protected for over six weeks. Stifle (talk) 14:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, okay. It's worth giving it a go. Will do. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 11:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

User talk:AYC Financial

KSB;

I'm puzzled by your block of this user. While clearly they don't yet understand wikipedia's policies, why did you block them when they've made no edits following the note that I left on the talk page pointing them to the relevant guidelines? Company names aren't reasons for instant-block per "Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited." I'm also concerned that you effectivly undo another adminstrator's action (e.g. not blocking) without discussion.

I'm not going to try and get married to this user, just feeling that perhaps a more gentle approach is possible.

brenneman 23:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Aaron. I'll admit that I didn't actually notice the message you'd left on the user's talk page at the time of blocking and I apologise if it appears as though I intentionally overruled you. I saw the report listed at WP:UAA and upon reviewing the user's edits, I made a judgement call and gave him/her a spam/username block per Wikipedia:U#Inappropriate_usernames after seeing the blatant advertising for the company of the same name that had been placed on the userpage (which I then speedied). So yes, it was my bad - and I'll be happy to unblock so that you can work with the user, if you wish me to do so. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Generally: I realise it's not clear from the tone of my first note, but I've been away on-and-off the last few years and I'm just checking how things may have changed.
Specifically: Ahh, no, I hadn't seen the notice there. Looking, I see you do a lot of work in this area and I'm happy to defer. I'm fairly clear on what the odds of these users converting to the side of good are, but I tend to do a few in dribs and drabs and then check back. (To my mind, if you don't know better, writing your company up as your username is a totally obvious thing to do.)
Thanks again,
brenneman 00:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Imposter?

Heart Shaped Kurt (talk · contribs): I don't know if this is really you or not, but I thought you should be aware if it isn't. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No, that's not me. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 15:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Heart Shaped Kurt has now been given an involuntary permanent break from editing Wikipedia. Regards, BencherliteTalk 15:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks muchly. Appreciated. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
No problem. Perhaps it was a late Valentine admirer?! BencherliteTalk 16:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, you know what they say about imitation and flattery... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Goatse.cx-07-11-08.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Goatse.cx-07-11-08.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Witton Albion F.C.

Perhaps it is time to give Witton Albion F.C. a shot of semi-protection? This is a wiki after all. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 00:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, okay. I don't really like leaving articles fully protected like that. The banned user in question is still around - but he hasn't been particularly active recently. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

gull meat

I've added to your query. BrainyBabe (talk) 01:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

User:AGentleUser

Please change the block settings for that user and select "cannot edit own talk page" on Special:Block. If you look at Revision history of User talk:AGentleUser, you will see talk page abuse. -- IRP ☎ 02:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Done and done. No worries. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

On-line Taxonomy Sources

Hi Kurt, If you need links for more authoritative taxonomic sources available on the web, and don't know where to go, contact me, I know where they are.--Steve Pryor (talk) 09:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for helping to clear out that massive backlog of broken redirects. I don't know how it took only four admins to compensate for a RedirectCleanupBot, but it worked! --Dylan (chat, work, ping, sign) 20:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy Kurt Shaped Box's Day!

Kurt Shaped Box has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Kurt Shaped Box's day!
For your administrative and RefDesk contributions (especially the seagulls :D),
enjoy being the Star of the day, Kurt Shaped Box!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac15
02:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox.

Wow. I don't know what to say... Most excellent. Thank you very much... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:EuskoNiko

please see the contributions of EuskoNiko. He has returned to disruptively and massively adding unsourced ethnic categories. You previously blocked him for the same behavior, under a different name, and he made this sock account to continue his disruptive editing. Theserialcomma (talk) 23:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:ComplicVideo.PNG

Thank you for uploading File:ComplicVideo.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Σxplicit 06:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Let's not start a drama

[6] oops, sorry, I didn't know I was doing wrong. let's just not start a war, I can answer this question myself, just sources wasn't clear about IP, I can't find any place else to ask question.--69.226.39.79 (talk) 01:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Massive removal of categories

You and Theserialcomma began removing Chileans of xxx descent from several articles yesterday. I've posted a message on Theserialcomma's talk page about this. Please read it. ☆ CieloEstrellado 08:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I've replied over at User talk:Theserialcomma. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 09:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Another deletion

Can you delete this also. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thalassia (genus) I asked them to create it, but then when you did, I blanked the text, but this removes it from the category. It seems easier to just ask you to delete it when you get around to it. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

No probs. Done and done. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 06:27, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 06:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The article-diffs tool you wanted

You asked at Village Pump for a tool to track a user's changes. For some reason I'm not seeing any Edit links on that page now so I'm putting the answer here.

This is the download link for a Windows program in zip format, called Contributor Surveyor (made by User:Dcoetzee). It lists a user's articles in order of how often they edited it, and includes clickable diffs showing the size of each contribution. I understand it is much used by WikiProject Copyright Cleanup.- KoolerStill (talk) 12:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, someone linked me to that yesterday - but thanks very much for the thought. Heh, now I've run that program I am fully aware of the daunting task in front of me... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Selective deletion of User:TylerKnowsYouCale in page histories of Steve Beshear

Since you blocked that account, can you remove the user's name in reference to contributions to the article. Whether you keep the contributions or not matters little, but it would be nice to remove reference to this person, as association could cause them problems. The article is now under protection from edits and it would be beneficial for the unauthorized and harrasing username not to show up in edit history or anywhere else for regular users. It is my understanding that this is authorized under WP:RFO and WP:Selective deletion. Thanks. TylerKnew (talk) 03:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I'm setting to it now. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

well

Sorry about that. Thats a nickname (Name is Cody, they started calling me Chody) i've had since like middle school. I'll change my name as soon as I can get a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thechode69 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Editing algaebase articles

