User talk:Alison/Archive 13

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Edit history is available here (warning: linked page is extremely huge). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Messedrocker (talk • contribs) 06:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Alison

User:King Lopez has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

For You Alison. King Lopez ^Contribs 09:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Awww - thank you :) I'll pass it on - Alison ☺ 05:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my page. Arimasen is a known village idiot in the Bemani community. You were there to correct my page for me, when I didn't get around to it. Thanks again. --Dj HaQ 17:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. That vandal has been indefinitely blocked now - he was previously blocked and was on a bit of a spree - Alison ☺ 05:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much

It's unusual for me to log in and not be met with harassment from Gaimhreadhan, so you seem to have resolved the problem. Brixton Busters 17:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. His block expired some days ago but he's not returned since - Alison ☺ 05:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been referred to as the current Provisional IRA propaganda units', please help. Thanks. Brixton Busters 13:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No, you have not. Please try and read more carefully...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 19:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Help:Logging in undo?

Any clue as to why when I tried to undo the move, it went to Help:Logging instead of Help:Logging in (history) ? ~Kylu (u|t) 05:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd say you got tripped up with the space in the title, somehow. I was doubly-careful to ensure it was not escaped or anything. Though nobody noticed my fixing it :) - Alison ☺ 05:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I noticed, thanks! :D ~Kylu (u|t) 05:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

RE:Amish troll

Hello there Allison, according to the ip's contribs that edit was his/her first offense. Am I missing something here. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 21:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep. I never block on first offence, but the 'Steph is Amish' vandal has been at it for weeks now. See [1] and so on. They just move IPs - Alison ☺ 21:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems friends of the Amish shouldn't be allowed to edit articles either. =P Krimpet 22:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh! - Alison ☺ 22:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Help!

I need you to visit my Userpage and Fix the icons at the very top right of the page. They're clahing and I don't know why.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 03:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I moved the ribbon from position right=30 px to right=90 px and it looks fine now. Sorry to bud in, Alison. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 03:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Flyguy. I tweaked them about just a little more to resize / align edges, etc - Alison ☺ 03:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem! I didn't want to play around too much. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 04:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, be bold!! :) - Alison ☺ 04:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Will do! I figured responding to queries on your talk page was pretty bold already ;) -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 04:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

That'll probably stop 'im for five minutes, tops.

Just saying. Any possibility of a prefix block, or would that be too damaging? HalfShadow 07:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Lemme check. The range looks a bit too wide - Alison ☺ 07:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Krimpet/DaisiesI am an idiot. A troll like me is someone who starts arguments with disinfo or liges, so I am one of them. I do, however, flame. You are one of hundreds of incredible and wonderful cops who does or says things that takes thinking beyond entry-level college/university. -lysdexia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.108.164.11 (talk) 07:38:16, August 2, 2007 (UTC)

I know yer a 'er. So am I (do I look like an 'Al'?). Anyways - fun's over with Riana. Sorry for that. By the way, WP:SOCK refers to using multiple accounts (or addresses) to evade blocks. Kinda like you're doing. Please also take my advice and read WP:AGF, WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL and WP:3RR. Work for you? - Alison ☺ 07:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Krimpet/Daisies'Al' is not contradictory. As I'm banned, my "block" is forever, which is why Wp is a corrupt catch-22. faith? I will not assum any faith (faketh); it has nothing to do with the work here. The NPA page still does not explain what attacks are, nor does the civil page explain what civil is. That was true the year/years ago I was banned, and it's still true today. S-whatever was the one who broke the 3RR. I get banned for everyone else's sins. -lysdexia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.108.164.11 (talk) 07:48:39, August 2, 2007 (UTC)

Oh, don't talk to the badlife, Al. HalfShadow 07:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Where's my flowerz?? I want my pretty flowerz??? - Alison ☺ 07:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Here ya go, hopefully this'll be the last that we need =) Krimpet 07:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Pretty, pretty :) - Alison ☺ 07:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Technical question re: RfCs

Hey Alison, hoping you can answer this question -- just a technical question about who can or cannot certify a user-conduct RfC.

I started two RfCs for users in the long-time battle of the Battle of Washita River -- Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Custerwest and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/HanzoHattori -- and have been waiting around anxiously for User:Murderbike to get online & certify them as another user intimately involved in the same dispute. Just now, another user, User:The Evil Spartan, who has not at all been involved in the Battle of Washita River disputes but who has had much prior contact with HanzoHattori, came in to certify the HanzoHattori RfC. But it seems to me that his certification is invalid, as he hasn't been involved in the same dispute, but rather in other, unrelated disputes. I said this to him, but he thinks he possibly is okay to certify this. (See User talk:The Evil Spartan#HanzoHattori RfC.)

Is his certification valid? Thanks. --Yksin 19:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe so. From WP:RFC, "Before requesting community comment, at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem. Any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute may be deleted after 48 hours. The evidence, preferably in the form of diffs, should not simply show the dispute itself, but should show attempts to find a resolution or compromise. The users certifying the dispute must be the same users who were involved in the attempt to resolve it." - that would indicate that, as User:The Evil Spartan has not been directly involved in trying to resolve the dispute, they cannot certify it. - Alison ☺ 19:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that's what I thought. Thanks. I'll let him know, & cross my fingers Murderbike shows up soon. --Yksin 19:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like MurderBike just showed up :) - Alison ☺ 19:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI, a related article RfC has been initiated at Talk:Battle of Washita River#Request for comment. We could really use some comments from people outside the dispute. We've been dealing with this since July 1. Thanks. --Yksin 02:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Is this okay...

[2] :-p ~ Wikihermit 22:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh! :) - Alison ☺ 23:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Re [3]

I would ask that you not remove this link unless you have a specific objection to its inclusion. Per Help:Reverting, reverting a good-faith edit should not be done lightly; at a bare minimum, this would seem to imply that one should not revert a good faith edit when one does not actually disagree with its content, merely for reasons of fairness or process. John254 01:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I have not removed it since. However, re-adding it as quick as it was smacks of triumphalism and as there is so much debate over it and a lot of unanswered questions from User:Steinsky on the ArbCom request. I have a number of reservations myself, from a cursory glance as the site appears to be a portal for local companies touting their business - Alison ☺ 05:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello.

May I inquire as to how people (such as yourself, for one) have customized their usernames? It's something I've been seeing a lot of lately and was curious. I'm sure there's docs on it somewhere that I'm too blind to find.. Th 2005 10:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You mean customise your signature? Wikipedia:Signatures tells you most of what you need to know. For more exotic signatures, there are people here who can maybe help you out. I got mine from my friend User:NikoSilver and his signature shop. I can do simple ones myself, if it's any help to you - Alison ☺ 05:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

G'Day

Hi Allison, I really love your userpage, do you mind if I take a few bits I love and make it mine too? :) Anyway, was just wondering what you meant about the Anthony Chidiac article. It hasnt been deleted 5 times, just once, and the name then got "salted" because I reposted a completely revised article up and put a (hangon) saying that in a few days citable references to his works will be provided. If you look on my userpage, looks like both myself and others are providing such links and, like wikipedia, will only get better with time too. What I need to to give this article "birth" in wiki for others to be able to work with/on, as its my userspace and I want to work on other things now. The guy is very notable, doing things with famous people for decades, and creting change in the industry through creative ways. He is rumoured to be on the Zune project (secretly), though no media report is out yet on it so all I can note is his current status and past achievements with technologies. thoughts? Thanks for your time. T --T3Smile 12:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Feel free to take what you like from my userpage :) Re. the Anthony Chidiac article, I have added further comments at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Content review. I can possibly email the sources to you but there have been serious issues with that article - Alison ☺ 21:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Your note

Hi Alison, thanks for asking before acting. I don't know this editor, but I see that he's been blocked 4 times over the last month. My own experience is that being over lenient and reversing blocks often results in repeat behavior. I would highly recommend that instead of unblocking you simply reduce his block, say to 48 hours, on his promise of good behavior. Then, you can monitor his continued conduct, and if he persists in violating rules, he should be blocked for at least a week next time, with no parole. Consider that by being over lenient, you could actually be harming his own chances at reform. In any case, I leave it to your discretion. Crum375 19:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, Crum375. That sounds perfectly reasonable to me. I'll reduce the block to 48 hours, as suggested and monitor the situation. I agree that repeated unblockings are not a Good Thing as it can instil in an editor that blocks can always be reverted. Thanks again - Alison ☺ 20:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Thanks again for consulting - I wish more admins could follow your lead. Crum375

No problem. I believe it should be the default behaviour for admins to do that. - Alison ☺ 21:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Userpage protection

Hi there. I just semi-protected your userpage as it's been the subject of intense levels of vandalism. Hope you don't mind :) - Alison ☺ 21:32, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. I'm planning on making one for myself, by the way... eventually. Hopefully soon. Just after I deal with this one other thing... ;) Gscshoyru 21:37, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, a quick question -- how did you become aware of this? I don't think I've dealt that much with you in the past, etc, though I could be completely wrong. Gscshoyru 21:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The Walmart article was up on WP:RPP recently and I investigated page protection. Your username was in the recent edit history and I clicked to take a look. Your userpage history speaks volumes :) - Alison ☺ 23:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi

If you get a chance could you look at this Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma, Counter-revolutionary is replacing 'Killed' with 'murdered' yet here he argued that 'murdered' was Pov and edited this article to 'Killed', I ask him about this on his Talk page and he is being contradictary on the issue, he even manages to have a dig at VK, who is not even involved in the discussion.

When I reverted his edit, another editor Biofoundationsoflanguage reverted it back so I ask him in his talk page why, it would appear we are supposed to edit as NPOV, but they are think they can ignore the rules of WP.--padraig 23:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Y'know, Padraig, I'd really love to help but I try my best to steer clear of Irish political articles as I've my own POV when it comes to certain matters and I can recognise that. Can you possible bring this matter to another admin or maybe get back to me here if you cannot? As a child, I recall Lord Mountbatten's death (and that of a local child) and have strong views on the subject - Alison ☺ 23:29, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Alison we all have views on issues but we are all expected to be neutral in our editing on articles, I have brought up other issues with another admin in the past few days, and they have been ignored, involving another editor and one of those mentioned above. So I decided to ask you because you seemed to be fair in your handling in the few cases I come across your input.--padraig 23:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Padraig, I've thought about it some more and took a cursory look over some of the issues and to be honest, I need to recuse myself on this one. Sorry, but I'd really rather not. Can you possibly place a request on WP:ANI so someone else will pick it up? - Alison ☺ 00:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not being contradictory. I was pointing out a difference between the killing of an elderly man by terrorists (see Prince Louis and Sir Norman Stronge, bart.) and a shooting by a legitimate army at Bloody Sunday. --Counter-revolutionary 08:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

my page was deleted

and I need it back. I worked on it for over a month and wanted to publish it by aug.28, 2007. I last saw it on AugM 1st. Can you help me? It's about an R and B singer whose first release is Aug. 28th.

My email addr is lestermar@aol.com

Thank you so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LeddyLover (talk • contribs)

Hi there. Can you let me know the name of the article & I can look into its history? Thanks - Alison ☺ 00:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support, and for the nice note on my talkpage. Please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --El on ka 01:11, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hope my report to AIV was done correctly. It's been an interesting night, having just stepped out of a dispute in which I probably should've been blocked over had it not been my honestly admitting I should be blocked. :P Anyways, sorry for the inconvenience. :) -WarthogDemon 07:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

If I may point out her incivility seems to be continuing following comments on both her and my talk page, the latest being: [4] and [5]. -WarthogDemon 06:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm. She's toned it down a lot - Alison ☺ 07:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Congrats

Hey, congrats on living in the states for a year now! Hope it's been a good one! Jmlk 1 7 07:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh. Thank you :) Believe it or not, when you posted that it was one year to the day! It's been great so far - better than dreary, rainy Ireland - Alison ☺

Kappa

I really don't think that the user needs to be blocked, I've responded evenly and neutrally throughout, and have explained what he/she did wrong (even though he/she accused me of meatpuppetry, lol) and what the solution would be (to have someone make a disambiguation page), but it seems the person is simply emotional, from looking through their talk page. Take the report down, no need to block them, honestly it doesn't bother me, I just erase the bad words, lol. I do appreciate you and WarthogDemon looking out for me, though! (And Hi Alison! :) ) ^Ariel♥Gold 07:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I've left it up, because what he said there was totally uncalled-for and it needs to be pointed out. Good for you for keeping your cool, too. It looks like everything's over now, too - Alison ☺ 05:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I knew

Oh sorry, I knew they were there somewhere, all I remembered was Jtdirl, see he's back, on and off, just checked. Keep up the good work;) GH 18:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) Yeah, I'd forgotted about Jtdirl - he's kinda left now. His last words were "WHo gives a fuck?", which doesn't bode well. I think User:Kwekubo might be a sysop - he definitely is on ga.wiki. Speaking of which - have you thought about editing over there as Gaeilge? - Alison ☺ 21:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Trying to get rid of me? How sweet! Bit rusty, but if you promise to proof my grammar, then all things are possible. Bheadh sé go deas, ach muise, tá seomraí go leor anseo. Bí anseo amáireach! :) . JT was was good, think he got tired of being admin, and the groundhogs. Ever considered crat? He and moi made the papers once, tell you as Gaeilge, am eile :) -GH 22:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It might be nice for a change. I hang out over there to edit articles, something which I can't do here any more. I spent a wonderful hour or two on the ga:Séamus Ennis biog and have spent some time moving pics to Commons and interwiki'ing them, just to get a break from administrivia. Change is as good as a rest, sometimes :) I'm over here. As for 'crat; forget it! I'm so not 'crat material. Besides, we just got two new ones last month - Alison ☺ 05:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC) (What? Get rid of you?? Some chance of that happening! :-) )

Yeah, that would be a challenge of Pygmalion proportions, to go from primary sixth grade Gaeilge to post-primary honours sixth grade Gaeilge in the next couple of months, and become the consummate translator. Might just give it a try, need some reading material, and not Buntas Cainte. Something new, I like it ;¬!! GH 14:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Listerslashrimmer

Hi Alison, sorry to bother you again, but I have a question about banning. Listerslashrimmer recently made the most revolting case of vandalism I've ever seen on Wikipedia - see here for a comparison of before and after my reverting it. Moreover, ClueBot immediatly reverted it, but Listerslashrimmer reverted it back (at which point I reverted it back to ClueBot's version). I placed a warning on his user page, but it stikes me that this should surely be worth an outright ban, regardless of having gone through the correct number of warnings or not. Could you take a look, and let me know what you think? Cheers, _TheIslander 20:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that! It's yet another sock of User: Nam3witha3init. I've indefinitely blocked them now. Thanks again :) - Alison ☺ 21:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem - it's just nice to see another vandal (or sock of a vandal, in this case) banned ;). Cheers! _TheIslander 21:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Article Assistance

Alison - thanks for your assistance in the past. I was wondering if you can assist with a current dispute on an article. I am asking several admins to review a list of links for reliably. If you can simply take a moment and comment on those sources which are reliable enough for WP policy. Please see: User talk:Tiggerjay/Resolutions/1 Thanks in advance Tiggerjay 05:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile!


