User talk:Luna Santin/Archive 11

Talk – Sandbox – Suggestions

This is an archive of past discussion. Please do not modify it.

If you need to continue or revive one of these discussions, feel free to start a new thread on my talk page.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28

1 « 10 ‹ Archive 11 › 12 » 28

Deep Stealth Productions

I was actually reading over the speedy notice when the article was deleted; I was going to remove it because I felt the article *did* assert notability. An AfD, maybe, but it probably shouldn't have been speedied.--chris.lawson 05:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I don't think it's that big of a deal, just thought I'd let you know. I doubt the article would survive an AfD anyway, but if you do find any third-party sources (the article said something about involvement with the movie Transamerica?), hey, bonus.--chris.lawson 06:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Luna, make sure you note how Clawson is covering the footprints in the sand with his "anti-conspiracy" dust. --72.94.164.52 07:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this sockpuppet case: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/WaffelWTC

Hello, I have seen your reverts to World Trade Center and know you as a good admin. I just opened the sockpuppet case on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/WaffelWTC. I have to leave for an important appointment that will take me away from my computer for several hours. WaffelWTC, etal are vandalizing WTC with racial edits/blanking/pictures etc. I have reported the case but would appreciate if you would follow up for me. I am still somewhat the novice on submitting these sockpuppet cases. Thanks, Ronbo76 15:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually struck twice more after I wrote you. It took a while for the blocking admin to catch the other two. He closed out the case before those two were added/detected as the same attack type. Someone really has an agenda pushing the cat with a symbol on its head. Ronbo76 00:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

user:71.162.76.148 did it twice;
user:WTCGUY once

Thanks

hi I just want to say thanks for heling with that IP hopper I would give you a barn star but you said not to on your home page lolz and sorry for not answering that quick qustion sooner but I went off the internet to cool off :P ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 18:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi, How are you doing? (I love entei 02:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Welcome...

Welcome!!

Hello, Luna Santin, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some useful pages to help you get started:

I hope you enjoy contributing as much as I do. When posting on discussion pages, please sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, or ask your question and place {{helpme}} on your talk page. You may also leave me a message on my discussion page.

I hope you enjoy this picture

Happy editing! I love entei 02:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Songs

Thanks for adding the small option to the template. Could you also replace the image size (100px) with {{#ifeg:{{{small|}}}|yes|30|50}}px?— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 03:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fulsome prison

I didn't know he was into cross-dressing erotic images :D. He really should be blocked as he's either impersonating, or he is, a banned user (not to mention asking female Wikipedians for such images). Will ^{(Speak to Me/Breathe)}_{(Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash)} 00:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think it is Homey, though (if it is, he's changed, as I've interacted with him in the past, and Zeq. I think I left a statement on his ArbCom case.). Damn, I miss the block button. Will ^{(Speak to Me/Breathe)}_{(Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash)} 00:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least he has taste, you must admit. --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 05:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that was the 5th request for seminude images I'd received all day. It was starting to get tiring. – riana_dzasta 05:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please update a protected template.

Greetings Luna. Since you've protected {{MultiLicenceWithCC-By-All-IntEng}} could you please replace the deleted image with Image:CC-logo.svg ? Happy editing. Valentinian ^{T / C} 13:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

thanks for protecting my page and all the sailor moon pages :} ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 22:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled message

why is the atheism thing not NPOV ? belief in god or other supenatural phenomena is a belief that rests on shaky evidence; this is self obvious and npov. That it should need to be defended is clear evidence of the unwillingness of the god people to be neutral; they start with the assumption that atheism is somehow aberrent, as, apparenlty, do you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cinnamon colbert (talk • contribs) 25 February 2007.

reply - exactly. It is not contestable that there is no evidence for supernatural phenomena. That is why they are supernatural. Thus, the assertion I made is a strict logical inference from this, and, as such, it is up to you to say why the logical, scientific view - god does not exist and atheism is there fore a natural logical state - is not correct. I think you, like most atheists, are scared of them (for good reason to, look at Salman Rushdie) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cinnamon colbert (talk • contribs) 25 February 2007.

not saying it is the best - saying, (1) there is not one, repeat NOT ONE piece of evidence that god exists; (2) therefore, belief in god is alogical, and atheism should be the logical default state, just exactly as a belief that the moon is NOT made of green cheese is the logical default state, and people who believe otherwise need to justify themselves (In theUSA, at least in the 60s, it was common, for some strange reason, to tell young children that the moon was made of green cheese.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cinnamon colbert (talk • contribs) 25 February 2007.

no,no,no I don't argue the merits or demerits of anything; I merely ask why is precedence given to something for which there is no evidence. surely, you would not call it npov to say that people who believe in lunar green cheese are unusual ?

