User talk:Consumed Crustacean/Archive 4

Archives
1. April 27, 2005 – May 21, 2006
2. May 21, 2006 – August 9, 2006
3. August 9, 2006 – January 14, 2007
4. January 14, 2007 – March 24, 2010

Thanks

Thanks for your help with the Coy disambig.

Candent shlimazel 23:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I disagree

Hello, I disagree with your statement that I cannot link to my own website from my userpage. "it doesn't matter if they're on it or if you simply link to them." According to the WP:USERPAGE It says under removal that:

"Removal If the community lets you know that they would rather you delete some content from your user space, you should consider doing so - such content is only permitted with the consent of the community. After you've been here for a while, and written lots of great articles, the community may be more inclined to let you "get away with it". Alternatively, you could move the content to another site, and link to it." Notice bolded text.

It also says on the page: "You are welcome to include a link to your personal home page, although you should not surround it with any promotional language." No promotional language was on my sight.

So I disagree with your determination and believe that I have a right to link my Wikipedia user page to my own personal website. The rules say I can and the information is not promotional and isn't selling anything. I have contributed many articles and to many articles in this encyclopedia. My page on freemasonry actually was meant to help improve this encyclopedia. I addressed what I believe is some problems with how the articles on freemasonry are being edited and included links and info for possible future inclusion.

I don't want a long drawn out affair over this but as long as I am not advocating violence I should be able to edit the content on my own personal website without interfence and without the link to it being severed since the rules not only say that I can do it but suggest that I should do it. Especially, despite my vast additions to this encyclopedia the members don't want to let me "get away with it".

Also without prodding from anyone I posted a disclaimer that people may be offended by what is on my Non-Wikipedia website. So despite your gut reaction in answer to MsJapans request I think you should reconsider. Since it does not corrolate with what is written in the rules. Wikipedia can't dictate what is written on a personal website after suggesting that I link my page to a personal website.

I have had several vandalizations to my userpage including removing my picture of Jesus and replacing it with a naked teen as well as other things being done to it. This is why I reverted my page so quickly and labeled it as being vandalized. I understand that people may not agree with my beliefs or quotes or whatnot that is why I followed Wikipedia policy and linked it off site. I even warn people that they might be offended so they don't have to go there.

I don't think that I should be singled out for such treatment just because a few Wikipedians are up in arms about my pages. I could go through the vast amounts of user pages and give you examples of polemics that is allowed on Wikipedia or the links off site. But I'd rather not and in good faith would like to be able to link to my own webpage without harrassment as we are allowed to do. You can devise your own warning if you want. Thank you for your time and I hope that this situation can be cleared up, since I moved my page to follow the rules and cool the jets of those so incenced about it. Dwain 04:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Look, there is a difference between moving material off your userpage and linking to it when it's better suited to a blog or personal page, and doing so when it's outright polemic and insulting. I'm mostly concerned with the comments that were on your profile page, including associating paganism with satanism and the like. The existence of others who are doing this isn't justification, and using disclaimers is just Wikilawyering. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 16:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

RD edit

Hi, did you intend this edit[1] on the ref desk? Better in my opinion to delete both those trolling questions, but i wouldn't do so if another editor had already reverted a prior deletion. Was that your intention, or was it just an edit conflict?—eric 01:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. I meant to revert his addition of a second copy of the question. Remove it all you like, I don't know how that happened :/. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Skulltag. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Catman847 04:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm asking to have this page restored. i was looking at the debate about it, and whomever asked for it to be deleted was obviously biased.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skulltag

The AfD was posted a few (i'd say 3) MINUTES after it was originally posted. Unless he is EXTREMELY biased against any of these articles, it really isn't possible for it to be deleted unless he was waiting for something like this to happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catman847 (talk • contribs)

It did not close the discussion or speedy it, but ooookay. The time it took to nominate doesn/t really matter, and you can/t claim that every single user in that debate is biased. If you want to try for DRV, go ahead. One has already upheld the deletion, though. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, right now, seeing as i've never had an article deleted before, i'm not sure what DRV is.... Catman847 04:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Follow the steps [[2]]. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

What is your reason for deleting my Until June page?

oh wait.. there is none... so stop deleting it! --Mister Pine 05:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