Gscshoyru has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Gscshoyru 12:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

RFPP

While you're online, would you mind taking a look at this please, Alison? Thanks. Acalamari 00:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Done! There's not enough activity to justify full prot at this time. There's only a few edits per day and it's not good to needlessly lock people out. I've weighed in on RPP now. Thanks ;) - Alison ☺ 00:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; I knew there wasn't enough disruption to fully-protect the page, but I wanted a second opinion on extending the current protection. Thanks for giving that second opinion. :) Acalamari 00:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd say it's fine for the moment on that duration so I didn't change it. Extending it at this time is ostensibly pre-emptively protecting "just in case" it stays bad (and hopefully, it won't). Folks can always come back and request re-prot if it does. It's no biggie - Alison ☺ 00:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

xx

And why hasn't Hornetman receieved a similar warning? --Endlessdan 20:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Because I only saw your comment. Someone else's behaviour does not justify your personal attack. If you feel strongly about it, the proper thing to do is warn them for making personal attacks but remaining civil yourself - Alison ☺ 20:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Endlessdan

I was trying to work it out with him, but ok. Could you talk to him about putting down on my lifestyle (I don't knwo how else to put it). Thanks in advance.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 05:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Hornetman, take the high ground on this one; remain civil and ignore any personal attacks here. I've officially warned both of you now. Next one who persists gets blocked so don't let it be you ;) - Alison ☺ 05:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Email...

...you have. Sarah 06:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Tks. Replied :) - Alison ☺ 06:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you please restore an article?

I read that you were one of 44 admins who were willing to restore deleted content so it could be reviewed. I'm new to wikipedia and am not entirely sure how this process works. If I am not going through the process correctly or doing something incorrectly please let me know and I will fix it. I recently created a page on a national organization, Student Peace Action Network. One user, Jaranda deleted this page twice. The first time was justified as I prematurely saved the page with only the title. Like I said I am new and I sometimes make mistakes. Before I could amend this the page was deleted. However, after recreating the page this time with content (all of which was sourced) Jaranda came back a second time and deleted it again just time saying that the Student Peace Action Network is an insignificant group. I do not feel this is true and I also feel like the article shows the significance of the group. There are also several similar groups (student antiwar/peace/activist groups) that have had long standing wikipedia pages. I posted my feelings in Jaranda's talkpage.

I'm not trying to be difficult I just feel like Jaranda's deletion was unjustified and that there should at least be some discussion over the significance of the Student Peace Action Network before it is completely deleted. That's why I'm asking you to restore the page so its content can be reviewed and we can discuss the issues at hand before deleting the article (if it comes to that, but I hope it does not as I feel this group warrant's a wikipedia page).

Thanks, chipMD —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChipMD (talk • contribs)

Hi Chip. I've restored and userfied the article to User:ChipMD/Student Peace Action Network, so it can be reviewed. Just mark it {{db-userreq}} when you're done with it, but it looks like you've some work to do to establish notability - Alison ☺ 19:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I well work to establish notability just give me a little bit of time (a week tops) and it will be there. I assure this organization is signifcant, its info on most of their work is not available on the web (or easily found), but I'm searching for reliable sources that can detail their numerous notable actions and as long as someone doesn't come along and delete the article while I'm working on it I should be able to fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChipMD (talk • contribs)

Please don't call me dude

While I'm sure you are an attractive woman, you and I are NOT friends and will NEVER be friends. I'm sick and tired of being banned. PLEASE leave me alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.120.34 (talk • contribs)

Well, given that I blocked you four months back for rampant incivility, twice, and all you got was 30 hours, that was kinda lucky. However, you still persisted in being incivil and generally rude and obnoxious and thus you picked up a block of a few months from a less tolerant admin. So long as you're nice to others, you probably won't hear from me - Alison ☺ 22:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah - blocked by User:LessHeard vanU for another 6 months, I see. That didn't take long - Alison ☺ 22:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

More anti-Irish Witch-hunts????

Hi Ali; been away for weeks but trying to pick up the pieces it apears that Sir Fozzie's ArbCom thanks in large part to Sony) is proposing to ban me for ONE YEAR????!! Mainly on the basis that I insist on stating - (in talk pages, where necessary to explain my edits in relevent Wiki articles - not in the articles themselves) - that the British Empire was a genocidal entity (which it manifestly and demonstratively was!).

Can you confirm if I am misreading this?? Frankly, if true, it is an astonishing, naked attempt by the Anglo-American mindset to turn Wiki into their own propaganda organ. Please look into this and advise? The price of FREEDOM is eternal vigelence. (Sarah777 - far away still) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.253.54.232 (talk • contribs)

Hi Sarah. I was kinda wondering where you'd gone, actually. I've not looked into your RfC in ages but it looks kinda dead in the water, esp. given that some of the folks commenting are sailing a bit close to the wind in other areas. I dunno. I reckon the RfC will end up being closed by default and everyone will move on. I've not looked into the Famine ArbCom in a while but will get back to you later. - Alison ☺ 05:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

If you are right, Alison, that would be excellent news.

As I said in a recent e-mail to one of Sarah's antagonist's: "Unlike those propaganda pushers ******* ******* and ******* who only ever edit articles relevant to and in order to advance the ***** **** provo viewpoint, Sarah777 has fashioneed literally hundreds of Irish Geography articles (especially with regard to transportation) and done some absolutely fantastic and backbreakingly intensive and productive work in non controversial areas. Yes, she can lose her rag like you and I both but surely a ban on just the controversial articles would be more appropriate?"...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 18:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Sarah: I do hope Alison's polished up her crystal ball recently, and is not wrong. Since I know you've got a terrific and wicked sense of humour I thought I'd share with you this quote which just arrived from an editor I respect and admire:
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.

- George W Bush,"...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 18:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

It actually looks like Sarah is being proposed for a 1-year ban. I'm a little surprised. However, it looks like quite a few of the ArbCom members are not endorsing that solution, so we'll hopefully see how it goes - Alison ☺ 01:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi folks! Something surreal here - my unsigned comment above wasn't me - though I share the sentiments if not the poor spelling. What the **** is going on?? Can a few Admins simply ban folk they don't like? A ban would be so bizarre that surely the Wiki establishment can't be THAT nakedly biased - can they?? I also note Sony's gallant attempts to push his crusade against me in the Arb.com (as my other self above notes) by relentless twisting of the facts. Sorry Ali; can't forgive this time - I had been giving that **** the benefit of the doubt - pl read what he wrote and tell me why I should any more. This whole thing is a complete heap of ****! the Arb.com wasn't even about me - so Mr Sony figures he'll use it instead of his failed RfC. (Sarah777 01:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

F.y.i

[6]...Gaimhreadhan ^{(kiwiexile at DMOZ)}talk • 00:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Sock

[7] Lucky you :) If someone does a check on me, Riana, or Daniel, we'll all be desysopped, and no one will believe any explanations... --DarkFalls ^talk 10:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Throughput

Ye, thanks for the thought. Regrouping. GH 10:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Gaimhreadhan

Alison, there is a suggestion (or more) that Gaimhreadhan has died...have you any information? Sarah777

Oh no!! Yes, it's possible but I'd rather not say given that it relates to private emails he has sent me. I certainly hope that's not the case, I really do. - Alison ☺ 21:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I know there was postings on his user page about his medical situation. I pray that this is not the case, but if it is true.. I pray that God puts his spirit at rest :( SirFozzie 08:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Foz, I'm in phone contact with W. Frank now & don't want to say any more at this stage. It's not good ... - Alison ☺ 08:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Jesus, I hope the guy is OK.--Vintagekits 08:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I had an email today directing me to this Talk Page. I sincerely hope that the gentleman concerned has not passed away. He telephoned me some weeks back and I found him a most pleasant fellow to chat to. He told me then of his health problems and I have to say they sounded rather serious. Let us pray that this is just a rumour. David Lauder 19:56, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Gold heart

Allie, take a look at this post and this AN request. Grim news, but thought you should know. --DarkFalls ^talk 13:16, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Darkfalls, and thanks for carrying out the administrivia, etc. It's sad to see him go & I'll miss him. We're still in email contact, of course - Alison ☺ 21:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Reversion query

You have mail. Rockpocket 01:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

... as do you. Thanks for that - Alison ☺ 02:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Just dropping by...

As promised, one article outside my usual interests. Now I just need to add a few links from various other articles, and my work is done. If anyone reading this wants to make the lead bigger feel free, I'm feeling too lazy. Oh, and I decided not to go for the name I was thinking of, so no need for you to try and earn brownie points. Glasgow Two 19:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh - you seem awfully familiar, somehow :) Nice to see you back here. Just a short visit, I'm thinking ... - Alison ☺ 22:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Just dropping by...

As promised, one article outside my usual interests. Now I just need to add a few links from various other articles, and my work is done. If anyone reading this wants to make the lead bigger feel free, I'm feeling too lazy. Oh, and I decided not to go for the name I was thinking of, so no need for you to try and earn brownie points. Glasgow Two 19:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh - you seem awfully familiar, somehow :) Nice to see you back here. Just a short visit, I'm thinking ... - Alison ☺ 22:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Interested

When you refer to the Irish language, do you mean Gaelic as a whole? Because many people in Scotland would consider that their language too. I think it would be better if you reffered to it as just Gaelic! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattbroon (talk • contribs)

Not really. The Irish language is a Goidelic language; it's a subset of Gaelic. Scottish Gaelic or Gàidhlig is a distinctly different dialect. I can just about understand it to hear and read but cannot speak or write it very well - Alison ☺ 05:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Do most people in ireland speak this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattbroon (talk • contribs)

Yup. Most people in Ireland can speak some, as it's mandatory in school. However, there aren't too many that are fluent. Take a look at w:ga:Príomhleathanach to see the main page of the Irish Language Wikipedia, just for interest - Alison ☺ 05:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Could You Take A Look At This?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Alan Johnson looks very suspicious to me given it's the nominator's first edit here, and is shortly followed by an IP voting on it. -WarthogDemon 03:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

please help me upload a photo i just contributed

Hi there, I noticed that you are helpful and know what your doing here on wilipedia.

Also I noticed you protected the article biography of " Luka Rocco Magnotta" , I tried just now to add a photo that I uploaded of him....but I am unable because its protected... can you help me please and thank you to upload a photo of him?

I have tried to upload a photo but I can never do It...its soo complicated and I can never get it it work, please help me when you get some time, if you are able to.

Thank you so much.

Just dropping by...

As promised, one article outside my usual interests. Now I just need to add a few links from various other articles, and my work is done. If anyone reading this wants to make the lead bigger feel free, I'm feeling too lazy. Oh, and I decided not to go for the name I was thinking of, so no need for you to try and earn brownie points. Glasgow Two 19:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh - you seem awfully familiar, somehow :) Nice to see you back here. Just a short visit, I'm thinking ... - Alison ☺ 22:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Terrorist

I have replied to you on W. Frank's page. I realise this may be a difficult time for him, but he has repeatedly attacked me today. Perhaps if he cannot be civil he should not be editing right now? Thank you. Brixton Busters 16:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you could try not deliberately goading him, and others, as you are doing on, e.g., M62 coach bombing? Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 16:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been more than polite with him, and received abuse in return. Brixton Busters 16:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I concur with Bastun here. I'm not seeing these 'attacks' by W. Frank that you refer to. I see a lot of goad-and-response, though with much of the goading coming from yourself - Alison ☺ 16:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Please show me one edit to his talk page where I have goaded him, I have been nothing but polite. You don't consider these attacks?

"Try and stop peddling political propaganda"
"you've been editing long enough to know that by now" (I think we both know what that is alleging)
"Now I've read all the specious arguments you've advanced in the cause of advancing political propaganda"
"your consistent and concerted campaign of obfuscation"

Brixton Busters 16:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall saying anything about his talk page? - Alison ☺ 16:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Can you please show me where I've goaded him then? Brixton Busters 16:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

You've been at it for weeks now, primarily with Gaimhreadhan, but now your attention has switched to W. Frank. Furthermore, you're carrying out a petty revert-war on the M62 coach bombing article, amongst others. Citing WP:OR because you're unimpressed with a BBC news article which points out the number of children that the brave freedom fighters ~~murdered~~ (sorry, that was collateral damage, right?) in a bus bomb. And on it goes - Alison ☺ 17:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I have little desire to get involved in a discussion regarding the IRA, but I will at least clarify my position. It is a documented fact that they have generally tried to avoid civilian casualties, as such deaths are counter-productive to their aims. I find the claim that they would knowingly target a coach containing the families of soldiers, including children, to be an exceptional claim not backed up by any source. Thank you. Brixton Busters 17:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

"I have little desire to get involved in a discussion .." - indeed. "It is a documented fact that they have generally tried to avoid civilian casualties" - define 'documented' and 'generally' (a weasel word if ever there was one). The PIRA have a long history of murdering innocents, children included. Ask the Warrington victims or Jerry McCabe's family, for example. The vast majority of people on the island of Ireland despise the Provos, to be honest. I grew up amidst that and had friends - just kids -who were caught up in the violence. My cousin missed being killed in Canary Wharf; he was just some Paddy doing his day job, is all. And then there's the whole matter of proxy bombing. So don't get me started on the Provisional IRA and their "generally tried to avoid civilian casualties" - that's complete and utter nonsense - Alison ☺ 18:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC) (getting an idea as to why I don't edit Irish political articles, yet? I keep my POV in check. Suggest you do the same)

So here's my POV. I never bring this to the fore on WP; this is my talk page and I may comment on it here. As an admin, I never let this interfere with any decisions I made; hence my blocking of Gaimhreadhan at one point, on the harassment of your good self. Bear that in mind before you begin to accuse me of POV elsewhere - Alison ☺ 18:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Also I have replied regarding the "blanking" on my talk page, there is more to what I did than is initially apparent. Thank you. Brixton Busters 17:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Noted - Alison ☺ 17:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ali - how can someone so nice be so wrong? Of course there was collateral damage (a US Army phrase/euphemism, btw). Compared to the UK or US armies the IRA were very careful indeed. Think the biggest car-bomb. Double it in size. Put two of them under an aeroplane. Drop them on a civilian area in Basra or Baghdad or Fallaja or Lebanon or Afghanistan.