Why did you delete the article "antiwindows"

Why did you delete the article "antiwindows" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=antiwindows —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jonwikijonwiki (talk • contribs) 05:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Funnily enough, I asked Luna to delete that article, it doesn't demonstrate a Neutral point of view, and is a borderline attack page. I suggest next time you write an article, you might like to take a read through our guide to Writing your first article. Take care, — D e on555^talk_desk^{sign here!} 06:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: your comments on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.57.149.253

That ain't right, man, to treat us this way and make assumptions. You block a range but can unblock a specific IP within that range -ours is fixed and does not change. we have done no wrong. now whenever someone here at the office visits your site, we get an unwarranted block message. it ain't right. we have accounts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jacquese (talk • contribs) 26 February 2007.

antiwindows

I agree the article "antiwindows" was not for wikipedia I will be more carefull creating articles in the future. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.34.130.247 (talk) 02:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

3RR by anon on Armenian Genocide

I tried to submit a 3RR on user:85.99.64.9 who did more than 20 edits on that article. I think I screwed it up. Can you help me? Thanks, Morenooso 05:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I see it now on the bottom of the page. Too bad it not higher up in the instructions saying copy this and insert at bottom to complete report. Think I should tag the vandal with a level 4 template? That would make it easier for the block. Morenooso 05:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. You probably know way more than this humble padawan. Morenooso 05:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind me meddling with it, but I thought it would help to warn/explain him about Wikipedia not being censored, and I have placed a not-censored tag on the user's tp. As I expected, seeing his edits, the user is from Turkey, so I tried to explain how Wikipedia is still neutral in it. JackSparrow Ninja 06:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible username prob

Hi, I notice that you've acted as clerk in relation to this usurpation request: [1]. I'm concerned that the requested username may be incompatible with username policy which presently prohibits "Usernames mentioning or referring to illnesses, disabilities, or conditions". Ebola seems to qualify within that bracket. I wasn't sure where best to raise this question so thought I'd ask you. Do you think its worth having the name discussed at WP:RFCN? Thanks, WjBscribe 09:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I commented on the user:Diff problem now I think about it. You're quite right, Daniel.Bryant had the discussion at WT:CHU/U and linked the discussion the discussion from WP:RFCN. That's probably the best way to go here as well. Will you st it up or should I? I'm hesitant to do it because I know Essjay wants non-clerks to give WP:CHU and associated pages a wide berth. WjBscribe 09:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, cheers :-). WjBscribe 09:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: System of a Down

Thank-you for taking action on this page, it's much appreciated. --Seraphim Whipp 11:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The IP that has been vandalising the SOAD/SOAD talk is at it again.--Seraphim Whipp 22:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This vandal

Did you say something about trying to get hold of AOL about the 81.blah vandal? He is still refusing to go away; if his ISP won't do anything, can we consider just blocking the whole IP range? He's breaking into the WikiProject now, and we really don't want that to be inaccessible to other IP users. Please let me know what you think. --Masamage 20:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how long will my IP be blocked

re: your comments on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.57.149.253 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jacquese (talk • contribs) 00:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC). Is this permanent?[reply]

Hey thanks

Hey Luna Santin, I really appreciate you reverting the vandalism on my user-page! Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 06:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC) :)[reply]

Thanks

I just went to revert the vandalsim to my user page and found you beat me to it, thanks mate Jaxsonjo 09:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Hi, my ip was recently blocked by wikipedia. I admit that my addition to "grain boundary" article did disrupt the language flow of the paragraph, and i am truly sorry about it. However, i believe that the piece of information was much needed. Again i apologise for my rashness and not discussing it before editing.