I was going to run through the list and edit the articles, but I am being accused of blanking the article. Skip it. You know, meat editors do enough damage to interpersonal relations on wikipedia without lame pointless tagging.[7] I've had enough of trying to edit articles for a while. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 08:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears half a dozen of my most constructive edits in repairing this bot nightmare have been tagged as abuse in my edit summaries. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 09:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears to have tripped something else making it harder, when not impossible, to edit pages by deleting a lot of text. This is needed with anybot articles, with the unsourced text, deleting a lot of text. Also, really, it's in the testing stages and it's a permanent entry titled "Abuse filter tags?" That's so unnecessary as to be unbelievable. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 21:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Has the filter been disallowing your legit edits, then? There might actually be a way of fixing that, so that it doesn't happen again, if the right people are made aware of it... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I tried to remove most of the text and post it with just the one statement, but I had to have a certain amount of words. You participated in the anybot mess. Its articles included angiosperms, protists, fungi, and one person, all called algae. It would not allow me to remove the list (inaccurate), the taxobox (wrong), and most of the text plus the reference. I finally got somewhere just calling it an organism. It's not cluebot that was blocking. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I now see that you raised the issue on Wikipedia:Abuse filter/False positives earlier today. They very well may be trying to tweak the filter to fix this as we speak... Hopefully. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I think they're more worried about whether I'm calm or not. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


Please delete this anybot user page. User:Anybot/Thalassia. Thanks. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 20:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


Sorry, in my last few edits I realized how confusing that message was. Yes, please delete now as there's nothing in algaebase that verifies they are redirects to the genera, rather than to species. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 18:33, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


While you're doing seaweed related stuff can you move Isabella Abbot to Isabella Abbott. Here's her page at the University of Hawaii.[8] --69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done and  Done. No worries. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. She's one of the world's leading experts in seaweeds. I would worry about bad karma to spell her name incorrectly. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


On the seaweeds, there are edible seaweeds with common names from Japanese and Korean mostly, some Chinese, which names are used in English in areas where the seaweed is popularly eaten. These common names, only the ones I recognize, for a few of the major edible seaweeds, are worth having as redirects for wikipedia. This takes a long time because the common names should be sourced, like everything, for encyclopedia articles. To me, it's worth it to get these names for a popular food item sourced and included.

After that, I will ask at the wiki project plants, but I think the rest should just be deleted to put them out of their misery as soon as possible, as the anybot articles are too unreliable.

One of the articles you deleted at my request was a the French, Wakamé, with a diacritic, could you undelete and redirect it to Wakame? Sorry about that one. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

No probs. I've restored and redirected it for you... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Michelangelo24

Shouldn't User:Michelangelo24 be blocked? I just checked his history and he's been spending an entire year repeatedly bringing up deleted articles over and over. -WarthogDemon 00:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Blocked indef - it's been going on for far too long. He's had several final warnings, which he has just blanked from his talkpage and completely disregarded. I hope that the block will encourage him to finally engage in communication... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
A reason why I don't think users should be allowed to blank warnings - they'll just keep getting final warnings over and over since how often do editors check history? (Or is it just me? :P) -WarthogDemon 01:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, admins *should*, when dealing with reports of problem users at AIV, or wherever. I know that I do... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: AIV

Hello. I just read your comment on AIV, and wanted to address your concern. This is not truly a content dispute. I have no feelings about the material one way or the other, I simply feel that content should not be deleted without a good explanation, which this user has repeatedly failed to provide. The material has been in the article for at least six months without dispute, and I cannot accept its deletion without a stated reason. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 00:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The reason that I didn't block him immediately as a vandal is that he has indicated in his edit summaries that he believes that the passage of text in question does not belong in the article. It's a bit different to someone just blanking content for the lulz, so I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and give him chance to explain his reasoning and engage in discussion on the talk page - though if he reverts again, I *will* block him for violating the 3RR. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
He has reverted again, with the exact same edit summary. I have begun a discussion on the talk page, and hope that agreement can be reached amongst numerous editors. I have tired of arguing with this fellow. Thanks for your attention to this matter. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 01:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

User:XAXISx

I thought you'd like to know: this account was never compromised, apparently. Mangojuicetalk 06:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

I have done so. Thanks very much for the note. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

An old friend might be back

You may have useful input at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Soccermeko.—Kww(talk) 02:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I feel stupid

This is the first time I've been on wikipedia when I'm not tired, stressed, or otherwise mentaly incapacitated. And lo! I get the reference in your name now!Drew Smith What I've done 10:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Hoopy1

Hi Kurt Shaped Box. I noticed you blocked User:Hoopy1 from editing. I feel this user may have been inappropriately warned - see talk page. The final warning on their talk page was given in April of 2008. Perhaps another warning instead of a block may have been more fair. Just saying... -FASTILY (TALK) 02:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I had a look through his contribs before I blocked - they're all vandalism. He was attacking that Ahmad person in his edits a year ago and he was doing the same thing tonight. FWIW, I don't think that we really need to keep long-term intermittent vandals like this around for any longer than it takes to detect them.... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

IP block

Thanks for the block on 76.161.111.218. Of course, the Network is coming after you next... Drmies (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

So, what's the story with these guys/one guy with access to various networks? Is there a Long Term Abuse page? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I don't know. It sounded like what the little Greek boys on the Alabama campus might have hollered--nothing to worry about, just irritating, this conspiracy chatter. Then again, you never know... Seriously, is there a story? Drmies (talk) 02:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
BTW, if you are in a vandal-fighting mood, there's also IPs 70.71.166.217 and 24.94.7.135, for your consideration! Drmies (talk) 02:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Both blocked. As for the Network guy(s) - I seem to remember encountering him/them a few months back but I forget where now... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! So there is a story. I'll keep my eyes open, and I'll keep your funky (and cool) username in mind. Drmies (talk) 03:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

User created anybot article issue

This article was created by anybot's owner, but, from the text it is one he created from material gathered by the bot, just the article was posted by the bot owner, not the bot. It probably has the same problems as the rest of anybot's edits. But I'm not sure you should just delete it because of the creator in the edit history. Maybe you could ask plant editors to check it, or something?