It was already deleted through Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Until_June, and is suitable for CSD A7 anyways. If you want to contest it, use the deletion review. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the way I reacted. I know it was already deleted and I didn't agree with that but tried to make it better to repost after going through hours of research on that band. I have no idea what that CSD A7 means. As far as I'm concerned, that article is not even English. If someone is going to delete a page, I think they should at least give a real reason and not blame it on some wikipedia policy. Why is it CSD A7? At least then I might be able to fix it, but I can't repost it now becuase of what you did which wasn't really fair because I didn't see your message until after I reposted it. I won't repost it again until I know it's okay. So, please let me know what I can do to fix it. Also, is it okay to make the page a subpage of my user page until it is correct... if not, I'll delete it because it is already there. --Mister Pine 05:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

A7 is the A7th item on the list, listed under A7. It basically says that the article contains no assertion of notability. If you can assert some notability, you can probably recreate it; if someone wants to delete it then, they'll need to have a proper articles for deletion debate, instead of the last brief one. If you have something to indicate notability (note our policy on verifiability of information), then I can restore the article for you to add it. No guarantees that a decision will not be reached to delete it again though. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Monkeybreath (and different spellings)

The only thing I reported him was for a 3RR vio and he's been having a grudge against me, heh... I guess I should be happy that my user page is getting vandalized? Thanks for that rv, btw. :) -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 09:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Scot Sherman

Seriously. You instigated its deletion, and I would really really really like to see what it was all about. I heard that it was 40k. It must have been cool. Even if you can't find/don't know about a cached version, any memories you have about it would be awesome. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.53.46.141 (talk) 23:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

Sorry for not responding immediately, I was recovering it. User:Consumed Crustacean/Scot Sherman. Please save the file locally so I can redelete it. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

"Cross posting"

My edit history is a active mess because I kept forgetting to use Preview. Most of those postings are minor edits to my prior text.

All I've done is provide my opposition once (left to see), plus comment once (left for all to see ) on a neutral editor's vote because it noted Jakew's heavy involvement in the Circumcision topic.TipPt 18:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Read WP:CANVAS. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Be careful removing trolling

I don't think this was trolling. The user reposted the question two days later and got an answer. See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#black rights. -- SCZenz 19:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

IIRC (and I may not), we had a series of related questions asked on/around that day, many of which were obvious trolling, and all of which were written with a somewhat similar style. It was probably a bad call though, I'll be more careful. Thanks. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 19:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

AIV removal by non admin

Hi, you just removed a user from AIV that had not received a final warning. I saw that this should not have been added and explained to the user that added it about final warnings and stuff. For future references, as a non admin, if it is obvious that the proposed vandal should not be blocked, am I OK to remove the name? Regards RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure. According to WP:ADMIN, "Any user can behave in a way befitting an administrator (provided they do not falsely claim to be one), even if they have not been given the extra administrative functions". If it's uncertain you might want to err on the side of caution and wait for someone else to do it, but otherwise it should be fine. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, I just see it quite a lot on AIV and wasn't sure if removal of a user would get me a slap on the wrists! Obviously, I'll err on the side of caution if theres any doubt that the user should be removed. Thanks again RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 23:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

My talk page

Mr. Crustacean, I had actualy decided not to bother arguing anything on my talk page. Thank you for restoring it, however, I have been informed, by admins, that if I choose not to backup my discussion page I can do so. Finding out that all the negative statements of late have been started by MSJapan's complaints I have nothing to say apart from what I have written at the administrator's complaint board. Thanks again for your lucid comments. Dwain 00:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I had no idea what you were doing with the page. You blanked it, unblanked it, added extra spacing to it using an odd edit summary, reblanked it, and so on. I wasn't certain what state you intended it to be in, and indeed you didn't provide edit summaries to explain that. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Consumed Crustacean. I partially reverted your edit on Dwain's talk page. That is, I reverted your revert of his removal of unwanted posts, but I left your new post. It's not intended as a snub to you, but I feel very strongly that since removal of other people's edits from one's own talk page, while discouraged, is not forbidden, a user who does so should not be reverted. It only causes unnecessary anger, and doesn't achieve any good sufficient to counterbalance that. And that's something that I feel even with the worst trolls. If someone inserts naughty words into the article about President Bush, then revert him, even if you're going to make him angry. But if someone removes unwanted comments from his own talk page — well, it's not damaging the encyclopaedia, is it? (I agree that the blanking and unblanking, etc., with no edit summaries, made things confusing!) Cheers. Musical Linguist 00:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with one being aloud to remove talk page comments. I just had no idea what state he intended it to be in, as I said. Due to the confusing nature of it, I wasn't certain if it was intentional or not, and after a couple of edit conflicts I just said "screw it" and posted it as well as everything else. Hasty, yes. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome vandal?