Will you unblock my range of IP address please?

Puah85 15:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC) eddie[reply]

Mahabali article under racist attacks

Hello.

Currently there are sers vandalizing the Mahabali article. Can you ensure that there is a neutral version rather than a version attacking Brahmins please? It keeps talking about "Brahminic Vaishnavites" infiltrating Kerala, India.

Thank you! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ag1roads (talk • contribs) 17:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Unblock request

I mostly blocked for the blatant vandalism and now that you have brought up username block, I think you should have a look at this :P...¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 19:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His article in case you're wondering how that's relevant :P: Roger Federer.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 19:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

request regarding Unblock

The request was also to look at Dab's behaviour. By unblocking me himself, he is trying to get around the system. He has been abusing admin powers. He has been publishing original research and removing properly referenced material. How do I go about getting this issue addressed properly. This has been escallated to mediation cabal before please see here [[2]] and I have already requested mediation today [[3]]. As an admin he should be upholding Wikipedia policies and not abusing them. Thanks.Sbhushan 20:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:65.39.114.238

No protest to this block, but I just wanted to leave you a friendly reminder that this user has not been warned since February 22, 2007. The t4 warning was issued six days ago, and who knows if the same person is vandalizing again. Keep up the good work. Nishkid 64 20:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I'm fine with it. Just thought you wanted to know :D. Nishkid 64 02:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Going to a library

Your comments on our discussion page suggest we go to a library or a friend's house to circumnavigate the block you put on our IP range. You put this massive block on to disrupt the vandals of spammers and the spam of vandals. But couldn't then those rogues take the same advice? And post their treason from libraries? You said it is too much work to un-block our valid,fixed IP from the blocked range. And you think it is not too much work for us to register from libraries. And yet you think it is too much work for cplot to do that. And you think all of this makes perfect sense and our appeal is not vaild. Do I have this right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jacquese (talk • contribs) 21:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Ugh

New users can't move articles, so I kinda had to copy-paste it, sorry. -Erfan24 06:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editprotected edit request at Template talk:User5

Since you edit-protected {{User5}}, I should let you know I've requested an edit, at Template talk:User5, to add {{rfcu}} at the end for reference by Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets, where {{User5}} is extensively used. -- Ben 05:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MagicKirin Sockpuppet

Hi Luna Santin. I'm 99.9% sure that Giza D is the latest of the Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of MagicKirin. Contributions include the usual: Cindy Sheehan, Hezboulah, Jimmy Carter. Edits have the same style.-- Zleitzen^(talk) 13:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YAY ID HOPPING VANDLE BLOCKED

thanks for blocking his ISB (thingy) does that meen we can unprotec the sailor moon pages il help get them off but I wanted to ask you first ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 19:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo! Thank you! We love you! --Masamage 22:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal revert

Thanks for the revert to my user page ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same here, thanks. Dionyseus 22:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay You're Human!

Glad to see you're human Luna :P...I rarily see you mistakes therefore I had a theory in which you were a government robot prototype deployed onto an Encyclopedia website, whereby you would assume the identity of a certain Luna Santin and with a red herring proposal be given sysop rights by the community, after which they would send you as a sleeper cell to censor certain unwanted entries and you would extinguish any threats to those entries and by 2010 would launch a sting upon all of Wikipedia and send in droid armies to edit various pages and they would slowly start to replace all the administrators, then the government would gain its total control and cause its own database lock and thereby rendering anyone including Jimmy Wales from editing or entering the Wikipedia domain and all will be powerless...

Ok maybe I have too much of an imagination :P...¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User.