"THAT is "murdering innocents". And it is going on today; in Afghanistan, in Iraq. The "great majority of Irish" who "despised" the IRA but sit mum about the mass murderers passing through Shannon are in no position to "judge" the IRA. They have forfeited that right. Utterly. IMO. (Sarah777 19:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC))

Well, Sarah, I keep my POV in check, so my opinions stay my opinions. This is also why you have no idea as to what my opinions re. the US and Iraq, Shannon, etc are. I'd hate to think you were pre-judging me on such matters based upon your perceptions of the Irish people as a whole (100,000+ of whom marched on Dublin when the Iraq war began). At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who's murdering the innocents; it's all wrong and there is no exoneration to be had based on the actions of whomever else is doing whatever. Wrong is wrong. I carry my POV with me into the real-world; I don't do so here, though it's hard at times. That allows me to speak in support of you[8], while blocking Gaimhreadhan[9], for example. Reverting vandalism on both Ian Paisley [10] and Gerry Adams [11] with equal measure, as I do. I think you know this - Alison ☺ 22:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Calling anyone or any specific organisation terrorist on wikipedia is not a good idea. It just creates arguments and is known here as a weasel word. Sarah as ever has a point but obviously so do those who oppose her points and this scenario is exactly why terrorist, along with dictator, is a word to be avoided on wikipedia when dealing with specific people/organisations, SqueakBox 23:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ali, the bit that got my attention was the bit about the majority of Irish people despising the IRA for killing civilians while having no such strong feelings about facilitating the killing of hundreds of thousands of them in abroad. My crankiness on this point was triggered by the huge ruckus about the Heathrow slots from a whole population who have remained steadfastly mute about profiting from Rendition Central! I guess my point was that the odium of middle class RoI is hardly a measure of morality. I was one of those 100,000 btw! And I'd wager that the % of "IRA-despisers" was somewhat less in that group than in the population as a whole. The trouble with being opposed to murdering civilians is that nearly EVERYONE I know has their exceptions. I've met a lot of folk who claim to be pacifists - but none that actually are! The old "What if..." test invariably meets with "for God's sake don't be ridiculous, that is a TOTALLY different situation" exceptionalism! Anyway, Ali, I'm certainly not suggesting there is anything wrong with YOU having a POV!! (Sarah777 00:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC))

Guess what? I was there, too :) Which was why your comment above annoyed me so. Also, I have family who were caught up in Canary Wharf back then, so I tend to keep away from all this sectarian mess. See my reluctance to get involved as an admin re. Pádraig's request the other day - Alison ☺ 00:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC) (and pleeeease; Allie, not Ali :P )

Come on, Sarah, the Camp for Climate Action is about the saving the planet which isn't just about we humans, SqueakBox 00:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well Sq, the planet will continue to exist till the sun explodes! We humans won't, individually or collectively. So the notion of saving it is a bit egocentric. Anthropormorphic, even. (Sarah777 01:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC))

What defending our human survival on this planet is anthropomorphic? Natural disasters dont discriminate between races, cultures etc. Perhaps I am being selfish as I live by the sea and I dont want to see my home and business submerged. Whatever, I am very cynical of most types of radicalism, certainly these protestors as much as the IRA, ETA, FARC etc, except that they dont murder and hopefully wont even disrupt business as normal (whose disruption I would strongly oppose as it solves nothing but may detract from real solutions to our planetary problems), SqueakBox 01:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah but Squeak - those "radicals", combined, haven't killed in their entire history as many innocent civilians as the bomb on Nagasaki - or the invasion of Iraq. And murder is what that is though, oddly, it doesn't crop up very much in the old verifiable sources, does it? Sources in these Islands who regularly waffle about IRA "murders" mostly never let the word cross their lips when it comes to the war in Iraq. Unless the Other Side are doing the killing, of course.

And, btw, I live 400ft above sea-level -:) (Sarah777 11:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Astrotrain

As someone who knows the history of this edit war, your comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Astrotrain. I imagine you wouldn't close it as a conflict of interest, but your comments would still be appreciated. The Evil Spartan 19:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Commented - Alison ☺ 23:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

semi-protect

Can you semi-protect my userpage? I've had Rulechecker3 and some IP on Talk:Number of the Beast vandalizing it. I would greatly appreciate this. Savie Kumara 23:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Your userpage is already semi-protected since July :) and your talk page looks fine. Oh, and I've just blocked Rulechecker3 - Alison ☺ 23:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:NorthernIrishTowns

Alison there seems to be a problem with this template since it was protected, it is impossible to make the template show, I think the problem is caused by the placement of the protection template, could you check it out and move the protection template above rather then below the template to see if this solves the problem. Thanks.--padraig 02:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Alison replace the code with this User:Padraig/Sandbox8, below the protection code.--padraig 02:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't get to your code, but the template was horribly broken and has been for long before the prot template went in. I had to re-code chunks of it. See my edit comments in the history. It works just perfectly now. - Alison ☺ 02:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah! You switched to {{Navigation}} from {{Navbox generic}} - probably not a bad idea. I was going to do that too, but was worried about losing the NI image (which was never being displayed properly. I know how contentious these images in navboxes can be :) - Alison ☺ 02:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

/me huggles Alison, I shoulda called my dub-friend over from the start! :-P Cbrown1023 talk 02:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

{{huggles}} ya back :) A valiant effort on all sides. That template was seriously messed up - Alison ☺ 03:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The Northern Ireland image is fine, I would leave it, it might stop Astrotrain trying to add that flag again.--padraig 02:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

One can only hope! - Alison ☺ 03:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Going through the edit history that template has not worked since this edit on the 27 April 2007.--padraig 03:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like Keith tried to upgrade to {{Navbox generic}} and it went a bit wrong. He prolly didn't notice because of the default collapsed state. BTW, which looks best - collapsed by default or non-collapsed? I'm inclined to think 'non', as it's only small and integrates nicely into the towns - Alison ☺ 03:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I normaly use autocollapse when that option is available as then it will stay open unless similar templates are on the same article.--padraig 11:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Protection conflict, again :-)

Hello Alison. We've conflicted again while reviewing the protection request for Famagusta at the same time. I've protected it as the disrupting anon was editing from more than one IP. Hope you don't mind. Regards, Hús ö nd 03:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Good call indeed - Alison ☺ 03:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

That was fast, thanks!

Hi Alison, thanks a lot for your prompt attention to my RPP request. Best wishes, take care... --Kudret abi 04:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Gotta be quick! - Alison ☺ 05:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

RFA semi request

Did you even look at the ANI case? There already have been socks created expressly for this RFA banned, and countless obvious SPA's. When two blogs blatantly recruit new users to vote stack, you think there is no precedent for protecting the page? The RFA is already lost, this about preserving Wikipedia's sanctity. VanTucky ^(talk) 16:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, User:Deskana had the guts to do what you could not. VanTucky ^(talk) 16:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks are not tolerated. Do not say anything like that again. --Deskana (banana) 16:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Deskana's protection has nothing to do with 'guts', nor had my decision. It's a difference of opinion and I respect and support Deskana's opinion in this case - Alison ☺ 16:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

First off, let me back up and apologize for being personal. I don't think that falls under WP:NPA, as it is my right to make an evaluation of your judgement in admin tasks. But I should have used more civil language.

As to the issue. To do what is normally a bureaucrat's job in a sticky situation; to perform an application of IAR, does take courage. I think your call was wrong, and I stick by that. VanTucky ^(talk) 16:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Apology accepted. Re. your opinion; that's your opinion, and entitled to it. However, page protection is never to be applied lightly, especially during some's RfA where's there's a strong chance of blocking out "undesireables" (for various definitions of that word). That is so not the call of an admin at that point and requires bureaucrat intervention and WP:IAR does not apply in a case like that - Alison ☺ 16:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. IAR shouldn't be applied just for the sake of applying IAR - there has to be some thought into it, and I'm dismayed you thought it was a matter of courage, rather than common sense. ~ Riana ⁂ 17:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Security check

Hi, Allie. I was just about to press "send" on an email in reply to one I received a few days ago, but just want to double check first that it really did come from you. (Not that I really have any doubt!) Cheers. ElinorD (talk) 20:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep - that was me :-) I so owe you a long proper letter! Sooooon -Alison ☺ 21:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, the send button has now been pressed! :-) ElinorD (talk) 21:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Astrotrain

Astrotrain is edit warring on about ten pages today, he's been blocked twice this month for edit warring and obviously hasnt learned anything for these blocks. Can you have a word.--Vintagekits 23:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma - he [reverted an extensive edit because he didnt like the remove of term assassinated for the article and then refused to justify why. No edits on the talk page.

Template:Airports in Ireland - 2 reverts today, 3 out of the last six edits are his reverts. One of the edit summaries stated "see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-05-20 Lists of Marilyns, flagicons are allowed in templates" - I questions the mediator on that cabal and he said he didnt endorse the use of the Ulster banner on the template. No edits on the talk page.

Union Flag - 2 reverts today. First edit summary stated "remove ramble in poor English" - removal of referenced material because you thought it was poor English!!! I fixed the English up a bit and reinsterted it with the messege " dont think that reference material should be removed on the basis of "poor English" - he reverted it again citing "remove poorly written text". No edits on the talk page.

Template talk:United Kingdom regions, 2 reverts today,

Template:UK subdivisions - 3 reverts in the past 18 hours.

Template:AONBs in Northern Ireland 2 reverts inthe past day, 3 out of the last six edits are his reverts.

Now to his credit he is talking on some subjects but he is ignoring everything that is being said. Most of the edit warring (apart from the Mountbatten revert, which falls under WP:POINT) is based on the use of the Ulster banner, as you know there is no current concensus to use it except in some sporting contexts but he doesnt acknowledge that. All very frustrating.--Vintagekits 00:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

It takes two to tango! and you were blocked indefinitely until recently! --Counter-revolutionary 00:13, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Well as I am not reverting its a strange tango! whats my un/blocking got to do with it, wernt you recently blocked for harassing other users and making derogatory implications!! two can play that childish game but I would rather not. I would rather sort issues out these days, as can be seen on yours and Astros talk pages.--Vintagekits 00:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I'm not supposed to give 2 barnstars in 2 months to the same person, but I couldn't resist... --H irohisat ^Talk 05:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you so much :) - Alison ☺ 06:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

NPA

Alison could you have a word with User:Aatomic1 for personal attacks on editors in edit summaries.--padraig 17:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. Snide comments like that, even in edit summaries, are unhelpful - Alison ☺ 18:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry I truly believe what I saidhere is appropriate. I must stick by my insinuations and take the consequences. Aatomic1 18:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

So be it. Consider yourself duly warned - Alison ☺ 23:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Tgarden (talk · contribs)

Thanks. I was wary of doing it myself as this is (thankfully) such a rare occurrence; perhaps bold would have been best, huh? :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.Well, I did what I thought was right under the circumstances, wihout necessarily setting a precedent. It would be in the worst of taste if someone took over his account or defaced his userpage. Given his profile and standing, I don't doubt there would be those who would do just that - Alison ☺ 21:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

could you look at this please

team editing to make provisional SF seem more electorally attractive

I am being accused of being part of a team disrupting his edits not much of a team as it seems I inadvertently broke a wikipedia rule on reverting. This is the second time since I started editing with wikipedia that I have been accused of something. It's all a bit silly really could you comment on this please thanks. BigDunc 22:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I'd rather not. You've already barely escaped being blocked for 3RR today & indeed, if User:Spartaz hadn't got in when he did, I'd have blocked you myself. In fact, I'd rather you approached Spartaz on the matter as I make a point of steering clear of Irish political articles. I'd much rather you approached another admin as I'm stepping back from that area - Alison ☺ 23:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know, my patience with the disruption going on in those articles ended late last night and I'll be using the block button if it continues today. The only reason I didn't block BigDunc was because I was trying to be even handed to both sides of the dispute. I did not give W. Frank a further block when he resumed edit warring after his block expired yesterday morning because he initially responded to a request to stop. He resumed the disruption yesterday eveining so I will take appropriate measures if this continues. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I can appreciate that, Spartaz. I'm doing my utmost to contain my impatience with the lot of the, to be honest. Furthermore, I have my own POV which I keep in check re. those articles. I've already made that clear to everyone but I still keep getting asked to get involved by all sides & it's beginning to wear me down. Right now, they all need to stop it. - Alison ☺ 07:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

UCAS Protection - Opinion?

Alison, yesterday you semi-protected Shia LaBeouf for me, as vandalism was high. Today, I looked at the UCAS article, and found levels of vandalism similar to that of LaBeouf, if not higher. Reason being, this is the company that deals with University entrance in the UK, and results are released tomorrow, with a whole host of processes in the weeks to follow (I should know, I went through them last year :P ). I requested it to be semi-protected, but Royalguard11 rejected it, stating that protection isn't preemptive. I know it's not, but vandalism's pretty bad now, though he disputes this. Could you please take a look, and tell me what you think? Cheers, _TheIslander 00:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that Royalguard11 made the proper decision, to be honest. I note that more vandalism has occurred since then and have added the article to my watchlist. If it gets much worse, I'll protect it myself but right now, it's not too bad - Alison ☺ 00:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

OK then, thanks for your help ;) _TheIslander 00:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Marxist philosophy

When asked to participate in a dispute, I'm apt to apply the Horse Feathers philosophy as espoused by Professor Quincy Adams Wagstaff:

I don't know what they have to say

It makes no difference anyway;

Whatever it is, I'm against it

No matter what it is or who commenced it,

I'm against it!

Your proposition may be good

But let's have one thing understood:

Whatever it is, I'm against it

And even when you've changed it or condensed it,

I'm against it!