Hi Consumed Crustacean. What does Seong0980 (talk · contribs) have to do with the welcome vandal? I've indented him in the list and left a comment. Did you copy&paste the wrong username, or am I missing something? Note also that Jpgordon has carried out the checkuser. Picaroon 03:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Nothing, it was an incorrect copy/paste. I meant to add BNW11. Whoops :/ -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Vandal

I really don't mind, I was going to do indef, but I thought that was a little too harsh, but you can lengthen it to indef if you wish. Cbrown1023 04:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Tiny Kong

Thank you for moving back the page. Some of them link to this page with these keywords. --PJ Pete

Sure, no problem. You should thank Dancter and HeroicJay; I only did it because I noticed the speedy deletion tag they put on it. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you check this?

I posted that welcome vandal thing yesterday and you checked it out. I had prod'd one article in a new state and warned a vandal, and now they're going off on my talk page at each other being abusive. User:Honeydip69 and User:Connman21. Not sure what I should do, Honey is the vandal. - Denny 03:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response, I've had homework. Honey is, err... I sent him a test4, since it's pretty clear that he's being intentionally disruptive. It'll probably be an indefinite block if he keeps it up, considering his lack of useful contributions. The other fellow just seems like a frustrated newbie; I think you handled it decently, hopefully it will chill out. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Assistance required.

Hello Sir I am having a problem with User:DennyColt. This is an exert of a message I recently sent him asking for evidence of my alleged vandalism.

• Excuse me Denny what do you mean when you said "it looked like a completely raw thing that wasn't right to be an article??" It is a real article. The synopsis I added is completely accurate, and before any deletion I would like proof of any wrongdoings.

I wrote that article to the best of my ability and I assure you that should you want to research the information you will be satisfied with what I wrote. Thank you.

I'm not particularly sure what he meant by that, though I think he might have hit the prod a bit early. The article is completely unsourced though, which is something which should probably be corrected (see Wikipedia:Verifiability, a major policy), and an overly lengthy synopsis from a single TV episode might not be encyclopedic. I'm guessing this is along the lines of his thinking. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

How exactly would I cite a tv show? The only way I could provide a source would be to include the name of the episode. I couldn't use a website or supporting article to cite could I? Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.118.190.148 (talk • contribs).

A website would be probably be fine in a case like this, so long as it's decent, though a reliable one would be preferable. Again, Wikipedia:Verifiability is pertinent; everything in the Wikipedia, besides possibly extremely short stubs, should cite some source. In the case of the transformers articles, they have a lot of information (synopsis, trivia, and animation mistake sections in many of them), but no references in sight. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Well after I spent all that time writing it I would be very upset and angry if it was deleted because Denny made a judgement call on something he may or may not know anything about. Thanks for your help.

hi I was just thinking since you help end the punisher debate you help with the Vic Mignogna world of warcraft commerical debate? =^-^=;; —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonmaster88 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

hey

hey buddy, fuck off that stuff about ronaldo was completely accuracte. prove me otherwise cunt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honeydip69 (talk • contribs)

Bye bye now. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

thanx

YOU R THE BEST. Hope you stay in Wikipedia forever.Pendo 4 03:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Repeat Vandal User:24.181.122.190 Assistance

Hello, this IP was blocked for one day. The editor resumed vandalism as soon as the block was lifted. Can you please extend the block on this IP? -thanks- STS01 18:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Done, went for 2 weeks as it appears to be a static or somewhat static IP. Thanks for the notice. WP:AIV would probably have been faster if I wasn't online right now ;) -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 19:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Sylvia Browne

Hi, with regard to your citation request in this article, clearly no one citation will cover all those radio shows, and it is not really practical to create a list of 6 citations, one after the other. Perhaps you could clarify what you're after here? Thanks a lot, and regards — BillC ^talk 01:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's impractical to list 6 citations at all, especially when 6 claims that need sourcing are included. Any amount would be better than the current zero. Wikipedia:Verifiability is pretty crucial, and it gives readers increased confidence in the article, as well as further places to explore the topic. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Impractical to look like this.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6]} However, I can certainly find refs for at least some of them. — BillC ^talk 01:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Could just be put directly after the reference to the station: "... featured on some station^[1], some other station^[2], and yet another^[3]." -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Second opinion