Here: see this. Acalamari 22:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Luna Santin, what should be done about the request at the bottom of that page? Acalamari 00:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I decided to review one of their requests for unblock. I declined it after all the edits they'd done, including vandalism to my user page. Acalamari 00:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

Thanks for reverting my userpage and blocking that IP. They were leaving some weird messages on my talk page! Will (aka Wimt) 00:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle

Actually I looked into twinkle because I got accepted but they're having bugs, so I'm not added to the user list. Red Skunk ^talk 00:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any of the functions. What does it look like? 신 Red Skunk ^talk 00:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have firefox, and I don't see any differences. Thanks for your time. Red Skunk ^talk 00:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doh... Thanks. Can you look at my editor review? Sorry to ask but am semi anxious. Red Skunk ^talk 00:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblockmenow

Please restore user 67.167.130.247. this person did nothing wrong. He made MNAY contributions that were very useful and NEVER did vandalism. He does not want ot register because he does not have a home PC and he is not comfortable registering on a public computer. Yet, you censor for NO REASON of HIS DOING except charitable contribution. Please stop censoring many good people because a few with similar ip gateway do bad things. You judge me unfairly —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unblockmenow (talk • contribs) 05:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Cookie

Here is a chocolet chip cookie for geting rid of that IP hoping troll :} ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 16:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

Thanks for getting the guy who was vandalising the Naruto pages. Although I was having fun reverting his creative additions. Retlor 22:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks! Can you block this guy? He's past his final warning. --Hojimachong^talk 22:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:SunStar Net

I fear this is going to require longer than 15 minutes of semiprotection; this has been going on for days. Sadly enough, see the history of Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians and its talkpage. Regards, Newyorkbrad 23:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:biochemnick

He refuses to discuss the matter and has repeatedly violated the 3RR while inserting information that clearly has a WP:COI. 208.255.229.66 00:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Contra_Nazi

Hi Luna Santin. I saw that you blocked this user. As an admin on German Wikipedia I had some unpleasant experiences with one of the numerous sockpuppets of this guy, and quite frankly I don't like to be called an "automate nazi" on his discussion page. Is it possible to delete these slanderous remarks? Thanks and have a nice day. Stefan64 01:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]

get ried of the decland reson

the block has expierd ples get reaid of the decline teplite —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.222.107.129 (talk) 20:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

DJ Breaker

I created the DJ Breaker article and was not notified it was nominated for deletion. If the page requires more sources, I should be allowed to make the necessary changes prior to the deletion of the complete article. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Breakbackmountain (talk • contribs) 4 March 2007.

Why are you so strict?

why are you so strict I'm a good person. I just thought changing random things would be fun. I guess this site doesn't like it. Fine. Don't IP ban me! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.121.116.204 (talk) 5 March 2007

Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day!

:) pschemp (talk) 01:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usurpation and username probs

Hi Luna, I noticed that Rdsmith4 rejected the Ebola usurpation request. I've asked him if the discussion at WT:CHU/U should be closed as a result. I've also noticed another one that I'm a little uncomfortable with- Death ← Death666. Both those names have the potential to make pople feel quite uncomfortable seeing them in sigs and logs everywhere. I thought it best to ask Rdsmith4 how he wants these matters dealt with in future now he seems to be the main crat dealing with the page. Oh, and looking at the above message, "Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day!" WjBscribe 13:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Bennett/Network neutrality

I noticed you had a word with User:RichardBennett in his talk page before[4].

He's never really stopped, quite frankly he's been insulting everybody. According to him, everybody is a paid shill, every other edit apart from his own are vandalisms and everything anybody ever writes are scurrilous lies. Oh and apparently I'm paid by Google to write for the wikipedia. (See the history list here: [5]) The irony is that he really does stand to get money if Network neutrality gets buried- he's a well-known networking engineer.

If you could at least just have a word with him. His attitude, extremely marginal editing and extremely abrasive nature has kicked off a revert war between him and User:Calton in Network neutrality.

I've been trying to keep Network neutrality balanced, but his idea of balance appears to be 'show how network neutrality is really bad, and delete or reword anything that might make it look good'; I exaggerate, but not a lot. There's just no WP:NPOV; and his edit summaries are inexcusable in my view. WolfKeeper 00:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser and Checkip

Daniel and I seem to have worked out the checkuser/checkip problems. (click to see) -- Ben 07:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser

Thanks for fixing up my checkuser request - bit of a cockup there on my part. Orpheus 08:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

protect

Hi because you removed all the protection on sailor moon and that guys gone for good (touch wood) could you remove the protection on my pages (I would but I have no clue) thanks ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 16:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert on my userpage! :-) CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 16:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto ;) — Matt Eason ^{(Talk  Contribs)} 17:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's back