I post it here, removed from the list. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Hasn't stumped me, I just don't have time to check. I'm keeping redirects that I can reference, or that are really common. It's 10X as much work checking on the bot's edits as to do them correctly in the first place. Still, for some reason I did not want to just delete this article, so thanks for posting at plants, also the few up on top with notes should be added there. I'll add them. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 02:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

why you deleted tastystuffs.com page ?

why you deleted tastystuffs.com page ? please let me know

3 to 4 times deleted the same thing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.98.183 (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:SPAM#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles and Wikipedia:NOTADVERTISING#ADVERTISING. The Tastystuff article was blatantly promotional. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 08:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi Kurt! We used to be friends with all the chat about seagu;lls etc. dont spoil our friend ship eh? 8-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.56.109 (talk) 20:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for creation of Liberapedia and disambiguation of Metapedia

Upon searching for these two wikis on Wikipedia, I found that neither has a corresponding article of any length. Further searching revealed that both pages have been fully protected due to vandalism issues. Now, although Liberapedia is a satirical opposing model of Conservapedia only amounting to 5% of its size, and Metapedia is a biased and anti-semitic project, both receive reasonable traffic and are significant enough that they should be depicted on Wikipedia.

(Especially when we have articles like Dickipedia and London Buses route 273, the first of which is ludicrous and the latter much, much less significant than the two subjects of interest here. Please do reply and let me know if re-creation of the pages has been approved, and I will gladly supply neutral drafts of the corresponding articles.

P.S. Metapedia seems to be on the "external links" blacklist; is there a WP policy against linking to racist sites? Although it is understandable as a measure to prevent malicious citation, I find it a rather unnecessary and obstructive measure. (Before you ask, I am most definitely not a proponent of Metapedia or any of its points of view, which classifies me as an inferior race. I simply find its omission from Wikipedia to be unjustified.)

Doomed Rasher (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The Librapedia article was create-protected mainly because someone apparently affiliated with the site was creating spammy articles back in April/May 2008. Before that, it appears that it was deleted several times because each time, the creator of the article gave no indication of why the subject was notable. If you want to create an article on Librapedia that's neutral referenced and notability proved to WP standards (you know the drill, rite... ^_^ ), I'd be happy to unprotect it for you.
I see that the Metapedia article was deleted in 2007 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metapedia on grounds of lack of notability (looking at the deleted edits, it was little more than a stub anyway). If you believe that that particular Wiki now meets the General notability guideline and you can create an article that conforms to all relevant policies, then again, by all means go ahead and do it. Considering that the page is now a redirect, it might be an idea to create it at Metapedia (Encyclopedia), or similar and maybe later discuss whether it's appropriate that the article be moved there. If you want to write up drafts first to show me, then I'd certainly look them over for you - but, as a long-term user, don't feel that you *must* in order for your articles to be accepted. If they're well-written and provide sufficient independent references, they'll stick.
So, just say the word and I'll lift the protection on Liberapedia. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I have created a preliminary draft for Liberapedia here [9]. I will write the Metapedia article later when I get time off. (Metapedia actually has editions in 11 different languages totaling over 100,000 articles and a decent Alexa rank [10]; I do not know why no one took the time to write an article about it. (Given the anti-semitic and holocaust-denialist nature of the site, though, I wouldn't be surprised.))
EDIT> Liberapedia seems to be orphaned as the only internal links come from user talk pages and non-content pages. Should I add a few links where appropriate? Thanks.
Doomed Rasher (talk) 15:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've taken a look at your first draft. IMO, you're definitely going to need to locate some better references for the article before you move it into article space - citing Liberapedia itself and a couple of other open wikis is not going to be sufficient to avoid your article getting PRODded or sent to AfD by a passing user soon after 'going live'. See Wikipedia:Notability (web), WP:SPS, WP:RS, etc.. To prove notability, you'll need to provide evidence that Liberapedia is being written about by 'reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy' (to quote a line from WP:RS) - in other words, you need to show that Liberapedia has some real significance to/impact on those outside Liberapedia users and the 'keeping lists of wikis' people. If it's been mentioned say in the print media, or on TV, or on mainstream news websites, etc., then this is the sort of thing you'll need to reference.
Without knowing much about Metapedia beyond what you've told me, I'd advise you to be careful of using it's Alexa rank as sole means of asserting notability. Have a read of Wikipedia:Search_engine_test#Alexa_ratings (actually, have a read of the whole page). --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't get it...

You replied to me in the "Reusable Seagull" thread, and wrote:

"I'd sincerely hope that you weren't intending on (re)using the seagull for evil."

I'm sure there'a a perfectly good joke there, or clever social reference, or maybe just a really bad pun, but it went over my head -- and I hate it when that happens :-). Clarify? Thanks! --DaHorsesMouth (talk) 13:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

It probably went over your head because it's not particularly funny. ;) Steve wrote "Reusable seagull? Proof! Refuse sack."...yeah, I'd refuse the sack alright, implying that by refusing the sack, he'd be accepting the reusable seagull... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Refdesk Cold Case :

File:Insectivorous Plants Drew's copy.jpg

The above file's purpose is being discussed and/or is being considered for deletion. See files for discussion to help reach a consensus on what to do.

Reading about Venus Fly Traps this evening made me think about an outstanding mystery on the Reference desk. However, looking back, I can't help but think I must have been a bit thick.

Besides the strangely amateur layout on this scan that we all noticed before, something else struck me. The apostrophe after "Venus" is a vertical tick mark and not an apostrophe at all. A strange anomaly on a book allegedly 50 years old. Then I noticed that the double-quote at the end was also made of vertical tick marks.

Of course, a moment's thought made me wonder why there even was a double-quote at the end of the text. It's not paired with anything, and it's not in Darwin's original text.

My new theory is that this text was simply copy/pasted from where I quoted Darwin earlier in that thread. The quote mark at the end was sloppily left behind.

A little examination of the image shows me :

  • Pasting the text, (After modifying the critical sentence) into MS Word in Times New Roman at 14pt and default margins breaks up the lines and and justifies them exactly as shown in that image.
  • If I screenshot the text in MS Word, then resize it to 550x150 it matches the image pixel-perfect except for a minor variation in line spaces.
  • The strange triple space after "most wonderful in the world." should contain an asterisk. The asterisk is in the original text, but a hoaxer may have thought it was added later and removed it.
  • The text is exactly level, with subpixel-perfect accuracy. (Even the anti-aliasing is consistent across the whole line.)
  • The image has very heavy jpg compression. A common fudge for image forgers.