Hi, I posted a complain on the Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Donteatyellowsnow. One administrator has replied so far. I'm relatively new to the concept of WP:ANI, but I feel that considering the user was blocked once, and the number of warnings and incidents with that user, that the reaction was relatively light. Would you be able to give a second opinion, even if it supports the response. Thank again in advance. =) Langara College 05:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow response. I'm out of the Wikipedia mood right now, and I don't think I can help at the moment. My apologies. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Forgot my signature, thanks for marking it -- feb^talk 05:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Signing

Please be sure to sign talk pages and other discussion pages with ~~~~. This includes warning users with warning templates and the like. Thanks, and happy editing. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 10:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, thanks for the reminder. Did that a couple of times tonight, completely slipped my mind. Also, thank you for your quick action to my vandalism complaint! Nemilar 10:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

CSS

I saw you answer a CSS question on the help desk. Is there a list of classes I can reference somewhere? --Mgm|^(talk) 23:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Catalogue of CSS classes. You can also just look at the page's source code and read off the class or ID attribute, as in <div class="usermessage">. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for the assistance

I'd just like to say thank you for answering my question about the new message box's CSS code on the help desk. I knew I had seen something about it mentioned before, I just couldn't recall where. I hope you have a most wonderful day, and happy editing! Kyra_~(talk) 01:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For restoring Pierre Joliot. Veesicle (Talk) (Contribs) 22:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

It wasn't vandalism, I reverted a guy who replaced Mario with Michael Jackson! Bly1993 22:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

You edit is here [3]. I can't see any "Michael Jackson" edits within an hour. If that's what you intended, I have no idea what happened. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It was there, but for some reason it didn't show up in the history. I have no idea. But I swear it was there. That happened once on the Twilight Princess page too. Bly1993 23:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Then it was probably vandalism to a template on the page. If you're going to revert, make sure you actually check the diff of what you're reverting, or click the "Show Changes" button at the bottom. I could be a database hiccup, but those are pretty rare. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user talk page, I would have done it myself, but I was blocking the user indefinitely. :) That wasn't the first time he done that, and I had just reverted/warned him (which is how he got my username). Cbrown1023 talk 23:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, cool. No problem. Just middle-click-rollback'd the rest of his "contributions". -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

help desk / hookah

No problem. I figured that section got added while you were reverting and just got removed by accident. *Mishatx*-In\Out 05:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked user

Could you show me where this 'general consensus' is? They're being deleted per DENY; there is absolutely no consensus that people can go around deleting stuff per essays. Pages can still be put through MfD, and I'd expect that they'd get deleted there. However, DENY is not policy. 1ne 06:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Do I have to grab a specific page? It's a general thing. It's been going on for awhile, and I'm unaware of any serious challenges to it. I certainly don't think it's worth wheeling over and reverting deletions that have already taken place. Besides that, that particular user's page falls under WP:CSD G5. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Just because many people support an essay doesn't mean it's a 'general thing' that can be accepted. I certainly think that if it has such widespread support, it should be made a guideline or policy. As I've stated before elsewhere, I have no problem with the content of the 'DENY' essay. My problem is that it's an essay. 1ne 16:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, did the imposter add the 'indefblocked' template to the page himself? If he didn't, then it does not fall under G5. 1ne 16:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Does it matter? Is there a historical reason to keep the page? If you want me to pull another CSD out of my hat, G6; non-controversial housekeeping. Keeping imposter's userpages lying around doesn't help anyone, or really help the encyclopedia in any manner. I could also pull out WP:IAR, which is policy, though I hate to do that. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, could you do anything about this user: User_talk:Googoola? The account seems to be used mainly for vandalism. Thanks. Kon-Tiki001 15:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've indefinitely blocked him. There doesn't seem to be a single useful contribution. Thanks for noticing it. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

suggestions

i suggest you take care of the rude people in wikipedia like "Lanicoya" that are rude and racist nad if you haven't noticed she has been attacking me she insulted me first and i am offended why dont you do something about that?!Bacanaleranica 03:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/190.53.15.171 looks valid. Throwing around claims of racism is incivil. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Timberlake07.jpg