Did it not work? --Masamage 18:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you re-protect the Sailor Moon article? It got hit like eight times since I logged off last night. o_O --Masamage 18:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

didnt he learn his lession the last time? why wont he go away ♥Eternal Pink-ready for love♥ 18:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Account Creation Disabled

Hi Luna! You recently usernameblocked Edgesboommoobnploijuhygtfrdeswretdrfygtuhyiujnikjuhgyftrde (talk · contribs) with the block log summary "Please read our username policy and choose another name." I don't know if it was your intention, but you used the Account Creation Disabled blocking feature when you blocked this account, so the user was unable to choose another name. Per Wikipedia:Username policy#Blocking: "For inappropriate usernames that may have simply been created by someone without knowledge of this policy, blocks on the username should be indefinite and should typically not use the Account Creation Disabled blocking feature, so the user can create another appropriate username, as we invite the user to do if they have not vandalised." A ecis^Brievenbus 00:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism to KyraVixen's userpage

Sorry, didn't mean to stomp on your revert or warning re User:Varnin's vandalism of User:KyraVixen. When vandalism is particularly malicious, sometimes I warn first (hoping to stop it from continuing) and revert second. Please feel free to downgrade or remove my warning on User talk:Varnin as you see fit. Raymond Arritt 01:23, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the unblock

Thank you for unblocking me, I have read the autoblock policy, and i understand it, however, as I said on my talk page it is just frustrating to get autoblocked. Thank you. -Sunshine 13:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you very much. IrishGuy ^talk 02:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

I still want to be an admin. Will you guide me, o thou great redeemer?--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 05:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A little bit of column "A", a little bit of column "B".--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 02:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think your online. Could you help me become admin? I was disapointed with my last RfA, especially as it was dogged by the RfA/AfD business and am very much still interested in such a responsibility in the community.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 03:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I didn't mean tonight but in the near future. If I/we were to put up an RfA it would be shot down due to my lack of editing recently. Plus it maybe be very hard to get through an RfA right now as this Essjay thing will have the same affect 9-11 did on the airports. I was more leaning to some mentoring for a few weeks if that is possible. Thanks.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 04:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks for the insight. But lets say we start over and pretend I never did that previous RfA. What steps would you suggest I take into becoming an admin???? Cheers.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 04:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, will take it and follow it.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 07:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Bennett

As per your suggestion I created a RFC on RichardBennett. If you wish you could be one of the signatures since you have intervened. Otherwise comments on it are welcome.Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RichardBennett WolfKeeper 08:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you do get a chance, please look it over, there's about 24 hours left or it will lapse. I tried to get ThruranX to help, because he had commented about Richard Bennett's style, and so it counted for the signature. But he said and I quote:

"Leave me out of it. I have ZERO confidence in ANY wikipedia conflict resolution system. Richard Bennett will not stop, and the admins will not try to stop him in any way. Good bye. ThuranX 21:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)" WolfKeeper 08:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Usurpation of Username "Jules"

Hi, You have looked at my request to usurping the username Jules, from my current username Jules1975.

Unless I am mistaken, the usurpation should be allowed once the time for objection is up (on 10th March 2007)? In anticipation, I have changed my signature. I assume it is OK for me to do this and won't prejudice my request? If it will please let me know and I will change it back. Thanks. Jules 15:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

legal issues

Thank you for the warning regarding legal threats and for giving me the benefit of the doubt. You are correct that I was not aware of the rule and I will not do it again.GingerGin 18:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Can you please tell PaxEquilibrium to stop changing my userpage [6] and accusing me of being a sockpuppet of some AfrikaPaprika person? I have been cleared by checkuser here yet he continues. He claims I am this person based on the similarity of this person's IP with that of my own, but that is as far as the similarity goes and this was confirmed by the checkuser. Please can you tell this person to stop?! I don't know what to do anymore or who to talk to, please tell him to leave me alone. Tar-Elenion 19:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction - the Check-User pointed out that Tar-Elenion is most probably User:Afrika paprika.