I'm now convinced that User:Drew_R._Smith was hoaxing us for some bizarre reason known only to himself. I'm not sure why I didn't come to this conclusion earlier. Either I was assuming good faith, or being stupid.

The whole thing had left me rather curious, so I thought I'd mention my revelation on the subject here in case you were wondering about it too.

(P.S. I also cross-posted this on Steve's talk page.)

APL (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

personal RFC on sneeky edit

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Planetary_habitability&diff=311665773&oldid=311665338
I'm curious to know, do you consider this kind of edit sneeky and/or not encyclopedic??
GabrielVelasquez (talk) 15:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Bottle brushes

I really don't research this kind of thing, or I'd help you; but good job on starting research :-) Nyttend (talk) 00:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Mary Summer Rain

Hi there, a near-exact duplicate of this article, Mary Lee, aka author Mary Summer Rain, was already deleted as spam, but I've sent this one to AfD as you requested. Cheers! <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 22:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. It's a bit of a borderline one - but the claims of copies sold and TV appearances just push the article into the 'might be notable and could be salvageable with a bit of editing' category from where I'm looking at it... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Content Creation Bot discussion

If you have the time, having none myself, I know it's hard to find any, please read the content creation proposal for this bot carefully and weigh in particularly on preventative measures if you agree the bot should go forward.[11] --69.225.12.99 (talk) 21:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out to me - I've posted there to suggest that input be solicited from related WikiProject experts WRT to the results of the trial edits before doing anything else... Is this the guy who used to be User:69.226.103.13, btw? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, same user. I do networks during the school year, so my edits will be from rolling IPs. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

The rest of anybot's mess

I think there are some very usable redirects left, but I don't have time to deal with anymore. I think it's time to just nuke the rest of the list, unless Martin/Smith wants to clean up any. However, since he couldn't be bothered to help with the first 6000, it's not likely he's going to help with the last couple hundred. I'm done with that bot operator's messes. --69.225.12.99 (talk) 08:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was meaning to ask you about those. There's nothing salvageable there at all? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 09:11, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not going to check them. The ones left are probably some of the salvageable and more common Asian names for the seaweeds. I don't speak Spanish or Galic or Swedish, so all I can do is check the Japanese, Korean, Tagalog, and some of the Indonesian names as I have been doing. I'm just done with dealing with being crapped on on wikipedia. Since no one else is willing to check them or probably doesn't have the resources (my spouse is an Asian chef), it's probably just best to take care of the remaining few for good. My suggestion is just delete them. --69.225.12.99 (talk) 09:20, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't really want to be deleting redirects if they're theoretically useful and they're pointing to the right place - but given the origin, I honestly doubt that any of them are. However, I think that I'll post at WP:PLANTS one last time to determine if anyone has an opinion on preserving some of them and give people an opportunity to voice their objections. Yeah, I'll probably announce that I'm planning to delete any of the un-vouched for redirects after a week. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 09:34, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

re: ContentCreationBOT

For the record, I have no problem with your comments. They are helpful and constructive. My problem is with the IP's comments which seem to be aimed solely at derailing the bot, and not at actually trying to make sure it works properly. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I can understand where the IP is coming from, TBH. The time he spent checking through the articles and redirects created by Anybot probably amounted to literally *days* (when you add up the man hours) in the end - because virtually no-one else who was aware of the situation was knowledgeable enough to help him. I also seem to remember him having to deal with a lot of heat from other editors accusing him of bad faith and vandalism at the same time in order to get it understood that he was trying to help. He just doesn't want to see it happen again. I don't claim to speak for him but I can see how having to clean up someone else's bot-generated mess (IIRC, the BotOp didn't seem particularly eager to step in and help fix things either) could leave one with something of an anti-bot viewpoint... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Planet Color Guy

I've added some additional info to last weekend's WT:RD thread and raised the question of whether it's time to suspend PCG's ref desk privileges. As you'd commented in the thread, I specifically want to invite your input. — Lomn 18:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Name use

Re: Red-fronted Parrot, also known as the Jardine's Parrot

Have you got a measure of how much these two names are used? Snowman (talk) 08:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
What sort of thing did you have in mind? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
The relative popularity of these two English names. Snowman (talk) 09:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, what I was trying to ask is where you'd like me to look up the two names to compare them? I guess that you're not talking about comparing the number of Google hits here... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:42, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Do not worry. It seems that you do not know. Snowman (talk) 19:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello Kurt Shaped Box

I would like to explain the situation regarding your actions to blacklist EZ-tracks.com. 1. This whole thing started when Emanuel Krassenstein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Emanuel.krassenstein decided that in order to compete with the website ez-tracks.com, he can actually blacklist it. He works for Altnet.com which is a music downloads website and he is infamous for his deceptive techniques against competitors. Here is the SiteAdvisor page for his name: http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/altnet.com/summary/ (Yes! there is a whole page there dedicated to him). If you google his name you will see a lot more... 2. I am a big fan of ez-tracks and whenever I find something interesting I add it to wikipedia. If you check my contributions you will see that I have many contributions not related with this website. 3. I don't know where you read the bad info about ez-tracks but it certainly was not on the siteadvisor page: http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/www.ez-tracks.com Please read through it and you will see that the only thing it mentions is that some of the offers they display were misleading, nothing about malware etc.

I hope that Emanuel gets banned from Wikipedia and never gets to spam here anymore. Please feel free to discuss any of the above, you will see that ez-tracks.com is not what you should be going after.