Baseball Bugs 07:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Very apt indeed :) - Alison ☺ 07:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see that you're up at this hour. Come to think of it, I'm sorry to see that I'm up at this hour. :) Baseball Bugs 07:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Almost 1am here but happy to say that I'm leaving work here in a minute. It's all go around here - Alison ☺ 07:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Aha, a left-coaster. And now that you're leaving work, you can go home and be on wikipedia full time. Baseball Bugs 07:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

quick thanks

Hi Alison, thanks for your welcome back greeting! I'm only partially back, because I'm quite busy with various things. While I'm at it, thanks for protecting my page during my absence! --Kyoko 12:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Delighted to! And it's lovely to see you back on here, even if it's only for a flying visit :) - Alison ☺ 13:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Gladboy

Alison, sorry to bother you again (I really must start leaving you alone...), but I have a problem. User:Gladboy is being a pain, in lots of ways, but I'm not quite sure it's vandalism, as such. He's uploading tons of copyvio images (OrphanBot's having a whale of a time), removing AfD templates and reverting edits left, right and centre. I'm placed a few different warnings on his page, he ignores them, I've taken this up on the admin intervention noticeboard, no one's replied, I would pop this on the 'request a ban' page (or whatever it's called), but I'm just not 100% sure that it counts as vandalism. Could you take a look? I'm truely sorry to bother you again. Cheers, _TheIslander 13:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I've had a word with this editor. They look like they have newbie problems, is all. We'll see how things go but if they persist, they'll end up blocked for a short while - Alison ☺ 13:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Alison, you're a star. Just one more question: if I now go and revert his edits to Bodger and Badger, will I be in violation of 3RR? In fact, would I violate 3RR by reverting any edit of his that adds copyrighted material, or removes AfD templates? I'm not quite sure of the rules. Thanks, _TheIslander 13:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

(ec) If it's copyvio material or "simple vandalism", then go for it. See WP:3RR#Exceptions & thanks for the hard work here :) Ask away on my page - I don't mind at all - Alison ☺ 13:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Gladboy

hi alison i'm very but i new i would also like to aploigise to theislander i just don't know what to do would you be able to help me

gladboy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gladboy (talk • contribs)

That's perfectly all right. I can see you've been creating BBC articles but there are a few problems and it's obvious that your work is done in good faith. I've no doubt that between myself and theIslander, we should be able to get you up and running quickly enough - we were all new editors at one time :) It's gone 6am here and I've to get to bed but I'll be back on-line in about 4 hours and I'll see what I can do. In the meantime, I'll add a welcome template to your talk page. Best thing, maybe, is to have a read through our help pages and hints & see what we allow here - Alison ☺ 13:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Appology accepted ;). Your edits certainly seem to be in good faith; there are just a few rules that you need to be aware of, particularly WP:NFC (with regards to images), and WP:N (with regards to your new article). I'm certainly happy to help, just ask anytime on my talk page ;) Regards, _TheIslander 13:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ;)

		The Special Barnstar
		For answering the constant questions of a particular editor who has latched on to one particular admin, as he feels that she is remarkably helpful, kind and genial. Thank you ;) _TheIslander 14:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you :) Glad to be able to help! - Alison ☺ 05:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Help me, I'm being Wikistalked!

I am being Wikistalked by another Wikipedian who goes by the name of CyberGhostface. He keeps reverting edits made on my discussion page, among other things! I have asked him to stop, but he refuses! Please contact me for details! Is there anything that can be done to stop his harassing behavior? 24.168.46.238 13:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you take a look at this user's edits history and mine to see how much is actually 'stalking'.--CyberGhostface 15:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I have asked this guy TIME AND TIME AGAIN to leave me alone, yet he refuses to do so. He is CLEARLY in violation of Wikipedia rules reguarding stalking and harassment, so I must ask that he be dealt with appropriately by a Wikipedia Administrator. If he continues to stalk and harass me and Wikipedia does nothing to stop him, I will exercise my rights under the law to contact the proper law enforcement authorities, as he is in violation of cyberstalking laws in my state. Thank you for your concern, and your understanding! 24.168.46.238 15:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Here's an example of my 'harrassment'. He blanked User:Spirot's talkpage, writing "Good riddance!" I revert his edits and give him a warning. Thats about as far as it goes. If he stops vandalizing Wikipedia, I won't have to bother him.--CyberGhostface 15:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Adding my site link to Wikipedia

can you add my brad pitt site to the brad pitt section, the page is proceted my link is http://bradpittweb.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradpittweb (talk • contribs)

Hi there. I've answered this on your talk page - Alison ☺ 23:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

NI flag, again...

It's funny that the Northern Ireland flag has no orange in it, and the Republic of Ireland flag does. I used to wear an orange-colored shirt on St. Patrick's Day, and nobody got the joke. I've got a hunch they would in Belfast, though. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no edit war on this I explained the use that this template plays in sport articles to User_talk:Fennessy on his [page] and as well on the article talk page, he has accepted the reason that the template can't be altered for now, so protection is not necessary.--padraig 19:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Padraig, you'll have to take this up with the protecting admin, User:Riana as it would be inappropriate for me to overturn her admin action - Alison ☺ 19:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Alison I have no problem with the template being currently protected, I was just pointing out that it was unnecessary in the first place, as the dispute had already been ended before hand and the editor who had been altering it now accepts why the template can't currently be altered.--padraig 19:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That's good. Thanks for letting me know - Alison ☺ 19:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Nigger (disambiguation)

Hello, Alison. I just wanted to let you know that Nigger (disambiguation), an article you recently unprotected at my request, has not yet received any vandalism. You made the right decission :-) Happy editing! --Boricuaeddie 22:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow!! You obviously made the correct decision in reporting it to WP:RPP, too. Cool :) I remember my unprot comment at the time was like, "I must be crazy here to unprotect this!" - Alison ☺ 22:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course, now that it's been said .... :) - Alison ☺ 22:15, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry. That's what watchlists are for :-) --Boricuaeddie 22:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Eddie has given you a squid! Squids somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! --Boricuaeddie 22:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh cool! Thanks, Eddie. :) - Alison ☺ 22:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yum... live sushi. :b Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Mm?

Oh, right. The Winer. Yeah, might as well re-up it to full. DS 23:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Sorry about that - Alison ☺ 23:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Dave Winer edit war

Thanks for handling the protection request for this page. I have asked on Ryulong's page if it is appropriate to get Nick Irelan added to the list of banned users. If this is a possibility then it might be worth doing the bookkeeping to submit all his sockpuppets at WP:SSP. Or does he have to do a lot more bad things before this can be considered? Thanks, EdJohnston 23:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I didn't actually "officially" handle the request - User:DragonflySixtyseven did, but I ended up clashing with hir protection. Not to worry. Re. Nick Irelan, I'm not familiar with the case, though it looks like there's a lot of socking going on over on that article. There's no point in trying to block every one of them. If the trouble is really, really bad, there's Wikipedia:Community sanction noticeboard but that's a truly last resort - Alison ☺ 23:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Advice for a newbie

Hi Alison, I'm sorry to bother you, but I've got several messages on my IP address talk page User_talk:128.184.132.11 that I don't understand. This is going to sound dumb, but as far as I know I never edited any of the pages mentioned. I must have done it by accident (sneezed? fell asleep on keyboard?). I'm really sorry I put you to the trouble of reverting my dumb mistakes. I have a user account User:Kushami now, which seems to be going okay. 128.184.132.11 02:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I just replied on your talk page - Alison ☺ 05:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

88.218.173.235 is back at it again

— $PЯINGεrαgђ 17:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a new one... edit warring over a pianist. He might not have been the greatest, but he was definitely a key player. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally think Horowitz was better than he was, but I certainly am not about to add that to his article. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 18:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

H-O, R-O-W, I-T-Z spells "Horowitz"

Sunday night I took my girlfriend Peggy

To watch him play a concert at Carnegie

V-L, A-D-I-M-I, R, that's "Vladimir"

And he plays piano good

Like a real piano player should

Horowitz! Hear-hear!

Now, if you have any clue as to where that came from, you deserve a gold star. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

No Google (as I expected) or MSN (I hoped the real search engine would have it) ;) hits so it must not be notable. :P — $PЯINGεrαgђ 18:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I found it in Google, but I knew what to look for: "Allan Sherman" plus "Horowitz", and here's one of many sites that found it: [12] What's not necessarily clear from that, though, is that it's from a three-part medley of George M. Cohan songs with different words... specifically, "Mary is a Grand Old Name", "H-A-R-R-I-G-A-N", and "Give My Regards to Broadway". Obscurity R Us. :) Now, what is the point of this otherwise? Well, there's a song about Horowitz by a well-known singer. Does that other guy have a song about him? For that matter, is he on a bubble-gum card? "How can you say someone is great who has never been on a bubble-gum card?" That pushy editor has some 'splainin' to do. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, it never fails to amaze me regarding what people are passionate over & this editor has a thing about pianists, I guess. All I can do is try to reason with them and ensure they understand the whole concept of WP:NPOV as it applies here. They're obviously a dedicated fan of Sviatoslav Richter ... - Alison ☺ 20:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

It is not possible to claim that any artist is the greatest, obviously, because it's all a matter of opinion. Meanwhile, I was wondering... when the young Sviatoslav ("Svi" to his friends) was first learning to play, did he practice Richter scales? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

False committed identity use on user page

Hello, I'm concerned about this user User:Wikisteph888 who has a false committed identity algorithm. It's very disconcerting as this user has recently applied for admin-ship, though was denied. I don't know if Wikipedia has a policy dealing with this type of incident. In my opinion this lessens the reliability of Wikipedia. Wikipedia has enough problems as it is. Adding false information such as this, where people who are unfamiliar with hash strings, will assume this user has indeed a commented identity. I believe this borders on fraud, and needs to be addressed. Yet, I'm not sure on how to go about this. I do not want to accuss someone of fraud by posting on the user page, so I thought should ask a more experienced user on the procedure. Thanks in advance. Biomet 19:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that is not fraud. I am sure anybody who looked at that would know it is a a.) a mistake or b.) a joke. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

This user's first edit was vandalism; this user hasn't actually "contributed" to wikipedia at all. It looks like some person is just noodeling around with their user page, etc. That includes a clearly silly committed identity. As such, it isn't fraud. I would hope we have a policy for users who primarily exist to edit their own user page. But I can't think of where it might be. Thoughts? Wikipedia would not be at a loss if we blocked the account, but the only rule I can think of is WP:IAR. Rklawton 19:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

But, would wikipedia be any better because we blocked it? I think it would be a hard pressed case to make that argument. As long as they are poking around there userspace, let them do it. They may decide to expand their editing habits into articles of a topic that interest them which would be a gain for this project. Perhaps some gentle prodding into article writing might be worthwhile? Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, first off, there's no way that anyone had committed a fraudulent act here. As what RK says, they're just noodling around in their userspace and getting a feel for editing here. Give them a chance to prove themselves and get comfortable with editing. I think the best approach right now would be to leave a message and ask them if they need any help to get started in main space. Let's not scare them off - Alison ☺ 20:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Im three steps ahead of you allie! (read my posts on acalamari's page), and ive already offered to help! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Chris - you're totally awesome! Way ahead of me here :) - Alison ☺ 20:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if it appears I'm trying to cause problems, I'm not. After reading many articles and their discussion pages I've become a bit concerned. I've also been reading page after page of policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. There are so many it is quite difficult to find everything, as they are not all in one place. Until I learn the "ropes" I'll begin serious articles and edits. Here is a link to the administration request and the suggestions for improvement to the user above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Wikisteph888 Biomet 20:20, 17 August 2007 (UTC) PS, the reason I said it may be fraud, is this person has asked for power on Wikipedia, therefore the commited identity may be for personal gain in this area. Biomet 20:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

(ec) Well, you're absolutely right about the need to reduce nonsense on Wikipedia. However, we need to balance that with the fact that we get hundreds of new editors per day and we need to cut them a little slack. They won't be as familiar as we are of the rules and arcane quirks of the system that we take for granted. At best, they're an over-zealous newbie editor, at worst an amateur wikivandal. Either way, there's no big issue here and I'm certainly not about to block them unless they step majorly out of line here - Alison ☺ 20:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. You are correct. Myself a newbie, I should take heed. =) Biomet 20:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

E-mail

I meant to say this earlier, but just so you know, I sent one. :) Acalamari 22:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied - Alison ☺ 22:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Last chance

Ok, I've been watching this commentary from the sidelines here and your behaviour has reached the point of being downright incivil and disruptive. Blanking others' comments with [13] with "rm nonsense by agenda pushing baby, whaa, whaaa, whaaa", is completely out of order. Your edit history is replete with examples of personal attacks and snide comments. Next one warrants a block for incivility - Alison ☺ 22:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. - Alison ☺ 22:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Alison, I am done editing at Rove. I am done replying to Ryan. OK?--Tom 23:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page - Alison ☺ 23:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Signature help

Hey, this is prolly the wrong place to be asking, but I thought I'd give it a shot: how do folks alter their signature? Thanks --Endlessdan 20:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Signatures tells you most of what you need to know. You go into "my preferences", and choose 'signature'. There's the option of a raw signature, but you need to know HTML to work that one. This is what I use. For more exotic signatures, there are people here who can maybe help you out. I got mine from my friend User:NikoSilver and his signature shop. I can do simple ones myself, if it's any help to you - Alison ☺ 23:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked on Wictionary

Alison, I'm wondering if you know anything about Wictionary. I was unrightfully blocked from it for abusing multiple accounts. Since they don't have unblock templates, how do I appeal for an unblock there? LOZ: OOT 06:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Forget I even asked. Sorry for damaging your talk page with my question. LOZ: OOT 06:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all :) - Alison ☺ 22:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

It just frustrates me so much the way I just join, and all of a sudden, a guy named Connel MacKenzie just up and blocks me for abusive sockpuppetry when I never even had an account there before! And then I send him a message, and he instantaneously deletes them on sight (at least I think he does)! IT REALLY, REALLY ANGER'S ME!!! Oh, boy. I need to take a deep breath and relax. Ahhhhhh...