In the future, make sure to a image with disputed licensing with Template:PUIdisputed and notify the uploader as well. —Iamunknown 06:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ack, will do. Thanks for spotting it. I was rushing on that last edit last night, I suppose I got sloppy. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Martin's 3RR

You beat me to it, I just went there to report it. Thanks. --Milo H Minderbinder 22:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for replacing the sample. I was wondering if I was just looking for it in the wrong place. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the edit history of User:Myriam Tobias, I get the suspicion it may be a sock puppet of User:Martinphi, particularly since the new account has only edited articles Martin has also been editing in the same period. I'd appreciate your opinion, do you think I should make a SOCK report or request a checkuser? Thanks. --Milo H Minderbinder 23:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look later, but my first impression wasn't so. I'll be somewhat busy this weekend, so it might take time to reply -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

To follow up, I ended up filing Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Martinphi. Seems pretty blatant to me, but I'll see what other editors think. --Milo H Minderbinder 15:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting how the report progressed. The meatpuppetry would explain why I didn't read the two users as being the same person. Good call. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything I need to do to follow up on it? I haven't done one of those before so I'm not sure how it works - will an admin just close it at some point and decide if action is necessary then? --Minderbinder 15:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Often, yes. It's only been open a couple days, and it already has comments from a few different users. If it simply dies out though, a mention on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Community noticeboard might help. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

EXPLANAITON FOR GNOMING

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Wikignome

read it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Smith Jones (talk • contribs).

For keeping the Matthew Books page

Argument for keeping the Matthew Books page. There have been over 10,000 copies of these books sold, and they have received numerous reviews on Amazon.com. If this article is to be removed because the books are "not popular" then all but two articles about (spiritual) mediums should be removed as well.

Also, I am working on cleaning up the page.

If this article is to be removed doe to lack of notability, then the following should be as well:

Channelled entities: Aiwass, Count of St Germain, Djwal Khul, Dr. Fritz, Kryon

Spiritual mediums: Derek Acorah, Ailene Light, Rosemary Altea, Mina Crandon Benjamin Creme, Allison DuBois, Eva Pierrakos, Arthur Ford, Colin Fry, Ronna, Herman, Esther Hicks, Gordon Higginson, Estelle Roberts, Jane Roberts, Betty Shine, Doris Stokes, Swami Laura Horos, James Van Praagh, Lisa Williams, Mary Ann Wintkowski, Patience Worth, and Chico Xavier

--Snooziums 22:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

In addition, there is a review of the books and interview with their author on the Meria Heller show, a well-known radio show in the links section.

--Snooziums 22:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Attribution -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you do something about this?

Hello.
You're the first admin I could think of to deal with a trouble-editor. For a while, they were causing problems by making accusations, implied threats, insulting, etc... but they eventually stopped-when they "retired".
However, it seems like they've come out of retirement just to gripe. That, in and of itself, is fine (Heck, I like griping too), but I don't think it's appropriate to call people "dooshbag"(his spelling, not mine), or "retard" in edit summaries, as in here and here. The first was in response to someone basically saying they never got to resolve their issues with him. The second was in response to my saying it's inexcusable to call someone a douchebag (which apparently makes me a 'retard'). If this is what he came out of 'retirement' for, what's the bloody point? Bladestorm 14:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah. Another admin's already taken care of it. Bladestorm 16:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff then. I've been somewhat inactive as of late, and I don't know how long that will last. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for fixing the merge at Lunisolar calendar. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 19:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Billy Ego reported by User:MarkThomas

Hi, I wonder if you could spare a minute to review my recent 3RR complaint on User:Billy Ego for his repeated revert behaviour on Nazism at 3RR report on Billy Ego? Thanks! MarkThomas 17:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I see exactly three reverts, not four. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

70.153.116.145

That's probably not going to stop him for more than a couple of minutes. He's been IP socking for over an hour. HalfShadow 21:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Just noticed. Hrm. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I blame society. That way it's everyone's fault. HalfShadow 21:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

user: kpy18

user kpy18 should not have been blocked its complete bullshit its like if i was playing crackdown and i touched myself till i peed it just doesnt happen. Now im lookin at some page that has fucking clowns on it what the hell. Well anyways its for a school project so you banned him for no fucking reason whatsoever you sir are a moron and deserve whats comin to you which i hope is a bullet. If you wont unblock him then you have to block me! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumed_Crustacean_is_a_faggot there thats for you! I made it just for you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hckydude1103 (talk • contribs)