Thank you,

JohnADean (talk) 16:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi John.
ez-tracks.com was added to the spam blacklist by User:Hu12 following the discussion at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#ez-tracks.com. It should be noted that it was not blacklisted on the strength of the siteadvisor.com entry alone (which, according the page I can see in front of me now states that "In our tests, we found downloads on this site that some people consider adware, spyware or other potentially unwanted programs"), rather a combination of online references found by Hu12 and WP's own guidelines for external links normally to be avoided.
As for User:Emanuel.krassenstein (who it appears was the person who brought the issue to my attention at Talk:Avril Lavigne), I see no evidence that he has been been attempting to promote altnet.com on WP - though he does appear to have an interest in the removal of links to ez-tracks.com. For what it's worth, altnet.com doesn't look to me like the sort of site that has any business being linked to or used as a source on WP either (Wikipedia:ELNO states that "Links to web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising" are normally to be avoided). --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


I value your point of view. Thank you for the answer.

JohnADean (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Algae

Thanks muchly for following through on the Anybot situation. Hesperian 23:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

GBBG

Just back from Canada -thanks for video - impressive! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

hi

what's the official rebirth cover then? tell me so i can upload it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cashmoneyfan1 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Cocky aviculture

I've been checking my books..slim pickin's. Do you have anything general on cockies? Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't have anything handy at present, I'm afriad. One of the textbooks I have in storage at a relative's house (presuming that they're still there) might have something in it about Cockatoos - but don't quote me on that. It's been a long time... :)

Thanks

Thanks, Kurt. After a long period of relative civility, they seem to be crawling out of the woodwork. I suspect this guy is a sock of one I blocked yesterday Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Shithole

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RaseaC (talk) 20:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The above appears to have been placed here by mistake. I have notified RaseaC to take another look. Edison (talk) 20:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what happened there due to being unable to see the edit history, I can only guess it has something to do with you deleting it at some point. RaseaC (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Looking through the edit history to remind me of what this has to do with me, it seems that I speedy-deleted the page as G3 vandalism in January this year, then recreated it as a soft redirect to wiktionary - hence the appearance of the above template... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense. It looks as if it's the kind of article that would need pretty heavy protection even if it were just going to be a redirect. RaseaC (talk) 22:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Would you have any objections to me replacing the Wiktionary redirect and then fully-protecting the page? There's no way that WP will ever have, or need (well, as far as I can forsee) an article named 'shithole' - but I can imagine a link to the definition being somewhat useful for someone, somewhere... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
K.S.B. seems to have been a mere "victim of circumstances," and experienced "collateral damage" in the ongoing and never-ending fight against vandalism. In my checkered career, I have filled in one of these, once topped by an outhouse, and I have dug a fresh one, to be covered by an outhouse. They could be more politely titled "privy pit." Not a single one of the numerous articles of this title remotely approached encyclopedic quality. The title might well be protected ("salted") to prevent recreation. Edison (talk) 05:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
You're probably right. I will now go forth and permanently cover the privy pit to prevent anyone else from making further foul-smelling deposits... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Porkdukeslogo.jpg)

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Porkdukeslogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 20:00, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Mis understandings

Kurt Shaped Box,

If you come in contact with any one Who is trying to come up with a series sequel title, don't undo it or you will be blocked off for vandlizing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark J Marino (talk • contribs) 21:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Fearon vandal

Hi, I noticed that you handled the blocks for the Fearon vandal's most recent vandalism spree, so I thought you may be interested to know about the tracking page I maintain for this particular vandal. I am not sure how complete my tracking is, but it goes back all the way to September 2008, which is (I believe) when he or she first surfaced. –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 06:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, right. Thanks - if I make any more blocks, I'll log them on the page, if that's okay. I just did another sweep and found some of his vandalism to Grand Roy River that'd gone unnoticed for a couple of weeks... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 04:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
It would be much appreciated. I created the tracking page mostly so that I could follow changes to the commonly-targeted articles via Special:RelatedChanges, but since then I've used it just as much to keep track of the edits made the various IP accounts, and I hope others may find it useful too. Cheers, –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 08:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Cookie (cockatoo)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Cookie (cockatoo). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cookie (cockatoo). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Cookie (cockatoo)

Updated DYK query On December 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cookie (cockatoo), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 19:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Kurt Shaped Box! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 941 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Kevin McHale (actor) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Algae

WikiProject Algae was started as a meeting space on Wikipedia for improving the taxonomic representations of the groups of organisms called algae. Please join other editors at the talk page (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Algae) to discuss a higher level taxonomy for algae to be used on Wikipedia. --68.127.232.132 (talk) 19:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:FattestManInDunmore

Thanks for the block. I could see that coming after I saw their second edit. Dr "Baby's Breath" mies (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks as though you've got bit of a sockpuppet problem on the Kid Icarus (band) article. I'll keep an eye on it and any closely-related pages and take action as needed to prevent disruption. If it's obvious that the vandalism is coming from the same person with multiple accounts, they can be blocked on sight without having to go through the entire series of warnings. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Haha, YOU've got a bit of a problem--I don't have a trigger to put my finger on. Yes, you're right; thanks for keeping an eye out. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Seagull question.

There's a seagull question on the science ref desk...help! SteveBaker (talk) 05:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

transformers 3 redirects

could the Transformers 3 and Transformers III redirects be redirected to Transformers_(film_series)#Transformers III (2011) since stuff about transformers 3 is in seies page to keep at one place. Gman124 talk 14:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Just done that for you now. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Gman124 talk 01:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I was coming here to suggest Transformers 3 being unprotected, since with the movie entering preproduction, the corresponding section in Transformers (film series) is already getting big enough to merit the creation of the actual article. --uKER (talk) 04:56, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I haven't been using my machine for a couple of days. I'll unprotect the redirects, if you want to have a crack at an article and see what happens. It's possible that someone else may consider it 'too soon' and nominate it for AfD again though (or AfD it if it becomes an uncontrollable rumour/wishful thinking repository). --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Trevor Blumas

The article Trevor Blumas has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No RS found - all I could find were minor mentions (generally in the form "starring a, b, c, Trevor Blumas, ..."). Unsourced for almost 3 years.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

question

how did you get here so fast to block the IP? [12]. Malke2010 05:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

are you there?Malke2010 14:39, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Someone reported the IP at WP:AIV. I checked out the contribs and blocked it. That's pretty much it, really... :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, another admin gave me a heads up on that. I was very impressed that you were on it so fast. Thanks.Malke2010 23:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Snake