But I'm just wondering if you know of anything that could help me at the present with this predicament. And I'm sorry for the way I acted a second ago. It just, it just makes me so mad that a user would just block somebody with such extreme prejudice. Can you help me? LOZ: OOT 07:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

You've been blocked for username over there. Probably nothing personal. I'm contacting the blocking admin right now to see what's happened and what can be done here. Hold tight a while - Alison ☺ 07:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Commented here - Alison ☺ 07:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I get the feeling that he'll defend to the death that I'm a destructive user, despite never editing there before. Yes, I can be pessimistic at times, but I try not to be. LOZ: OOT 08:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually Alison, my username there is Zelda ocarina. LOZ: OOT 08:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

If your username on there is 'Zelda ocarina', then why were you blocked for creating an account called 'LOZ: OOT', because you certainly did that. Obviously, your other account will get caught in the autoblock as it was likely hardblocked - Alison ☺ 20:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Block on User_talk:75.21.187.140

The block tag on User_talk:75.21.187.140 seems to be missing a closing }. As I'm not an admin, I don't have the right to fix it, but I thought you might want to know. spazure (contribs) 06:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed it about 20 minutes later. Good catch :) BTW - as a non-admin, it's perfecly okay to make good-faith edits to stuff like block messages where there's been some obvious error. Be bold! - Alison ☺ 22:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Video Professor

Hi Alison, I tried to communicate with user User:Nsk92 however no luck, they just reverted the version again. Unfortunately I got sucked into an edit war, and I really hate edit wars. Can you please help out in this matter? I really like to discuss changes to the article before they just flat out revert it to their version, and make sure they are correct and referenced. Thank you for your help, Skporganic 13:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Expatlecturer on Gaijin

Thank you for responding to Bendono's request to block the user for 31 hours. I notice that the gaijin page was not reverted to its last non-contentious edit. Would it be alright for one of us to revert the page or should you do it? What's usually appropriate? J Readings 14:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's okay to revert, should it be appropriate. As protecting admin, I'm not making any decisions as to content there - Alison ☺ 07:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

59.91.254.1

Could you approach User:59.91.254.1? He seems to be engaged in trolling and I'd rather not get into the edit war he's trying to lure me into. -WarthogDemon 20:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. I've final-warned them; there's nothing but personal attacks coming from that editor - Alison ☺ 20:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

No Alison, I am finished for today. Wait until tomorrow and see me vindicated. You can notify Buddhipriya, Hornplease, Dbachmann etc.on my edit to see its merit. 59.91.254.1 20:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not concerned about your content dispute; I'm concerned about your attacking of other editors. If you resume that behaviour tomorrow, I'll block your account all the same - Alison ☺ 20:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked now as a self-confessed sock of User:Kuntan [14] - Alison ☺ 21:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

At least he was nice enough after trolling to come clean. :) -WarthogDemon 21:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this barnstar for your great work on Wikipedia! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 22:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow! Thank you so much :) Yayy!! - Alison ☺ 22:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile


Lights has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Cheers, Lig hts 00:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!! I could use a smile or two today :) - Alison ☺ 00:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Pyrénées-Orientales

For info I've added the urls to the spam blacklist so you could consider unprotecting if you want - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Herbythyme :) Unprot'd, so (and Perpignan) - Alison ☺ 14:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Retraction of Legal Threat - Corvus

Hi - I saw your inquiry related to a legal threat I made yesterday against Corvus. Just wanted to let you know I retracted it and have removed criticism of Corvus from all the materials on the jpeg deletion page. --Brainchannels 16:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Brainchannels, thanks for that update. I'm glad you both got it worked out. If there's any help you need on anything, just let me know and I'll see what I can do - Alison ☺ 01:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking about making legal threats against anyone who disagrees with me. The problem there is that I don't know who anyone here actually is. So I'll have to ask anyone who disagrees to tell me their real name and address. And anyone who actually does so, will probably be declared incompetent in court and the case will be dismissed. Well, that should keep my legal fees down, anyway. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Mail

If you have time, you have mail. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Anthony, replying now ... - Alison ☺ 01:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE

Quick question: take a look at this edit of the BBC Television Centre article. Is it just me, or is the second picture in violation of WP:UNDUE? It's a protest, attended by about 20 people (alledgedly, looks less to me), protesting against something that most people really don't mind (digital rights management on downloadable BBC content - as if the BBC would provide content to download without it...). Surely posting a picture of it on the page itself makes it seem as if the event was notable (which it certainly wasn't), thus violating WP:UNDUE. If you look at the history, you'll see that Briantist is adament that it's included, regardless of my pointing out the policy to him. I'd just love a second opinion, so that I know I haven't got it wrong. Cheers, _TheIslander 01:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree it falls under WP:UNDUE even though I'm personally against certain types of DRM and would question your "most people really don't mind" statement (most people really don't know). But yes, not notable enough for that level of coverage - Alison ☺ 01:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, without getting into a debate, if the BBC decided not to use DRM, the copyright owners of the programmes would not allow them to allow the downloading of them, and BBC iPlayer just wouldn't exist. All that aside ( =P ), thanks for your input ;). _TheIslander 01:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

This isn't a page about DRM, but about BBC Television Center, and the picture is to illustrate that people protest outside sometimes. I would have prefered pictures of the Greg Dyke leaving thing or one of the Chrisians complaing about Jerry Springer The Opera but I don't have any. The picture was to illustrate the subject, and makes no reference to the rights or wrongs of the protest, hence not WP:UNDUE. BRIANTIST (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Also the initial claim was that "no such protest occured" and I provided a valid link to it, and then TheIslander changed his reason to "undue" which shows an partial POV. Thanks. BRIANTIST (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

"The picture was to illustrate the subject..." But the picture doesn't illustrate the subject - BBC Television Centre has nothing to do with protests... _TheIslander 16:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Protection

Thanks. :) That was rather ridiculous vandalism the other day. (I wonder if warthogs eat dung beetles...) :P -WarthogDemon 01:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh! Yeah .... Might as well leave it on indef as you're a vandal fighter. It'll keep the trolling and time-wasting to a minimum - Alison ☺ 02:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

KarenAER has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks

Thanks for protecting the Psychic Surgery page. Can you believe that intro? But, anyway, I shouldn't have put the totally disputed tag in- it should only be the POV tag. Think you could change it? You locked it just as I was changing it. That might help with settling people down. –––Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 04:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for changing it (: Guess that article really needs mediation. –––Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 04:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it probably does all right. You guys can't even agree on the tagging :) - Alison ☺ 04:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Is making changes to a locked article on behalf of an involved user normal practice for an administrator? Ante lan ^talk 04:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

"Normal practice"?? Generally not. First time I've ever done it. However, switching from {{totally disputed}} to {{pov}} is not unreasonable given the circumstances. It can hardly be called modifying content in any meaningful way - Alison ☺ 04:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I've changed it back as it's obviously disputed. Now, dialog and consensus - Alison ☺ 05:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

(EC) Can you please unprotect the page. The disruption is entirely due to martinphi's editing against consensus. ornis (t) 04:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I'd rather not do that. The article is completely out of control right now & something needs to happen. I suggest you guys either discuss the matter or bring it to MedCom - see WP:DR. I have no opinion as to the current content - Alison ☺ 04:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I think you should carefully review the article's progress over the day. We haven't simply been treadmilling - there has been serious progress, though the editing has been heated. This is far more tame than what I've experienced in other articles where less progress was being made. Ante lan ^talk 04:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe so, but the article remains protected from here until things are resolved. There's absolutely no hurry in changing the article content at this point & a lot of energy has been burnt up today frantically changing/reverting. Some serious discussion needs to happen right now - Alison ☺ 05:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed that there is no hurry. I just want you to understand that we've had 27kb of discussion so far today and made 5kb of additions to a 10kb article. Let's just say the talk page was already in no risk of growing weeds for want of use. Ante lan ^talk 05:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Definitely needed protection. –––Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Now maybe they can work together and find a consensus! Dreadstar † 05:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

As noted elsewhere, you have been quite involved in editing this article today, so "they" should be "we". Please come back and help us work towards consensus. Ante lan ^talk 05:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Totally agreed. Everyone involved needs to work on this - Alison ☺ 05:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm in it neck deep...;) Dreadstar † 07:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Psychic surgery protection

Hi Alison. I see that you took on the dispute at the Psychic Surgery page which it seems good given that I think they were overdoing the matter. As a participant of the WikiProject True Origins I just wanted to call your attention to the matter that you have placed the page under protection not at its best edition, how is now it shows too many inaccuracies. Already mentions at the leading parragraph a completely inaccurate point of origin for Psychic surgeries and many practicioners are presented as linked to erroneous religious movements (i.e.candomble instead of umbanda). Along the article are many inaccuracies which are in true too many to allow that article to be there even if waiting resolution of dispute. May I suggest you revert to a more balanced previous edition and freeze it at that until disputes are resolved? There was a good point of understanding between the parties at: 18:45, 19 August 2007 [15], that will be most helpful. Thank you for your cooperation with the WikiProject True Origins Kind regards Jenny ^Len 11:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Afterthought: I know that there is a Mediation Committee but if you see that they don't arrive to agreement and you rather avoid the need to overload the Mediation Committee with still more cases, one of the members at the WikiProject True Origins (Doken) is a mediator in real life and has helped before to resolve disputes quite fairly and rapidly, they perhaps can ask him for opinion before getting to higher levels of resolution? Just a thought Jenny ^Len 11:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Please see my comment in the next section below. From the talk page and from my own talk page comments, it looks like reasonable progress is being made right now to determine consensus and as soon as all that is resolved, protection can be lifted and the article amended as agreed - Alison ☺ 18:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Request with certain urgency

The edition point at which the Psychic Surgery article was protected is really not so good and it is very aggressive. Would you consider to edit the definition as:

Definition	Psychic surgery is a controversial procedure involving an apparently invasive operation performed with resource to claimed paranormal abilities with the purpose to cure by means other than conventional medicine.
Practicioners.	The procedure is performed by practicioners who claim abilities for paranormal healing and who usually lack medical qualifications but enjoy some degree of credibility within certain communities or groups.

This until they decide what they really want? It is a very neutral definition.

This is what I wrote to all them:

About fraud/no fraud I was reading the chain of the debate. It is practically impossible after a debate or when parties are at opposite sides, to avoid to defend some points. There is only one solution if you want to come out of the freezer, and is to make the definition so short and neutral that doesn't imply one thing or another, thus my short and concise proposal for a definition. Please seat back, take a breath and think a while, there is no way you will reconciliate opposite understandings, you can just avoid both understandings.

My proposal is simple, you place a short definition avoiding "fraud" and also avoiding support to the concept, just a neutral encyclopedic definition which will tell the reader what it is, not what to think about. Then, in a second parragraph says who makes it also very neutral and then, in a first titled section highly visible with possible title "Controversy" expose both views as open as you want as far as it is with solid citations and not demeaning the opposite side belief. Leave to the reader to decide. This will provide a simple, short and understandable definition and also clear picture of the controversy and the sides available to join. You can use my short definition as candidate or not, but something in that style, no party flags.

I apologize if I am blunt, but you were exhausting yourselves in a loop. Please think about. Librarian2 17:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no interest as to the content of the article in question and, as a non-expert, do not feel qualified to make a judgement on that. However, I am qualified to recognise a content dispute and a revert-war. I strongly suggest everyone work out their differences at this point or at least define consensus. Right now, I see that is ongoing on the talk page. Under those circumstances, it would be highly inappropriate of me to make any unilateral changes at this time. Note that you can always request an admin to change the protected article by adding an {{editprotected}} request to the talk page. The page protection can also be reviewed at any time by applying to WP:RPP. But sorry, no unilateral changes from me at this time - Alison ☺ 18:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Alison!


^Ariel♥Gold gives you a huge smile, for being an angel! Just noticed you being my guardian angel over on my poor lil user page. Thanks so much! Some of those were pretty vile, I admit. I guess they don't like our happy smiley face boxes! lol. Hope you had a great weekend, and a nice Monday! Smiles promote WikiLove, and hopefully hers has made your day better! ({{subst:smile}})

^Ariel♥Gold 19:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you :) I was delighted to be able to do just that, as you've had enough abuse on your userpage as it is. You must be doing something right :) Thank you!!! - Alison ☺ 01:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Why I'm frustrated by admins

You guys could not be more inconsistent. One person says go use the editprotect template, someone else says - don't. This is going to cause major problems as it is at the crux of a major dispute. ~~If you want to educate youreslf on the Infobox NFLactive dispute - i'm happy to do so.~~ I will be happy to point you to a number of pertinant pieces of information if you would like: but leaving this information in is just creating problems. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 01:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm more than familiar with the debate as we (you and me) have already knocked heads, so to speak, over this issue. I've read through all the stuff in detail before. Seriously. One thing we admins are consistent about is that we cannot make a unilateral change just like that. In order of strength; WP:RPP is a forum for requesting trivial changes to stuff like fully-protected templates, etc. The next level is {{editprotected}} for making trivial or agreed changes to an item, sometimes in the middle of a dispute where there's agreement on some of the issue. But one thing we can't do is sidestep the dispute resolution process here, otherwise nothing is fixed - Alison ☺ 01:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I replied to the "obnoxious" version[16] :-) - Alison ☺ 01:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about the rudeness of the previous statment. I'm not asking anyone to sidestep anything - what i'm asking for is a person to look at the information before saying "it doesn't fit x y or z". There is a huge debate on this template. There are two particular people (who i actually think are meatpuppets) that i have a problem with, but the gist of this is - reasonable is completely absent. Nothing is focused, barbs, insults, insinuations, and incivility is rampant. An editor (who I have opened an RFCC against) started making some widespread changes - some of which actually broke what was already in place. That information was removed. Discussion took place a few weeks ago and this information was not put in. The user then reinstituted the changes, at which point i removed them and called for a new topic (which i've pointed you to). While I was away the guy had the information reinserted and then called for RPP. So if there is no consensus to include the information, how can you expect consensus to remove it? It's the same thing. BOLDING - A template should never be considered one article - because it has the potential to touch many articles. The information that is inserted is disputed. With the version locked in place - the users who are fighting for their "method" can now systematically include the information in several hundered articles. If the template does in fact end up with the information out (as I bet it will) - we're going to have a LOT of fixing to do. Leaving it out prevents them from instituting the changes and thus "faking consensus". It needs to go until discussion can be had. Remember, i'm not talking about one article - i'm talking about an infobox that is widely used. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 01:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand, but you've exactly described the job of WP:MEDCOM or WP:3O there. You need a mediator or a third opinion and it's rare that admins will make judgement calls on content disputes (esp. NFL, in my case. I'm an Irish native & don't understand that arcane business at all :) ) From what you're saying, it might be prudent to get them involved ASAP - Alison ☺ 01:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Friendly reminder: 3O is only for disputes that involve 2 users. Ante lan ^talk 17:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Just how many users are warring over this?? I keep seeing the same two names coming up :) - Alison ☺ 18:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I just read Juan Miguel Fangio's comment (There is a huge debate on this template. There are two particular people (who i actually think are meatpuppets) that i have a problem with) and inferred that there are at least three people. Ante lan ^talk 18:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject U2

Hello Alison, I noticed that you like to edit Ireland-related articles, and was wondering if you would like to join WikiProject U2. We definitely need help! If you would like to join, please add your name to the list of members, and if you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you! Neranei (talk) 01:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Awwww

Big meanie! I wanted to ask the guy where my paycheck was, as it looks like Jimnbo owes me since March :-) - Alison ☺ 01:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Hehe yep! Wal-mart still owes me plenty (user:Psycho Samurai)... wonder where my paycheck is ;) Gscshoyru 01:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Quick request

If you get any time today, could you pop over to the WT:RFPP page pretty please? It doesn't appear that it is checked all that often, and I had an issue that may or may not be something you could answer. If you're busy though, no worries! Sooner or later someone will see it. Happy Tuesday Alison! ^Ariel♥Gold 18:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've added it to my watchlist, just in case. Good catch ;) - Alison ☺ 22:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh, yeah, someone redirected it to the disambig page, but I'm not sure that's going to work, since the first entry is "For Play": Sandpit, lol. And, as of a couple minutes ago, an edit that really looks like they though it was the sandbox here. I think maybe that little indented line in italics leading to the real sandbox just isn't big enough, or obvious enough, or something, maybe it needs to be in a header, at the top to get people's attention or something? I guess the issue is that when it says "Sandbox may refer to:", technically, Wikipedia's sandbox isn't a valid entry, so putting it under a header wouldn't really be correct. So, eh, I'm not sure how to fix it, but at least the page is now on a bunch of people's watch lists! lol. Someone should add it to the watchlist for the IRC bots that do RC reporting, maybe as well.