No it didn't. It pointed out that there is similarity in IP's. It also said But this is really one for duck testing, no? or in other words that you are fishing. Leave me alone already! Tar-Elenion 20:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. I already tried posting there but no one seems to care. Tar-Elenion 19:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you; I planned on bringing up a neutral mediator (the situation seems very problematic). --PaxEquilibrium 19:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Great work on reverting vandalism!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For being extremely fast at reverting vandalism Af648 03:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Af648 03:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From an Inspired and Incapable Wikipedian

Hey There, I'm sort of just getting started in this thing. I'm wondering if you know any good tutors (I don't even know the correct term for them, you see how far I have to go!!??) to point me toward. Thanks for your time. -BurtonM

I replied on his talk page, because I knew you were busy. Real96 18:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usurpation

Thanks for tidying up my dual-request! --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 08:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check User Clerk Help!

Can you please tutor me on how to be a check user clerk? I signed up to be a check user clerk, but I don't know what IRC to download or use and I need some help around with the ropes. Feel free to leave a response on my talk page! Thanks. Real96 19:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

You recently reviewed an unblock request from Emotionlovesyou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I just wanted to let you know that I have found evidence of an anonIP sockpuppet which has been adding the same link since the user has been blocked. More info at User_talk:Emotionlovesyou#Sockpuppet. Nposs 16:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking

Could you please explain why you have blocked me? I have never committed any vandalism in wikipedia and have not found any reason for my blocking? Hope this was a mistake and you can unblock me —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Artfish (talk • contribs) 21:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Phi Kappa Psi

This is a request for procedural information.

I've notice that Phi Kappa Psi is being vandalized from various accounts, to remove the “Controversy” section. Right now, the problem doesn't seem overwhelming, but the fact that various accounts have been involved makes me think that it could become so.

If-and-when this begins to snow-ball, where do I report the problem? —SlamDiego 06:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:82.45.40.51

Thanks for the above delete Luna - I was about to go to the AIV. Have a barnstar!

		The Original Barnstar
		For deleting a page making personal attacks on myself, and being super-quick about it :) as well as your great RFCU work, I, Anthony, award you, Luna Santin the Original Barnstar! Kind regards, anthonycfc ^[talk]

anthonycfc ^[talk] 22:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That Ip

That Ip you blocked for being a userpage troll has somehow created an account! User:Klimpos. As the edits are exactly the same, do something. Retiono Virginian 22:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're also engaging in personal attacks about you. Retiono Virginian 22:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the Ip, and look how similar the edits are to the account. User talk:82.45.40.51. Retiono Virginian 22:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:quick note

Thanks a lot! Sorry about that little "mistake" I did during archiving. I seem to be getting the hang of it, though!

I have a question: do the cases listed as "declined" get automatically archived and removed, or should I wait?--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 00:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it really doesn't matter then...I guess. Do you mind if I use your userbox for RFCU clerks? I couldn't find one on the clerks' page. =( Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 01:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Just to clarify, for the RfA one, are you interested in encouraging people to nominate themselves, to nominate others, or to participate in the ~~voting~~ discussion process? Thanks – Qxz 01:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied in off-wiki conversation. – Luna Santin (talk) 03:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep doing a great job

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your relentless efforts in keeping the hordes at bay. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've been hitting the same IPs

I noticed you are blcoking them without additional. I don't have a problem with it but I've been leaving warnings on their talk page. Is this a waste of time or should I do it even though you have already blocked them? see user_talk:75.126.163.10 user_talk:139.164.130.170. You beat me to the revert by the speed of mouse clicks. :).--Tbeatty 06:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no worries. If you don't mind, I'll just drop the test5 warning if you already blcoked them and I see it on the logs. --Tbeatty 07:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naah. It actually saves me the trouble of the IPvandal report. --Tbeatty 07:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser procedure mess

Hi Luna Santin,

Please return Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Milomedes to the commentable case file area. I have an open request with UnivitedCompany to correct procedural errors[7].

However, I'm concerned that I'm not going to get a response. I was just reading on the bureaucrats' noticeboard that checkusers do burn out. That may be the problem behind this expanding procedural mess.