Kurt, sorry for my reply. I misread - thought you were fooling around, so I went along... - DVdm (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

fyi

You blocked user:Idahoprov. Now User:Factcheck12 has been created immediately thereafter, and is making the same edits. Thought you might like to know. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Blocked the sockpuppet account indefinitely. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Whew. Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

  • The latest ... now an (166.198.183.228) is reverting to the edits of the blocked parties. And now a second IP is doing the same. In each case, their only edits, ever. Page protection? Blocks? Your call.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
I've protected the page for a week in the hope that Idahoprov will start discussing his problems with the current state of the article on the talk page (if not, blocks will follow). There's not really much point blocking the individual IPs now - they're probably dynamically assigned every time he logs on. I'll make sure that I keep an eye on the article. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for being so helpful and pro-active. I'll use the time to see what high-level RSs there are to see if I can further improve the article in the interim ... just added a Forbes article ref for much of the article, and a work he co-published. Protecting it frees me up from wasting time reverting Ida.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Uganda - thanks

Thanks very much for your prompt help with the Uganda external link issue. Best wishes, DBaK (talk) 12:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:29, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Commons image

Hi. Do you think that, after this this deletion, this file should be deleted too? Thank you--Trixt (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep. Thanks. I'm not an admin on Commons but I've tagged the file for speedy deletion as an obvious copyvio. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Bsktblldn619

Remember this guy? He's popped his head out of the ground again. I blocked the new sock, but I thought maybe you should be aware. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Block of 79.76.190.131

I see you've blocked Special:Contributions/79.76.190.131 for block evasion. Could you refer me to who you believe this user is? Thanks. Buddy431 (talk) 01:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI, he's either User:Light current or another banned user from the same UK Tiscali IP range. This has been going on for a couple of years on the RefDesks now. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Block of 63.226.45.178 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Hi, same question for that one. I can't find anything suspicious on his activity (including alternate accounts). Can you please comment there? -- Luk talk 12:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm 100% sure that it's the same user. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cherryrain/Archive - this has been going on for several years now, with his/her attempts at promoting his/her various alter egos/fictional characters on websites featuring user-generated content, with WP being only one aspect of it. 'Crystal Cherry' was first, then 'Parys Sylver' (diff) and it would seem that from what I've seen elsewhere on the web, 'Kookee Jenkins' (diff, diff) is this person's latest project. Also note the continued celebrity libel and attempts to create fictional celebrity 'feuds' with his/her characters, as the IP here has tried at B. Scott (if you have the time, check back through all the confirmed socks' contribs and Google the names I mentioned and you might see a pattern emerge). There's absolutely no doubt here. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Block of 79.76.190.131

I see you've blocked Special:Contributions/79.76.190.131 for block evasion. Could you refer me to who you believe this user is? Thanks. Buddy431 (talk) 01:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI, he's either User:Light current or another banned user from the same UK Tiscali IP range. This has been going on for a couple of years on the RefDesks now. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Block of 63.226.45.178 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Hi, same question for that one. I can't find anything suspicious on his activity (including alternate accounts). Can you please comment there? -- Luk talk 12:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm 100% sure that it's the same user. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cherryrain/Archive - this has been going on for several years now, with his/her attempts at promoting his/her various alter egos/fictional characters on websites featuring user-generated content, with WP being only one aspect of it. 'Crystal Cherry' was first, then 'Parys Sylver' (diff) and it would seem that from what I've seen elsewhere on the web, 'Kookee Jenkins' (diff, diff) is this person's latest project. Also note the continued celebrity libel and attempts to create fictional celebrity 'feuds' with his/her characters, as the IP here has tried at B. Scott (if you have the time, check back through all the confirmed socks' contribs and Google the names I mentioned and you might see a pattern emerge). There's absolutely no doubt here. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 12:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

User: Pagemonster18

Hello Kurt Shaped Box. You blocked Pagemonster18 in January 2010 for "the repeated addition of unsourced information". After the unblock, Pagemonster18 has been warned three times for adding unsourced information (the third warning was given today). Can you please take a look? Thanks, Davtra (talk) 05:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

After investigating the user's contributions, Pagemonster18 has added unsourced materials to five articles that were reverted by other editors in June 2010. I reported this to the Administrators' Noticeboard. Davtra (talk) 06:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I've replied at ANI. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
I think Pagemonster18 should be blocked. Pagemonster18 received the first warning in August 2009 for adding unsourced materials. After the ANI, Pagemonster18 made contributions that were reverted for adding unsourced data (links are at ANI). I've found additional reverts in June 2010, Reboot (fiction) [link] and Ellen Page [link]. I also found this at Samuel L. Jackson filmography. Pagemonster18 added a movie and cast details that hadn't been released or confirmed yet. Davtra (talk) 02:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I went through all of Pagemonster18's contributions in May 2010. Details are on ANI. Thanks, Davtra (talk) 03:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Recreating a page and unsure about topic written in the previous page.

Dear Kurt,

I am wanting to write a page on a boy who has recently helped sianger in their songs. I searched Wikipedia but I a unable to find is page, but when I searched it in Google I found out that the page has been deleted by you. I am not aware about the topic written on the previous page , and I want you to tell me what was written.