^Ariel♥Gold 23:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice Collar

Thanks for catching dixR4chix. Ya got there b4 me! Cheers, ask123 22:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I was actually in the parking lot, checking the recents list on my iPhone. I did a username block first, then discovered what they were at. Hardblocked now :) Thanks for striving to remain NPOV with that article, BTW. I've requested semi-prot over on WP:RPP. Can't do it myself as I'm editing there - Alison ☺ 22:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Semi-prot is a good idea there considering the recent press. Vandal seemed new at that racket but might sock-puppet the poor sucker (why hit a man when he's down, right?). So I'll keep an eye out. And thanks for the hardblock. Sometimes you've just gotta throw 'em full court press. Many thanks again! Ciao 4 now... ask123 03:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Hi there!!!

Thanks for the message! Nice to meetcha! --LifeloverElena 22:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Guess the message bar worked :) Nice to meet you, too! - Alison ☺ 22:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it did! Now instead of the boring orange, it's on to delighting bright pink! --LifeloverElena 22:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Cool. Mine's the same colour as my userpage stuff :) - Alison ☺ 22:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

McCloskey

The NYT article makes it clear that there was a campaign of harassment: "What happened to Bailey is important, because the harassment was so extraordinarily bad and because it could happen to any researcher in the field," said Alice Dreger. And McCloskey actively participated in this harassment. How else do you characterise trying to get him in trouble both with his employer and with the government? And certainly Andrea James's actions can't be called anything else.

The campaign had its desired result - they made Bailey's life a misery. He "would wake up in the middle of the night unable to think of anything else. He took anti-anxiety pills for a while. He began to worry about losing his job." They "brought research to a near standstill in Dr. Bailey’s laboratory, and clouded his name among some other researchers", who "were quite scared", and "were advised by a government grant officer that they should distance themselves from Dr. Bailey". There is no other way to describe this; it's not POV at all, it's a simple three-word summary of the facts as described.

The article also makes it clear that McCloskey didn't act alone, but in concert with at least one other person; therefore it's perfectly fair to say that she participated in the campaign, even if she wasn't responsible for every single act taken against him. Zsero 23:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Minor request (I think...)

Alison, in preparation for what I regard as a necessary retirement from Wikipedia, I would like to know how I go about deleting the two subpages I created off of my main user page. One (the latter of the two I created) was simply called [[17]], and the other had something to do with Bobby Sands, though I cannot recall what the exact name was... What, if you can help, is the process for deleting such detritus? Thanks, as always, for your time. ---Theoldanarchist_Comhrá 19:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I'll get back to you in about an hour or so. It's an easy process .... - Alison ☺ 19:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! ---Theoldanarchist_Comhrá 19:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm sorry to see you leave the project :( Re. your pages, take a look here as this lists all the pages in your userspace. Point out the ones you want deleted and I'll speedy-delete them for you per WP:CSD#G7 - it's allowed :) If you want your userpage protected, I can do that, too. Good luck and remember, you can always return if you like - Alison ☺ 20:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Alison. The fact is, my own writing has to take precedence right now. I may return when I've finished my script. Time will tell. If you could protect my userpage, I would appreciate that. The two subpages I'd like deleted: [[18]] and [[19]]. Thanks again. Slan. ---Theoldanarchist_Comhrá 21:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok - all done. Best wishes for the future, sir and good luck with your own writings - Alison ☺ 21:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

SPAN Page

I've done some major work on the SPAN page and I feel it is now ready to be reviewed. I've added the tag to it (this page may meet the requirements for speed deletion), but like I said before I'm new to this process. What happens now?

ChipMD 02:15, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

RS2007

Hello Alison! I am RS2007. Can you unprotect the biography of Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar? User:Ragib fully-protected the article and took a Wikibreak.

And, I also noticed something unique on your user page.

Committed identity: click here to know more! 0f10 e6db 298f c29f 7531 9c94 faf4 dfa8 3e7c 9163 e70f 14d9 072b 4127 d373 1a25 e39e 64b4 df13 10e7 b189 b234 a5a2 5922 2215 f165 91b8 7c16 9069 9005 3971 653dis a Whirlpool commitment to this user's real-life identity.

What is 'Committed identity'? Real-life identity? Can you explain me? Thank you. RS2007 05:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected - hi there. The article has now been unprotected as it had been protected long enough. I answered your request over on WP:RPP. Re. the committed identity/whirlpool thing; this is a simple cryptographic hash function which produces a one-way hash of a phrase only I know. If my account gets compromised, I can log in using another and provide the original phrase to verify my identity to regain access/explain events. See commitment scheme for more info - Alison ☺ 06:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Alison, thanks for your hard work on WP:RPP.Proabivouac 07:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) Some of today's ones were particularly difficult, for some reason - Alison ☺ 07:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Is there any way that non-administrators can help?Proabivouac 03:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Astrotrain again

Further to your warnings here Astrotrain has just logged because in again today made a number of the same reverts again. I raised the same issue here with John but nothing was done. Its the same thing day in day out. Logs in, reverts, leaves - logs in the next days, reverts leave - now that is what I call disruption, he has X amount of blocks for edit warring over the past few months. Can you sort it out.--Vintagekits 17:02, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. This flags issue is just ridiculous and Astrotrain is one of the major players in that revert-war. Blocked for 72 hours for under Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. 3 reverts per day on multiple articles, day after day, is totally unacceptable. Mind you, there are others on the other side doing similar and similar blocks will apply to them - Alison ☺ 18:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Marie Curie

I wonder if the following might be construed as an apt acknowledgement in the context of that Nobel laureate quote you've posted at User:Alison?

In my view, the otherwise abstract concepts of metathesis in chemistry are especially well-visualized in the unique diplomas which were crafted for King Carl XIV Gustaf to present to the three chemists who shared the Nobel Prize in 2005.

In this artwork, I wonder if you might perhaps construe an illustration of the contributions you strive to make as a Wikpipedia administrator? Just a question, an idle curiosity -- an unanticipated whim caused me to think of sharing these. Hmm-m-m. Ooperhoofd 20:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Northern Ireland flag issue

I see that you have taken an interest in this issue, and would like to refer you to a suggested compromise which I came up with here. Unfortunately it met with stony silence, but it was a good faith attempt by me to try to find a solution. Perhaps a solution could be imposed, at least as a short-term measure? The only additional measure needed would be to guard against flagcruft thereafter.

Whilst here, I notice that you have criticised this post, apparently on the grounds that it is triumphalist:

“

To my mind the issue revolves not around was he pushed but when he was in the last chance saloon, how did he behave. He continued to be didactic, mean-spirited, unpleasant and provocative.

I think VK should be indefinitely blocked for being disruptive, malicious, spiteful and vindictive, for failure to WP:AGF, for threatening to use wikirules outwith common sense, for adding inappropriate fact tags, and because he has never shown willingness to take responsibility for his actions, and for being didactic. I have seen no evidence of messages threatening editors at their home addresses. Too much time has been wasted on him. I trust the decisions made at today’s date.- Kittybrewster (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

”

At the risk of boredom through repetition, this moronic 'war' has been zealously pursued by Vintagekits since January. He has concocted a conspiracy against him; initially by 'the Scottish editors', but subsequently expanded to almost any editor who disagreed with his PoV-pushing on the IRA articles and almost every Admin who came into contact with him (yourself included). He has pursued his war via sock-puppetry, petty harassment, canvassing, bad-faith AfDs, provoking editors and then complaining to Admins (he was a master at this), abuse, and threats. As you know. Why then do you take the attitude that both 'sides' are as bad as each other? Why do you give this rubbish credence? Why do you not take on board the allegation of a conspiracy of Admins against him?

I'm sorry for the fraught tone of this post, but I find the whole situation exasperating. I thought that I had previously got the message through to Rockpocket here, but I find the same equivalence argument being made again by people who must have seen again and again the disruptive behaviour indulged in by Vintagekits and yet take at face value his claims of a conspiracy against him. Might there not just be a grain of truth in the alternative theory that we are not all out of step, he is?

Frankly, if you read Kittybrewster's post, above, you will see that it isn't triumphalist but merely sets out his own views: and this from the one individual who has probably suffered the most from Vintagekits' goading and disruption. I'd sign up to Kittybrewster's post, and I dare say a couple of Admins who have had previous run-ins with Vintagekits would as well.

As I say, I apologise for the fraught tone of this post, which I don't feel warrants a reply. Thank you for taking the time to read it.--Major Bonkers (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Some advice or directions

I’ve made the following post on Rockpocket, talk page, [20]. Since you also would be aware of my comments on VK alledged threats against another Editor, you will know I never once condoned or supported such actions. You opinion would be welcome, Thanks --Domer48 17:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not Fair!

I worked really hard on my article, in fact, I worked for 2 days, but it was deleted right after I finished it! I don't really understand all the stuff about how to make your article come back, and I think Wikipedia should only delete the articles with bad stuff in it like bad words and things like that. Its not fair! I think Wikipedia should just let people right funny, entertaining things instead of just boring, history stuff with all these long, hard words.

I hope that one day someone will stop all the nonsense about deleting the enjoyable articles.

Bye!

     From,
     Brianna  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BeeliW10 (talk • contribs) 23:03, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

If you are reeeealy bored...

I think I have sorted the kinks out of the {{WikiProject Ireland}} banner, so assesments and comments are shown. I have a version on my sandbox although I have to check a few of the categories. I just "nicked" the current WP:Cities banner (which the old {{WikiProject Ireland}} banner was based on). This version has the nested box fix. So if you want to check or fiddle with it... FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

VKs arbcom

Alison just a query this arbcom is supposed to be about VK and his behaviour which lead to his indef block, so I'am abit curious by this [21] where W. Frank has added a load of editors to the list of those involved, but looking at the names added I fail to see how many of these are involved in this issue, it seems that W. Frank is trying to turn this into a vendetta against every editor that he has had a dispute with, even though they have nothing to do with this issue, is this allowed.--padraig 02:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not my arbcom call. That's squeakbox's, so you need to take it up with hir. I'm not filing that one. All I'm concerned about is VK's block right now. I'm more than aware of the sockery and nonsense that's going on on all sides and, quite honestly, am sick to death of the lot of them. I don't get involved in this nonsense as a rule - you know this. However, VK stays down on this one. What he did was inexcusable. I have an extremely low tolerance threshold for bullying and intimidation.

Chances are, if this arb case goes through, it'll take an eternity due to its breadth and there will be massive fallout on all sides. As for myself, I really don't care one way or another. I cannot reveal what I have other than to a certain arbcom member, but am 100% transparent otherwise. I don't play political games on here and don't take sides and have no favourites. VK's rhetoric runs right off me because I know that talk is baseless. He's already shown me what he's made of.

Like this comment, for example. Just another 'evil cabalistic admin-abuse' rant, empty words. Wonder who's sock *that* is?

Bring on the arbcom, I say, because there are plenty of heads that need to roll. I'm with Giano on this one - Alison ☺ 02:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I ahev no idea about the extra people W Frank brought in, I just mentioend the people I knew about, I think if this needs clarifying (and it sounds like it does) it should be on VK's talk page, SqueakBox 02:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Alison thanks for the reply, and I wasn't asking you to get involve, sorry if you got that impression, I just wanted to know if this is how arbcom worked where a editor could include editors not involved with the issue. I think we all know that no matter how this turns out VK is basicly finished on WP either way, I just don't understand why W. Frank is including some of these editors to this as I can't see any connection they have to this, unless I am missing something here.--padraig 02:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

You have mail...

If you have time, I've sent a non-urgent email. Cheers ;) _TheIslander 12:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Addhoc

I've left three warnings on this users talk page and everytime he's reverted it citing "nonsense". Could you talk to his guy before I become uncivil, which I don't want to do.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 19:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

You kinda left very stern boilerplate final-warns. That can be kinda rude under certain circumstances. See the essay, Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. In this case, leaving a polite note on their talk page, stating your issues, would be much more appropriate here. There's nothing wrong with blanking your own talk page comments per se, but it can be rude, too. I'd say they're a bit miffed right now! - Alison ☺ 20:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you talk to him though if you havent already?--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 20:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

And say what? "Please dialog with Hornetman"? I suggest you leave a polite note on his talk page and respectfully ask for his rationale re. the article blanking. He's obviously got his reasons. Then, the onus is upon him to reply and explain himself. If he blanks your polite request, then I will step in - Alison ☺ 20:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

He did it again. [22]--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 07:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You said, "I'm only trying to help you learn Wikipedia ...". I think the guy may actually know a little more about Wikipedia than you do. He's a very old hand at it. The delete message said; "Remove trolling". I think you should leave him alone now before you get blocked - Alison ☺ 08:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 09:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

My friggin user page got blanked AGIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 03:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding WP:NOP vis a vis WP:RFPP

Greetings, I hope I've not misunderstood the protection policy, but as I understand it, full protection is used in the event of an edit war. I'll note that even though the war has spanned a half month with six edits, the last six edits were reversions. The content need discussion. I hope you will not misunderstand me, and I hope you will reconsider your declination to protect that page. With respect, Navou ^banter 02:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Navou, seriously, I don't think it's appropriate here. I'm seeing content discussion ongoing on the talk page and I really don't think we're in edit warsville yet here. What I will do now is leave a note on WP:RPP to defer to another admin for a second opinion, giving them the option to override my decision - Alison ☺ 08:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for being open to a second look. Best regards, Navou ^banter 14:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Psurgery

Hi Alison! I think we have a consensus version of the lead for Psychic surgery, so if you want to unprotect the article, I think it'll be fine. Thanks so much for stepping in and halting the edit war! Dreadstar † 02:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice work, guys! I've just left a final-chance message on the talk page and if there are no objections by tomorrow, prot gets lifted - Alison ☺ 08:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks Alison! Dreadstar † 08:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Crossing my psychic fingers...;) Dreadstar † —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 01:39, August 24, 2007 (UTC).