You're referring to User:KPY1. He was acting disruptive, and refused to stop or even to express desire to stop. He also issued a death threat. If he contests the block with the {{unblock}} tag as described on the block message, and does so reasonably, I or someone else might unblock him. However, if your school project is to mess with the Wikipedia, it sounds like I have no choice but to keep the block on. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

obviously your a fucking moron for taking a death threat over the internet in any way serious thats really sad also his name is kpy18 not kpy1 shows how much thought u put into your words or maybe even actions. Lastly what the fuck you called it the wikipedia its just wikipedia not "the" that makes it sound retarded and the threat he said was jokingly we should kill this guy you think hes gonna follow through with that? Also were adding to our own fucking schools wikipedia for school were messing around with that and will keep any messing around within that. Please dont be a fucking moron oh and by the way if you really take a death threat serious over the internet well then i think you deservere to be killed :) thanks and have a nice day! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hckydude1103 (talk • contribs).

Oh no, I mistyped a username, whatever will I do? You don't own your school's article. Disruptions to the article aren't permitted simply because you attend the school. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

hey how is it refusal to stop if he said its for a school project you just never asked nicely and wow you are a fucking moron nice job! o btw where is kettle moraine school at i dont know where it is can you give me directions from texas?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hckydude1103 (talk • contribs).

I already said he can appeal it. He was asked to stop, he responded by saying it's for a school project, which indicates that he had no intent to stop. You yourself should probably stop adding things about staff members hunting T-Rexs and other nonsense. And Google Maps. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

wow i never added ne thing to that webpage i did revert it but reverted it back right away i never added ne of that stuff so obviously you have no idea whos doing anything so how can you have the right to ban someone if you cant even figure out who edited what?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hckydude1103 (talk • contribs).

You readded it, and soon after removed it. That's still disruptive, and I didn't see your revert until after I sent the warning. Please chill. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

ok well if hes really good will u let him back just give him a chance man i mean it wont affect u to quick unban him and if he does something wrong just ban him again—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hckydude1103 (talk • contribs).

Alright, I have unblocked him. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Association of Members' Advocates MFD

Gosh, never thought my post would end in an MFD but OTOH I'm a big fan of bold actions and AN consensus seems clear, so good on ya :)

Anyway, I was just wondering if subpages ought to be included. Stuff like Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/AMA Coordinator and {{AMA alerts}} --kingboyk 16:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just put a note to that effect at the top. Thanks :) -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Why!!???? why??? what's on with you man? why a mfd on AMA, why?? --Emperor Walter Humala · ^{( talk? · help! )} 20:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Have you read the MfD and the discussions surrounding it? Please, no knee-jerk reactions. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

RE User talk:Matrix17

Ok i see.Sorry for that But its not me reverting a bad edit its servant saber reverting good edit. so dont blame me for that-.--Matrix17 20:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom ruling violation by Johnski

Harvardy is a known sockpuppet of longerm problem editor Johnski, who was indefinitely blocked by the Arbcom for a litany of abuses and violations. Numerous editors concur with this assessment. It is my understanding that Harvardy admitted to being a Johnski sockpuppet in a private email to an Admin some time ago. As soon as I find the reference I will post it. Given that the creation of the Harvardy account is a direct violation of the Arbcom's ruling, the suspected sockpuppet warning is entirely warranted. Please note that Doktor Who's posting of the vandalism notice against myself and Davidpdx is a result of ongoing problems involving that editor's contributions to a number of music-related articles, which I have sought to address. These include violations of WP:V, WP:OR, WP:CIVIL, WP:3RR. In addition, Doktor Who himself has been identified as one of several active sockpuppets of Sky-surfer. --Gene_poole 02:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I recieved your message on my talk page. First of all, I would ask you to address me with a little bit more civility next time you leave a message on my page. Certainly leaving a message to "cut it the hell out" doesn't meet the standards of civility. Second, this situation is a long standing one as Gene_poole has described above.

While I agree with you about the constant reverts, User:Johnski is using his new identity and remarks under the sockpuppet warning to try to give the allusion that he is not who he really is. The Administators and other's who run Wikipedia have been unhelpful for the most part in dealing with this issue. The Arbitration Committee in their great wisdom issued the weakest ruling possible, essentially making it difficult to enforce. I spend countless hours, along with others compliling stuff for arbitration in order to stop Johnski from his constant barage of vandalism.