With Regards,

Randonguychris--Randomguychris (talk) 17:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

What was the title of the deleted article? I'll take a look. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Kurt,
The name of the article is Aathil Ahmed.
Thank you,Randomguychris--Randomguychris (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Aathil Ahmed was an obvious and blatant hoax article - just an attempt by someone to add his own/a friend's name to Wikipedia with a long list of false accomplishments. There were no references to the guy doing what the article claimed that he had done anywhere else (and I did look). --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Well,I appreciate you for what you have done. However I am not really sure what the article had contained ,so , if possible can you tell me what it had.
Thank you Randomguychris--Randomguychris (talk) 16:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your speedy work at blocking vandals! It really is appreciated! :D --khfan93 02:27, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Seems like there's a few people screwing around together tonight... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Asif

Requesting unprotection on the Asif page please, as I’d like to start an article on the name including a list of bearers of the name. Regards. JohnCengiz77 (talk) 15:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. I didn't realize that was still protected after all this time. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Just a fan, and I love your user name... probably the first time I had to stop and say hi, just based on your name alone. QFL 24-7 bla bla bla ¤ cntrb ¤ kids ¤ pics 04:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Recent block of 209.40.217.175

Hi,

I think it's worth pointing out my suspicion that this user is User:Synrgyprod in disguise. The latter achieved a level 4 warning earlier today for doing exactly the same thing. -- roleplayer 01:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep. I'm hoping that the autoblock will catch him if he tries to remove the tags using his account again. If not, I'll slap a block on that too. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I thought it would. Thanks for keeping watch. -- roleplayer 01:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Robinson, IL Article

Thank you for your help in preventing vandalism on the Robinson, IL page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.142.96.249 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 2 February 2008

It seems we are once again having issues with this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.11.116.237 (talk) 22:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears I have been unable to successfully communicate why the edits to the Robinson, IL page are not considered constructive to the unsigned IP address that continues to remove sourced and previously discussed content included in the article (Notable Persons). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.11.113.51 (talk) 06:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I am unsure as to who to turn to in order to end the edit warring that is occurring on this page. The person you previously warned about removing content without explanation continues to make the removals of well sourced content due to personal feeling about the content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.11.113.51 (talk) 00:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Light current

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Light current, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Light current and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Light current during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mr. R00t Talk 18:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: Page created for and about Chad Carter that you deleted

Hello Kurt,

Sorry if I'm repeating this process, but could you help me to post a bio about Chad Carter correctly. Apparently I used copyrighted information from his website. The same bio exist on All About Jazz too. What should I do? Cdub1372 (talk) 17:43, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Rev delete request

Hi. There seems to be no place for RevDelete requests, just thought I'd point out a blatant RD#2 in this diff. Hope you'll see fit to delete it. Note: the revert is correct and should stand, the edit summary should be purged. Thanks for your help. Zunaid 08:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. No probs. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 13:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

User talk:66.38.133.102

This User talk:66.38.133.102 continues to add factually incorrect information to music articles after you have already blocked him. It's clear he has no intention of stopping. Mkdwtalk 01:52, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for making me aware of this. I've blocked him for a further month now. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Robinson, IL article

User talk:173.31.34.252 continues to make disruptive edits the Robinson, Illinois article removing content without explanation for the content removals. The page was protected for a period of thirty days during which times it appears editors attempted to discuss the issue on the articles talk page. User talk:173.31.34.252 never entered the discussion and resumed removing content without reasoning in less than 24 hours after the protection on the page expired. Any assistance you could render this situation would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.11.112.205 (talk) 09:47, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

KRS One album

are you referring to me as the "long term vandal" on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta-Historical&curid=28476710&action=history — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadchild (talk • contribs) 15:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

No, not at all. I was referring to the removal of the junk added here and amended in subsequent edits by this long term IP vandal, who's been doing this sort of thing for literally years. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
ok good to know. just wanted to make sure i wasn't doing anything wrong. Sadchild (talk) 18:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Seagull question...

...awaits you at WP:RDS. --Jayron32 22:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Seagull thieves

Kurt,

I came across these pics of gulls caught red-taloned, and thought you might like to see them: [13]. StuRat (talk) 16:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your contribution to the article Green toucanet! Chrisrus (talk) 04:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Phil. Eagle photo

A photo on wiki commons has just been deleted (see the last half of this for a bit of background), but the version on English wiki still exists. I noticed you placed a template on the Eng. wiki version when the commons version was still around. I have not removed it and not asked snowmanradio since it clearly states that this is for admins, but I guess that template (if not the photo) should be deleted. Despite searching I haven't been able to find anything on deletions on commons versus Eng. wiki. • Rabo³ • 23:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I've now listed the image at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. • Rabo³ • 03:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

89.240.225.83

Is there a reason you massreverted so many of 89.240.225.83's edits? Many of them seemed like they made sense. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 02:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I can answer that, the IP was mass vandalising !!! and I would have suggested a longer block then 31 hours. ZooPro 07:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
He's using a dynamic IP. There's no real point in blocking each address for any longer as he'll have a different IP the next time he logs in. As for my reverts, take a look at User:First_Light/Fauna_vandalism#Nationalist_vandalism for an idea as to the extent and the long-term nature of the problem with this person's edits. Part of his MO seems to be to hide his political/POV-pushing edits and subtle vandalism amongst good/reasonable-looking edits. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 11:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Blanking of Domestic Canary

Total mistake. I meant to blank my talk page and I don't know how the hell I did that one... Thanks for pointing it out (and look, I still have 6 months of signposts. Heh.) --Auto (talk / contribs) 04:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Blocking of Dublin City Soul Festival

My account, Dublin City Soul Festival (Dublincitysoulfestival@gmail.com) has been blocked due to spam by yourself. I was just wondering why that was and if I could get it unblocked? I was going to use it to make a page about the Dublin City Soul Festival on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.167.177.169 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

User: 86.43.178.93

The "edit-war" you mentioned in Great Black-backed Gull is a case of subtle vandalism. The IP address 86.43.178.93 is being used to make many changes to mainly bird articles by making small changes and when referenced, the references are weak or circular. There have been a number of these edits coming from IP addresses of the form 86.43.xxx.yyy. They appear to come from Dublin, Ireland. Several have been blocked but then another one pops up. It takes a considerable amount of time to revert all the damage that they do. Dger (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd seen (and mass-reverted) some of it a while back - when he was changing figures without adding any refs at all. Then I saw that he'd started trying to add refs, so I figured that he'd taken the hint and was trying to edit constructively. I haven't really been around much on here in the past couple of weeks to do anything more than take a cursory glance... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
It seems to me that this user(s) is becoming more sophisticated about hiding the vandalism. Dger (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. When you recently edited Beak, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raptor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Alexander-anderson-hellsing.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Alexander-anderson-hellsing.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Integra-hellsing.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Integra-hellsing.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello!