Thanks! (my RfA)

File:ForAlison.png

I need a mentor on RFPP!!!

Hi Alison! Thanks a lot for your support in my RfA. What I can say, I was so lucky, as if I was born under the sign of a lucky star. Don't hesitate to rebuke me if I mishandle the tools. I still have to learn much from your experience in RFPP. Best regards. @pple 03:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Request

Could you leave a comment here? It would be greatly appreciated.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 07:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you want me to :) - Alison ☺ 08:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've listened to what Elinor had to say over there and have agreed to her resolution. Good compromise, IMO, and we can all move on. I strongly suggest, however, that you heed closely what she has to say in the last line or two - Alison ☺ 18:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom case

I have filed Wikipedia:Request for arbitration#User:Vintagekits and you are a mentioned party, SqueakBox 22:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Not the only one either! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Good lord, it reads like "Who's Who". - Philippe | Talk 22:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

And these are jsut the people I can confirm, there are a few others on VK's talk page and maybe others stillt hat I am unaware of, but I think this is precisely why the case should be in arbcom, ie its not just about VK, 22:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)SqueakBox

Thanks, you didn't expect me to miss this did you? As you can tell by my statement I know certain things are foregone conclusions, but now is probably the best time for the whole Ireland vs Britain mess to be sorted out once and for all. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Alison, I just wanted to say thank you for my successful RfA, which passed 89/2/5. I was pleasantly surprised at the amount of support that I received and I am more than a little bit humbled at the kind words yourself and many others had to say about me. I wanted to personally say how much it is appreciated. I've enjoyed working with you in the past and hope to more in the future :) Trusilver 02:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Yay! Congratulations, Trusilver and welcome to the mayhem that's adminship :) - Alison ☺ 03:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

7000 edits

I just made my 7000th edit today. NHRHS2010^Talk 03:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Yayy!!! Congratulations again :) You're catching up fast. By coincidence, I just passed my 20,000 mark on Monday - Alison ☺ 03:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

How do you find out how many edits you've made (short of counting them)? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, you've just made 4238 edits so far. Lots and lots of baseball edits :) - Alison ☺ 03:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. And it looks like I need to improve on the edit summaries. Maybe you've heard the old saying: "Better ed than red." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

20,000 edits? Wow...I was just recently informed that I passed had 18,000. Nice one Alison; you are amazing. :) Acalamari 03:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

As, indeed, are you, sir! :) - Alison ☺ 11:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

12.5K for me with deleted edits... Nowhere near you ~~bots~~ guys... :) On another note, you should be in bed Allie. --DarkFalls ^talk 11:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ummm. I can't sleep. And I've to be up in about 90 mins. Meh! You're catching up on me, too. Must ~~restart the bot~~ do more edits ;) - Alison ☺ 11:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Quick! Get the quarinitine tents over here, can we contain the edit count-itis? I sure hope so! Its spreading like wildfire, I cant resist the urge! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) Seriously though, congratulations guys! :) Neranei (talk) 14:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hola

How do I upload pictures?--ChristianYouth 11:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Como estas, Hornetman? :) It's quite easy, really. Have a read of Wikipedia:Uploading images first, make sure the images you are about to upload meet the requirements for fair use/free use, and add them to the project. If they're free-licensed images, you might want to upload them to the Wikimedia Commons instead. Welcome back! - Alison ☺ 11:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, your userpage is way better that the old one. Probably best to keep it to this level - Alison ☺ 11:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm in a local Church Youth Group with the one you call HornetMan, he's told me how rudly ya'll have treated him. But that's not me.--ChristianYouth 12:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh come off it Hornetman. You're really making it far too obvious. It would be less obvious if you'd never said anything. --Deskana (apples) 12:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

(ec) You just made me spit orange juice onto my keyboard (and it's a laptop!) - Alison ☺ 12:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

What, no Red Bull? And stop biting the "newbies" you bullies! ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 12:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Geez, Hackney, I missed you. You bad lad! - Alison ☺ 12:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I hope it shorts out. THAT NOT ME!!--ChristianYouth 12:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems you didn't leave your snarky attitude behind when you did similar for your old account. Daniel 12:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Why are ya'll accusing my friend, Matt of being me?--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 12:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

This has exceeded the quota of lulz I'm allowed for one night... Daniel 12:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Laugh it up. But it's true it's not me I'm about to register under something with 17 on the end of it.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 12:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Told ya!--ChristianYouth 12:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

*puts head in hands* Daniel 12:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Sockies, the lot of ya. Now look what you've done to poor Daniel. He can only take so much - Alison ☺ 12:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Sockies? ChristianYouth is not a Sockie of Hornetman16. He does like to imporsonate me alot in Public. But he has his honest moments which is what YOUR denying him.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 12:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Daniel, when you're not sure whether to laugh or to cry, it's far better to laugh! ElinorD (talk) 12:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Because you guys couldn't accept the fact that ChristianYouth wasn't a Sockpuppet my friend Matt was blocked. Thanks alot guys. Don't you think if I wanted to create a sock puppet whatsoever I would and picked something with a number on the end of it. I have numbers on the end of stuff I've created since I was eight. I'm not about to stop now. I suggest you show your civility and unblock my friend!--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 13:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Good hand bad hand accounts are prohibited. By requesting unblock for an account that several administrators have agreed is obviously a sock, you have started to disrupt Wikipedia. As such, I have used checkuser to prevent the disruption, and checkuser has confirmed that you used the other account as a sockpuppet. --Deskana (apples) 13:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

That just a bunch of bullie agreeing they bullied somebody not the truth.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 13:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hahahahaha.... I don't know whether or not to believe CY: my inclination is not. Funny as, though, and going to all that effort to try and get himself unblocked - talking to himself! By the way, since you had some trouble with me, I and my Voxpuppet have been trying to make ourselves invaluable to Wikipedia...--Vox Humana 8' 19:03, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Y'know, I'm glad you're still about. Yeah, we had 'issues' in the past but I notice your arch-nemesis appears to now be banned for a year. BTW - here's my sock-puppet: User:AliClick. Mind if I hack around with your userpage is a similar manner? :) - Alison ☺ 19:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Socks

Guess who needs the banhammer dropping please? Does nobody pay attention any more? :( One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Sock Rocked, and now Blocked, are you shocked? SirFozzie 16:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm shocked at you actually doing some work aye! Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

(Looks into getting Hack the Mop, so he can do his own donkey work in the future ;)). Seriously, it's good to have you back, ONiH SirFozzie 16:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I won't be here long enough for that! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Not fair!! I missed that one :) - Alison ☺ 16:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC) (welcome back, Hackney. None of that scooting off after the arb case, ya hear?)

You had 60 hours to drop the banhammer! It's a long term vandal who targets just one article in an obvious way, how is it remotely possible to "miss" him? Right now the arb case looks like it'll be just declined which will just ignore all the wider ongoing problems. I've no desire to edit if it involves constant battles with trolls who've probably made one constructive edit between them ever to Irish republican related articles. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I know! I've been so busy both on other wikis and off-wiki. Yeah, I think the arb case is going to tank and ultimately, nothing will be resolved. VK is going to come back anyway, you can be sure, and it'll be business as usual. I've no time for the politics either, dude, and i tried to keep away from this steamroller of a thing. Got sucked in nonetheless :/ Either way, having an editor like you on here kinda boosts my optimism a bit, y'know :) - Alison ☺ 17:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

*knock knock* I'm now watching that article, FWIW. I figure another pair of eyes + "banhammer" (man, I love that) won't hurt. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice to see *you* back on, too :) - Alison ☺ 17:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Some background info for Fvasconcellos. It's an Australian vandal who's been attacking the article for a year now uses IPs registered to Flinders University (such as 129.96.252.38) or 58.84 prefixed IPs. The page seems to be indefinitely semi-protected now as every time semi wore off before the problems would just start again. So he's getting round that with sleepers, and the vandalism isn't difficult to spot (as you may have seen!) so it's just block on sight. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

What on Earth is his beef with Craig Charles?? - Alison ☺ 17:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, Hackney. Certainly shouldn't be hard to spot, and will probably be a while before it flares up again. I don't even know who Craig Charles is, so I've no idea :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

He used to target all the Red Dwarf cast members, for example see Special:Contributions/129.96.234.230. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ages back Craig Charles was found not guilty of rape after months on remand and that is what the latest vandalism is all about, SqueakBox 17:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/216.194.1.193 - looks like the arb case was timed just right! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah. The Good Ol'Days. I really have to get my Sock Shredder back from the shop.. it was due for a checkup anyway ;) SirFozzie 18:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Already blocked, but I extended it to a week. Heh, "I thought you'd vanished asshole" - he really wuvs you! - Alison ☺ 19:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I have vanished, I've only come back for one specific reason but when a 216.194 prefixed IP suddenly appears on my watchlist I'm not going to sit back and do nothing! That said I reckon I should write two articles over the weekend, one about a high-ranking G**** N*** and another about the Maze prison escape, which really deserves an article seeing as it was the biggest prison escape in British history. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

We need you back, if only for your sock-magnetic purposes :) Poor RMS couldn't keep his head down when you showed back up. Now that's awesome! Considering he's too afraid to go anywhere near me. But yeah, articles, articles. The Maze escape one sounds fascinating - Alison ☺ 19:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Aye, I thought the Maze one was going to be tricky at first. I tried buying a book by Chris Ryder about the prison (which would obviously cover the escape in detail) a while ago on Ebay, but the seller robbed me :( Most news reports don't go into much detail, they just mention the truck and guns and stabbings. But then I found the official report into the entire escape which is more than I could have hoped for really! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Nothing like a good primary source, eh? Looks wordy, too. Reckon I'll wait for the article :D - Alison ☺ 19:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

This sounds awfully like a challenge - Alison ☺ 20:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Strange, especially the RMS and UK connection..... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Cucumber City is real!

Look, CUCUMBER CITY IS REAL!!!! I can't believe it got deleted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeeliW10 (talk • contribs) 20:06, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Soooo - I took a look at the deleted article (and the other one with "HI" in it). It's not exactly notable, now is it? - Alison ☺ 20:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Request to unprotect Sri Lanka

We have come up with a consensus for the article. I think you can protect Sri Lanka. Thanks Watchdogb 00:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected - excellent work, guys. Good job - Alison ☺ 00:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response and kind words. Watchdogb 00:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Kind of an apology

I'd like to apologize about this Hornetman16 thing, I was his adopter so I kind of feel guilty about what happened. I'm sorry about it. Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 02:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It's okay - you shouldn't feel guilty on this one. It was entirely down to that editor's volition, he was warned repeatedly and it was basically entirely outside your realm of influence. Seriously, no reason to feel guilty at all - Alison ☺ 16:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

my page

Hey, thanks for protecting my userpage. I have no idea what I ever did to piss off that little twit who vandalized it....first time I ever got my page vandalized too, kind of a nasty surprise. Thanks for being bold and protecting it, and best wishes to you! K. Lásztocska 03:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. Nobody should have to put up with that kind of abuse - Alison ☺ 16:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Hornetman16's userpage

Someone changed the tag on his user page to say that he's been banned. Is this true, or is it just a wrong tag? I thought Hornetman16 had only been blocked indefinitely, not banned. Acalamari 16:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Whoa! This was tweaked by User:Lights yesterday for reasons unknown. And no, HM has not been banned, not at all. Reverted, and thanks for letting me know :) - Alison ☺ 16:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome; I didn't think he was banned. I wasn't on Wikipedia yesterday so I missed what happened. Acalamari 16:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Hornetman16/Bar

I've nominated User:Hornetman16/Bar, a page you created, for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Hornetman16/Bar and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Hornetman16/Bar during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. SLSB talk • contrib 16:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Commented - thanks - Alison ☺ 17:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Protections

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		You should really stop putting admins out of their jobs at RFPP ;) Will ^(talk) 16:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Somone noticed! :) Thank you! - Alison ☺ 17:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I owe you one for that as well, but I saw the pogrom on your barnstars so I won't bother.... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 18:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

HornetMan16 MFD

I didn't realize I reposted the speedy template after Adambro deleted it. I was going through his subpage log and put that on one that didn't have a speedy. I should have looked at the logs and saw that I had previously posted one there and it was deleted. Sorry. SLSB talk • contrib 20:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem - Alison ☺ 05:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I withdrew the MFD I guess they are OK here. I didn't mean to be a nuisance. Sorry. SLSB talk • contrib 19:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Template

Is there a template that can be used to warn an editor of violating 3RR? I believe I've seen one before but I can't seem to find it. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep! I use them all the time. You want {{uw-3rr1}}, {{uw-3rr2}}, etc. You can fill in the article name and other bits. Don't forget to subst - Alison ☺ 20:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you very much =] --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

RFPP

Heh. :) Acalamari 19:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, you know my COI over that one :-D - Alison ☺ 19:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Irish articles assessments

It seems that the assessment of Irish articles has fallen off the radar but recently Flowerpotman, Sarah777 and I have been doing a little work on this as well as actually classifying articles (actually Sarah has done the most work). Anyway, you are listed as a member of the WikiProject hence this post.

The first thing that needs doing is to work on the WikiProject template. Actually there are two templates both of which get recorded by the assessment statistics bot that collects the ratings and creates the listings in the category Category:Ireland articles by quality. The two project templates are {{Irelandproj}} listed on the main project page and {{WikiProject Ireland}} listed on the assessment page—the first allows both quality and importance rating as well as nesting but no reviewer comments, while the second allows quality rating and comments but the importance does not seem to work and comments are not included. This needs to be fixed, so we use one that works fully—can you help?