If I can't get adequate procedural justice, I'll need to make a closing comment on the the case myself to at least declare that I'm not the (tendentious) requester I seem to have been confused with, and therefore can't refile as suggested.

I was also reading that RFCU clerks offer advice about the arcaine checkuser process. If you are too busy in the real world to offer me any advice, can you recommend who to ask or what to do next?

If possible, please reply here. Milo 07:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Milomedes, I see no outstanding requests. Please bear in mind that WP:RFCU (and related subpages) are primarily procedural in nature, and are not intended for discussion -- if you have any remaining comments, you could mention them at Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Milomedes (the talk page), the admin noticeboards, or take them up with the acting checkuser. You could also submit another case request, but I can't comment on the merits (or lack of merits) of any given case. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm complaining about procedure. "Request" may be an ambiguous term of art in this context. Above, I provided a link to UnivitedCompany's talk page where I have laid out my complaint.

As for the case talk page suggestion, part of the problem may be that UnivitedCompany didn't read the talk page, so why would anyone read it in the future to uncover the ambiguous mess on the case page?

Btw, had there been any head of page instruction on tolerable length of comment, I wouldn't have written so much, and my comments might not have been missed (if that's what happened). Milo 08:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, RfCU is not a discussion page. You've been offered a number of routes to continue the discussion, or to otherwise pursue your request. In addition, I would like to point out that the instructions header, outlined in a large green box at the top of WP:RFCU, does in fact point out that lengthy discussions will be moved or refactored. I've pointed out a number of doors which are open to you, including submitting a new request for checkuser -- please choose one of them. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"As I said, RfCU is not a discussion page" There would be no need for a discussion if it were not for procedural issues and errors. Apparently, it's not written down what is supposed to be done when a procedural problem occurs.

"lengthy discussions will be moved or refactored" Those instuctions are for the requester which I was not, rather than a victim commenter, but I agree that I should not have been literal about assuming the lengthyness rule didn't apply to commenters as well. In general, the RFCU instructions need to be improved, and I'm not the only person who thinks this.

"a number of doors which are open to you" Not quite:

• Under the rules, I can't make a new request because that would be trying to "prove my innocence", so that door is closed.

• By probable test, as previously noted, I doubt the talk page door can effectively correct an error on the case page. You wouldn't like it if your username was being confused by inference with a tendentious requester, and your only option was to place a notice on a different page that apparently wasn't read.

• By "acting checkuser" I can only guess that you mean UnivitedCompany; I used that door, and so far, UC has made things worse.

• The only door that leaves is admin noticeboards. Thank you, I'll think about it. Milo 09:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Oops

No worries, I understand it's easy to miss. I can help by trying to be more clear in my reports ;) -- TexMurphy 08:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your suggestion at User:Luna Santin/Improve me (1.5 months late)

Yeah, that sounds like something I need to work on -- are there any particular messages that prompted this suggestion? Luna Santin 23:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I got you mixed up with someone else. But, in fact, there was one minor incident: [[8]]. I probably shouldn't be too picky, though. Patstuart^talk·edits 23:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

protection

I need your attention at the RFP page. Can i have some fishy crackers? 02:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Wikipedia
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Message of the Day

Wikipedia isn't always child friendly. Cheers! BTW, you never told me that you were USURP clerk. Real96 16:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That one IS funny :D Why do I always get the stupid vandals? (sorry for crushing here) -- lucasbfr ^talk 19:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usurpation question

Hi Luna, wanted to ask your opinion about this [9]. I told Anthony cfc at the time that requests should not be deleted but should be left for a crat to tag {{not done}} so they can be archived by the bot. I assumed he would restore it but it seems he didn't... Was wondering if anything should be done about it? One could:

Restore it to the page and let Dan tag it as {{not done}}
Add it to the archive manually
Just leave it deleted