A GTO For You!
Enjoy! Jayemd (talk) 23:21, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:4-skins-from-chaos-to-1984-cover.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:4-skins-from-chaos-to-1984-cover.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Philp M Parker books

I wasn't able to answer your question on the Ref Desk, but FYI The 2007-2012 World Outlook for Frozen Concentrated Lemonade Weighing Less Than 10 and More Than 13 Ounces has the best Amazon review I have ever read - thought you might enjoy it too :) 184.147.123.169 (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I was browsing some of the reviews on the UK Amazon the other day - it's much the same there. Didn't see a single one from anyone that actually seemed to have read the book though. I'm sure that if his books were cheaper, they would commonly sit alongside the works of such luminaries as B. R. Burg and Hiroyuki Nishigaki in terms of Xmas stocking fillers for people who can take a joke. Supposedly Parker is (or was) working on a machine that could write novels. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:African Grey Parrot red-factor mutations.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:African Grey Parrot red-factor mutations.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kurt Shaped Box. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds.
Message added 19:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Cheers, Riley 19:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Restricted-use media list

An RfC that may interest you has been opened at MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#Restricted-use media list, so please come and include your opinion. – PAINE ELLSWORTH CLIMAX! 09:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Revert

Any reason why this was reverted. Its certainly not vandalism and as no edit summary provided i cant see why. It may not have been a complete update but imo not a reason to revert at all. Of course maybe it was an error but im just interested.Blethering Scot 23:50, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

The person who's been using that IP recently is a long-term vandal (this one's been at it for literally years!) and prolific adder of somewhat-plausible-sounding misinformation, whom I blocked today after I caught him at it once more. That particular revert was made when I reverted the other nonsense he'd added elsewhere today. If you can vouch for the accuracy of that edit, then do feel free to re-add it - and accept my apologies for reverting good info. Sometimes vandals do interspace correct edits in with the damaging ones to make it less obvious that they're screwing around elsewhere on the 'pedia. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Ah that explains it, yeah the info was fine and I've added to it anyway. You know how you just stare at something and just cant see it and i never thought to check the ip history. Thanks.Blethering Scot 22:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Knowledge update kittiwake

Appreciation
Thanks for the knowledge update on the kittiwake and the correction! Pdreijnders (talk) 10:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks very much! :) I think that I'll go and edit the description of that picture of Commons now. Forgot to do that before... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 11:52, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Kittiwakescreenshot.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 19:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

AVICULTURE PAGE

WHO is Weatherall, as he is reported to provide the most accurate definition of aviculture?? Is Weatherall an Australian? If so, it would be a good idea to indicate that he is an Australian. .............................................................................................................. Aviculture does include very large exotic bird breeding farms which are a business, as well as much smaller hobby bird breeding farms. The practice of aviculture has created other human activities: development of commercial bird feeds, development of cage and housing companies, toys and equipment companies, and a focus of veterinary medical studies on avian species, with the resulting creation of national avian veterinary associations in many countries.[1]

Laurella Desborough (talk) 15:38, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Laurella. In all honesty, I don't know who Wetherall is. My involvement with the Aviculture article has been limited to a few minor edits over the years and I have it saved in my Watchlist - so I noticed yours and User:Cherane's (is this your friend?) recent additions. From what I could see, yours and Cherane's edits looked reasonable in terms of content. However, there were major issues with the text and reference formatting, which made the article appear very ugly and broken-looking. I'd assume that this is why another user decided to revert all the edits made by you two. Have a read of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (and it's associated sub-pages) and Wikipedia:Citing sources for details of how things work on WP. It can be quite a steep learning curve sometimes... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Luke Skywalker

Five years passed, and there have been seldom vandalisms since. Can you change protection settings to "pending changes" instead? --George Ho (talk) 17:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Sure. I don't actually remember indefinitely semiprotecting that article. Done for you now... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:03, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Open Talking birds

see Talk:Talking bird --CYl7EPTEMA777 (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Not yet. Discussion is still ongoing as to the proposed new wording, as far as I can see. Give it a few more days. This is how these content disputes are typically resolved. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
i write administrator!!!CYl7EPTEMA777 (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
If this is the case, has an SPI case been opened yet? The IP user has been blocked several times, right? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Common Gull to Mew Gull

Kurt:Can you revert your edits and leave the bird as Mew Gull. We did have a Requested Move discussion (see talk page) which came back with no consensus. Given that, the argument for the IOC standard should prevail which is Mew Gull......Pvmoutside (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Pvmoutside. The article was moved back to Common Gull by User:BD2412. I merely changed the wording back to reflect this. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia:Consensus#No consensus, "If an article title has been stable for a long time, then the long-standing article title is kept. In this case, the long-standing article title is Common Gull, and no move from this title should be made absent consensus for that specific move. bd2412 T 22:19, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Discussion on WP:ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding CYl7EPTEMA777's recent edits and block threats regarding "Talking bird"-named articles. The thread is User:CYl7EPTEMA777, blocking threats, and disruptive edits on Talking bird and related articles. Thank you. —Steel1943 (talk) 21:04, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

African Grey

I note that the main page has been moved, but "Talk:African Grey Parrot" needs to be moved the the new genus page to follow its main page. Snowman (talk) 08:12, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'll fix that now. I hadn't noticed - thanks for letting me know. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 11:59, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

List of apex predators

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 04:03, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's probably a good idea - the Randy Orton vandalism and joke edits still seem to be going on. Done. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Oi! Update

Hi - thanks for the info. I have undone the change, with the official band page that links the 'Oi! Collection'. https://antiestablishment.bandcamp.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staplediet (talk • contribs) 14:24, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Kurt Shaped Box. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 23:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Still here. Just been really busy with other stuff recently. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Welcome back, if you need a break anything at WP:ADMINBACKLOG can help get your mind off of things :D — xaosflux Talk 03:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Kurt Shaped Box.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kurt Shaped Box. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:15, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Information icon Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 00:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ www.aav.org
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kurt_Shaped_Box/Archive_4&oldid=1124802319"