The next thing is to decide if we just let editors assess as they wish or to create some criteria or guidelines for rating the quality and importance of the Irish articles. Personally I am in favour of some guidelines—some will be easy to decide while others are a little more complex. What do you think?

Some projects make lists of articles for assessment while other go after groups of articles by category. What should we do? A mixture of both by using a "To do list"?

As of the last assessment statistics bot run on Sunday, August 20, only 1462 articles have been tagged, of which 1156 have been assessed for quality but 660 of these have no importance value.

Besides these 1462 there must be hundreds more untagged articles that should be tagged when we get the template issue mentioned above fixed.

We are not bad in our assessments but some projects have all their articles assessed while others are lacking more than we are. We can really use a few active editors to bring assessments to the fore. Please reply on the assessment talk page as to what you can do. Please help out. ww2censor 17:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

You have probably been too busy to get involved but maybe you can give a quick look over the assessment discussions and progress on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland/Assessment page. I are making progress but would love your comments. Cheers ww2censor 02:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll try get to it today if I get a chance. Busy, busy though ... - Alison ☺ 20:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh I know what is is like sometimes. TTFN ww2censor 23:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Quick question

I have been doing work on the various WikiP:IRL categories and accidentally created redundant categories myself - I was using one naming scheme and there were others from earlier. There were also a few unneeded ones created by other people. Anyway I have rationalized it all using one scheme and decategorized the superfluous categories, as they were empty and there are no templates that will start populating them. Long story short, everything is where it should be, but do I need to run the unneccesary cats through WP:CFD? FlowerpotmaN·(t) 05:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Just list them out here, with a colon before the 'category', and I'll nuke them all for you :) - Alison ☺ 05:26, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, then :O)

Category:Disambig-Class Ireland pages

Category:Template-Class Ireland pages

Category:Category-Class Ireland pages

Category:Dab-Class Ireland articles

Category:List-Class Ireland pages

Category:Template-Class Ireland pages

If you want to see what replaced them, they're in my edit summaries from the night. (And the wierd thing is, this is what I was doing when I was taking a break from doing non-Wiki things that needed doing :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 05:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Done - all gone now :) Thanks for being diligent! - Alison ☺ 19:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Always clean up after myself, especially if I ~~goof~~ take a radically different approach. On a completely different issue, how has Wikipedia gone 6 years, without someone not realizing there was an obvious edit summary just waiting to be happen? (Really had to do that one.) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 21:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Haw! Awesome :) Well I guess you can claim prior art on that one now. Well done :) - Alison ☺ 20:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... The Skibbereen Eagle, now there's a thought. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Can you have a word with W. Frank as comments such as this are not helpful refering to editors as "fanatical antagonists".--padraig 14:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Padraig, I've just commented on his IP userpage. Comments like that are unacceptable and unhelpful in the extreme - Alison ☺ 19:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Now I know you don't go here normally

Can you take a look at these please, in particular things like this. His talk page and block log are relevant as well....thanks! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Kildare

Can you help me do this move? Kildare was moved to Kildare Town and made into a disambiguation page, but a disambiguation page Kildare (disambiguation) already existed. Kildare Town is a crazy name and a couple of editors have indicated this is a stupid and non used name, so want to revert Kildare Town to Kildare. All the entries in Kildare plus many other links are on the dab page. Can you do that as I don't have the ability to move it. Cheers TIA ww2censor 02:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Done - all fixed now. I've left a detailed comment at Talk:Kildare#Page move fixes, as well as informing the original mover. Thanks - Alison ☺ 19:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm intrigued ... I thought I had corrected the situation but my "move" seems to have gone unnoticed. Just out of interest was I the "out-of-process move" you referred to? Abtract 19:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

You had actually half-corrected it :) And no, yours was not the one I perceived to be out-of-process. As the talk page shows, someone made the move suggestion and a few short hours later, it was moved. Nothing by way of dialogue had happened and a bunch of style standards got broken in the process. This was months ago, mind. Don't worry - it wasn't you!! - Alison ☺ 20:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC) (btw, not seen you in ages :) )

btw I am omnipresent but generally below yr horizon :) Abtract 20:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh - thought as much :) - Alison ☺ 20:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this. ww2censor 01:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

My username

Haha! It's good, is it not? Everyone loves the cavalry, they're all dashing and the like. See? Thanks for the compliment ;-) Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 18:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm reminded of something Richard Armour once said, that in the old west the infantry and the cavalry got calouses, in different places. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent pic. The expression on her face somehow sums it all up :) - Alison ☺ 19:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

PIRA/IRA

Hi Ali Please can you see this on my talk page. I think that W. Frank's persistent addition to the P is starting to be disruptive but I don't know that its sufficiently disruptive to merit a block. What do you think. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's being disruptive. He's been formally warned right now over that. It doesn't merit a block right now, esp. as he's not been warned of its imminence. He has now & I'll monitor the situation from here on ... Thanks for bringing it up! - Alison ☺ 19:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Kildare

I have no recollection whatsoever of ever dealing with that page! So whatever you deem best is fine with me. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 19:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Pascal! Your name was last in the move log and it was ages ago, so who knows :) It's all sorted now & everyone seems to be happy, though. Thanks again - Alison ☺ 19:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Greeting

Allie, you have mail. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Replying :) - Alison ☺ 22:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Can you please tell User:Conypiece to stop reverting edits I make on my talkpage. I have ask him not to post there.--padraig 23:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Padraig. Looks like User:SirFozzie did just that. Thanks, Foz - Alison ☺ 23:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Anon

We have a IP User:86.159.133.145 [23] reverting all the templates, this is obviously a editor evading 3RR.--padraig 19:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Foz blocked it just before I did - Alison ☺ 19:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Who ever it is was just targeting my edits without even checking them, they even reverted this one where I was fixing the article after a editor was messing with it, I think SirFozzie is going to request a checkuser on this one.--padraig 19:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

That's borderline wikistalkery. If that happens again, let myself or Foz know - Alison ☺ 19:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it's either Astrotrain or Biofoundationsoflanguage. One or both were edit warring with padraig on the articles in question, and several of the reverts are to Biofoundationsoflanguage's preferred version, so I have listed him as the probable sock master on the Check User Request. The IP address also corresponds to their general area, as it is a BT Internet IP address. SirFozzie 19:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd say you're right. See what CheckUser says ... - Alison ☺ 19:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It could be anyone, it could even be me! The Great Escape is coming along nicely, should be finished by tomorrow. Can anyone confirm whether I can use this as irreplacable fair use? Even if I had the talent, any version I created would only be a derivative work I assume? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it may be Crown copyright, dude :( Can you possibly draw up an outline? It looks like a useful image - Alison ☺ 20:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC) (can't wait to read!)

Yeah, I was thinking it was probably crown copyright due to the report it's part of. However that doesn't have any bearing on the claim of fair use as far as I know, as all fair use images are copyrighted by definition. I'll just write the article and leave a link to possible images on the talk page I think, and let someone more clued up on images sort it out. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 20:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Erm... anyone got any idea as to what to call this section?

Alison said:

Y'know, I'm glad you're still about. Yeah, we had 'issues' in the past but I notice your arch-nemesis appears to now be banned for a year. BTW - here's my sock-puppet: User:AliClick. Mind if I hack around with your userpage is a similar manner? :) - Alison ☺ 19:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) - I do try to make myself useful around here. Maybe when my contribs are higher I might launch an RfA - what do you think? And no, I don't mind you hacking around with my userpage.--Vox Humana 8' 19:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

RfA could all happen. Maybe get a bit of time up between then and your old blocks, maybe. You're a good editor :) BTW, I hacked on your sock-puppet page and also put in the proper headers, so you're all legal. Just so there are no accusations in the future! What do you think of the page? - Alison ☺ 19:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I fixed your userpage, too. And added {{User Alt Acct Master}} just in case :) - Alison ☺ 19:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. It's a little tacky, but otherwise great. I'll bear in mind your advice as regards RFA - how far do you think I need time-wise between a block and an RfA?.--Vox Humana 8' 21:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

"Tacky", LOL!! I try, I try :) Re. the time, I'd say a lot more than 2 months anyway. You just need to show that you've moved on since the whole Pigs/harassment thing and have become a model Wikipedian. As, it would appear, you have. If you were to nom today, I'd probably go with neutral or weak support. You're on the right track, though, and you've also done some excellent work on Commons, I see - Alison ☺ 21:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Wikipedia:Admin coaching might be a good place to check out - Alison ☺ 21:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, as for the Commons, I've got about 12 films awaiting developing :-) - a digital camera is on the wishlist for Christmas! I've already signed up for Admin Coaching and often ask User:J Milburn, a fairly new admin who has become a friend of mine through Wikipedia, for advice over MSN Messenger. And, yes, I do try to behave myself ;-) - but I do sometimes get annoyed that certain admins completely ignore policy and reinstate inflammatory comments made by other users... I just try to avoid getting in those kinds of scrapes and follow J Milburn's example.--Vox Humana 8' 23:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Good plan in all, I'd say. And yes, "certain admins" are like that even if they're not "ignoring policy" :) - Alison ☺ 23:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

No, when I said "certain admins", I didn't mean you. Sorry for any offence caused :-) --Vox Humana 8' 15:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Allison, thank you for your comments and feedback. I will stick to adding information that adds to the article, now how do I get the ref to be right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srikarna (talk • contribs) 22:21, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

I'll fix the ref in a minute for you. However, that link is still inappropriate (it's waaaay commercial) and you've mentioned it twice now. I'll find a proper medical cite in a minute as I'm familiar with the procedure - Alison ☺ 22:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

All done :) I've added a pubmed link to the seminal Hinderer work on malar implantation - Alison ☺ 22:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I will refrain from any commercial sites in the future.

Srikarna 22:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It's probably for the best, really. Most of them are advertisement thinly disguised as information - Alison ☺ 22:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Again

Alison he is removing the Hungerstrike template and other information from the Harry West article, West was the only candidate in the by-election against Bobby Sands, User:Coneypiece thinks this is not relevent and is removing it, he tried to argue this in the talk page and got no consensus.--padraig 00:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Both blocked. There's no excuse for that behaviour from either of you - Alison ☺ 00:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

RCU

I wonder whether you'd be prepared to initiate a RfCU for those accounts on the 'other side' please? It seems a bit unfair than anyone who has been so unreasonable as to have disagreed with padraig is being checked.

Between:

Naturally I'd be happy to apologise if I were wrong. As I'm sure will happen to me when the current 'results' come through? I can hope anyway.

Thank you. Biofoundationsoflanguage 08:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for CheckUser is over here. Feel free to initiate one yourself if you believe it is warranted. Note that I have not done so in this case, other than to add a name to one on behalf of an editor I blocked myself. I wouldn't feel overly put-out about it, however, and would like to point out to you that the Arbitration Committee also have use of CheckUser as part of their function. The sooner this silly 'sides' nonsense ends, the better - Alison ☺ 10:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Now that you've shown yourself to be IP smart, you'll never get rid of me

Please take a look at the single edit of this... person, Alison. I suppose we're not lucky enough for it to be a static IP? Bishonen | talk 12:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC).

(PS: or try educating my ignorance, it's your only hope!) Bishonen | talk 12:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC).

Heh - It'll happen sometime ... but not today:) 5am here in this part of the world. Check your email - Alison ☺ 12:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied. Bishonen | talk 12:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC).

Dave Winer protection

The article is fully protected, but it has a semi-protect tag on it -- kinda confusing. :-)--SarekOfVulcan 20:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Oops! Fixed now. The article is actually fully-protected - Alison ☺ 21:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Careful

Shouldn't use the Northern Ireland Conflict to indict another editor, and some other stuff, it could be seen that you are assuming that the editor in question is a member of a paramilitary organisation. Could leave WP wide open. Can't say that. Remember you are only a witness. Surprised. :) User:Gold_heart 21:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Did I say a WP editor was a member of a paramilitary organisation? Certainly not! I never even suggested such a thing. However, I have certainly suggested one particular editor used an intimidation tactic which was popular amongst several orgs ("We know where you live") and did so in probable full knowledge of the history of that tactic. That's what makes it particularly heinous - Alison ☺ 22:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, stick by it. There is an inference, it's leading, unless there are different standard rules on WP. Remember Vk can't answer you, that's why I'm pointing it out here. Your are bringing your subjective feelings into the equation. Can't do, that's the way it usually is! User:Gold_heart 22:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The inference was in his comments to you-know-who, and that quite significant as it indicates the utter nastiness of that comment, bringing the whole silly edit-warring nonsense to a new low. VK has every right to challenge this in his initial statement as well as when the Arb case is underway on the 'workshop' page, etc. I am obliged to state my rationale for the block in as clear a way as I can, and this I have done. How I 'feel' about it is neither here nor there, Gold - Alison ☺ 22:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Only trying to be helpful, but run through it with the WP lawyers, just in case, err on the the side of caution, as always. Take care. User:Gold_heart 22:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Anyone could be a member of a paramilitary organisation, after all we're all volunteers here ;) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Hackney, you troublemaker!! :) - Alison ☺ 23:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Tiocfaidh ár lá , simply means "our day will come", it's a euphemism for a United Ireland. There is nothing wrong with that sentiment, no more than a Free Wales or and Independent Scotland, "Free South Africa" etc. I'm all for a United Ireland, hope that doesn't mean an indefinate ban, well it makes me the next marked editor, does it?

Billy Wright was wrong in his murder campaign of at least 50 people simply because they were Roman Catholic. That is why agents of the British Government colluded in his killing.YA@LL GET WHAT BILLY WRONG DID , to me it says, "do you all understand what Billy Wright did". Let us not get carried away with our own POV here. Things were bad in NI, let us leave it in the past. Thepiper 11:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Apologies, I was reading YA@LL GET WHAT BILLY WRONG DID with a mistaken understanding. Alison, you are correct. That shouldn't have been said. Thepiper 13:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. It's all gone to arbitration now anyways, so we'll see what they make of it - Alison ☺ 13:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Removal of poorly sourced controversial material

I note Trad Unionist has been blocked for 3RR on Orange Institute. On two occasions the sole reference to justify describing the present Organisation as Sectarian was Michael Farrell's book which is over 30 years old..hmm...does he not have a point maybe? Aatomic1 22:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

No, he doesn't. He was revert-warring. That's not the way to deal with an issue such as that. That's what the talk page is for. If he had issues with the book ref, blanking out the entire statement is not the way to address this. As it happens, another reference has now been supplied. Had he suggested this in the first place, he would not be blocked now - Alison ☺ 22:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)