Was wondering what you thought best. Cheers, WjBscribe 19:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should I read your not commenting on this as- "leave it alone and stop making a fuss over nothing" :-)? WjBscribe 19:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. I'd lean towards adding to it the archive but with a 'clerknote' instead of {{not done}}. Seems better than embarassing Anthony by restoring it and explaining to Dan- who might see the readdition as unnecessary bureacracy anyway. Does that seem an alright approach to you? As you say, the rejected requests archive isn't that important. WjBscribe 19:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done [10]. WjBscribe 19:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up on ANI

Thanks, I didn't know that was there. :) --Golbez 23:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Request

This is all I'm doing for now. I'll probably do one to encourage voters at some point – Qxz 01:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! – Qxz 21:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Action on completed checkuser case

You've been quite helpful in the past following up on checkuser cases, so I wanted to ask a favor. If you have time, could you look into the situation I described here? I posted to AN/I but haven't gotten any response. I don't mean to forum-shop, so if you'd rather wait for someone to respond on AN/I (or respond there yourself) I totally understand. Thanks for your time. MastCell 21:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it looks like User:Irishguy commented at User Talk:Martinphi. Not that I wouldn't appreciate you taking a look at it, but thought I'd give you a heads-up that another admin (I think he's an admin) had gotten involved. MastCell 02:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I accept the explanation given me on my talk page. But you seem to think that there is some reason for doubt here, as to whether it is necessary to treat us as the same user. Is this so? What is the consensus? Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 23:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with WP:RFCU

Regarding this comment you left on an RFCU case, what exactly is the indicator template?--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 03:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are a very nice wikipedian

Thank you for unblocking me.

I made an edit I felt was suitable to an article I started but someone else seemed it wasn't[11]. So instead of changing it and warning me, they had me blocked. This was also the first time I had ever been blocked. But this is now resolved thanks to you.

Thank you. Justinpauloberg 04:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question about CSD.

If a page, such as that Nicole Fennimore page you just deleted met two criteria, would/could/should I put them both? I'm sure I could have also put G1 on there as well. Pumeleon^T 04:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock decline [12]

I would have gone with "talk to the hand" —dgies^t_c 05:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock 81.145.241.252

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Luna Santin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please can you unblock the proxy server ip 81.145.241.252 as it is unfair on all AOL users who don't abuse wikipedia. This only encourages the idiots by letting them see that their stupity can affect other users.

Decline reason:

Please follow the instructions. Also, the unblock request goes on your user discussion page, not someone else's such as Luna Santin. — Yamla 19:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

IRC

Luna, I can't get on the Check Users IRC channel. :-( Real96 01:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Thank you, Luna Santin; I can edit now. Acalamari 01:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Question.

I have a question: can admins unblock themselves if they've been autoblocked? For example, if some vandal shared your IP address, vandalized, got blocked by another admin, and you were affected; could you unblock yourself, or not? I'm curious. Acalamari 02:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand if an admin unblocked themselves if another admin had blocked them; they'd be in big trouble; but I thought it would be okay to un-autoblock themselves. Obviously not. Acalamari 03:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for reverting vandalism on my userpage. I'm glad someone was familiar with who that was - all I could tell was that is was definitely not a new user. Natalie 03:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} requests

Thanks! I really mean it.

I've been meaning to give you something for a while, so I guess now is a good time. You seem to be about the most knowledgable (and thus useful) person I've come across in the time I've been here. Even though you didn't know about {{protected image}}. :) I'd award you a barnstar, but you don't seem to want those, so... here's some flowers instead.

yeah, I know... but it's the thought that counts... – Qxz 03:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gah... forcing me to view the page source to read your comments! sneaky... – Qxz 04:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up

Please see Template talk:Birthyr Jerry 03:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

I would like to thank you for everything you did regarding the account created that was named similarily to my own. I know that I reacted foolishly to the comments posted. Thank you for everything. MelicansMatkin 06:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thank you for editing Saare Jahan Se Achcha per my request. --Webkami 09:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chaning User Name

Greetings,

Got your link from Wikipedia, as they refer to users for assistance. We are trying to change our user name (actually a typo error), and have not been able to locate the request entry box. Our current User name: "freedomproject" and we would like to change it to new user name: "Freedom Project"

could you guide us in this matter please? Thank you. - Gail. dpexecasst@aol.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Freedomproject (talk • contribs) 15:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]