The IP starting with 211 was me as I'm at work and am not able to log in or use Wikipedia very easily. My guess is that there might be a partial block by the education board because of some of the content on Wikipedia. I don't know this for sure, it's only a guess. Davidpdx 02:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I said cut it out, not cut it the hell out. I apologize if you find the use of the word 'hell' in 'I don't know what the hell is going on' to be offensive. Again, if you want to pursue this productively, feel free. Revert warring over a user page aids no one, however, and won't stop the sock if he is a sock. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on my user page. Can you clean and protect this IP User page or tell Davidpdx and Gene Poole to let me reveal my suspicion there too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:125.212.108.206 Harvardy 02:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

CC, just to let you know, Harvardy is the one who has been vandalizing these pages, not myself and Gene Poole as he alledges. His comments on the IP user page accusing GP of using that IP as a sockpuppet are laughable. He has also passed the 3RR theshold and I have reported him for that as well as violating the arbitration decison. I would appreciate it if at this point you could stay clear of the matter and let those complaints run their course. Davidpdx 02:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

In my rush to revert spam links added by 125.212.108.206 (a likely Harvardy sock, incidentally) to a number of articles, I inadvertently failed to realise that more recent changes had been made to several articles, and reverted to the wrong version. --Gene_poole 03:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Aye. I screw up with edit conflicts and stuff all the time :P -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Out

You. Stop it. OUT! --Stukov 06:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• cough* HalfShadow 06:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. It's possible this should have involved more investigation into what caused it. Please feel free to reduce or lift the block if you see fit. — coelacan — 07:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Seems fine, considering the user's history and multitude of previous warnings. I was just waiting for something past test4 to warrant a somewhat longer block. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 07:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Harvardy

This message is to request unprotection for Harvardy's user page. I have pursued this through legitimate means. Today admin User:Tom harrison banned Harvardy indefinately for being a sockpuppet of User:Johnski. I asked for this page to be unprotected through the page protection board and was told it is up to you. In addition, since he has been banned I believe the sockpuppet warnings should be reinstated. Davidpdx 09:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought that had been done. Must have been looking at something else. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

ur ghey

very —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rockermang (talk • contribs) 23:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Wiktionary -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't Threaten Me

First of all unless your even a operator or anything, you do not threaten me! I would gladly have fixed the errors but for you to come out and threaten me like that pisses me off and scares me. I can fix the errors. I have done so and will do so. So stop threatening me. PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES, MAYBE SOME PEOPLE FORGET TO ADD CERTAIN THINGS, you ever realize human beings aren't perfect.--Jack Cox 00:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

You have a multitude of copyright warnings and yet have not fixed the issue. If a user is continuously violating copyright law despite being warned about it, it is in Wikipedia's best interest for me to block them. If you fix it, nothing needs to happen. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

That is, I figured it better to warn you than to just block you the next time it happens. Is that not reasonable? -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes that's all I want. Well as for the source of it, They all came from dvds, I used the dvd and took screenshots on my computer with it. --Jack Cox 00:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Just specify that and they should be fine. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Makemytrip username

This is in reference to your comment for the Makemytrip username. Being an employee of this company i have taken appropriate permissions to use this name, the company content and image on wikipedia. Please do reply back ASAP to sort out this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Makemytrip (talk • contribs)

You haven't provided any proof to the effect... -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

What a mess...

Just glanced through a few of the choice words people have said to you. Not a terribly civilized bunch are they? Vranak

That's hardly anything compared to other areas of the internet I frequent. Doesn't bother me. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Removing user:Pbethala from AIV without taking any action

Hello, how come you removed this user from the AIV without taking any action against his account ? [| Diff]. His only edits have been to create attack pages, one especialy I mentioned, about a child, and accusing him of sexual crimes. It seems likely this child exists in real life, but you just removed the user from AIV, without giving a particular reason, just (1 comment removed). He created another page full of homophobic nonsense also. This is just a question, by the way, I'm just curious, as I have seen users blocked for less.--Jackaranga 21:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't. User:HBC AIV helperbot2 did. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

But did you tell the bot to? If not how can the bot know who to remove ?--Jackaranga 22:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The bot is supposed to automatically remove users when they are blocked (such as the IP in that diff), so that admins don't have to. It seems to have thought that your report was a comment on that IP's report, rather than being separate. I'll bring it up on the bot's talk page. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh right, thanks for sorting this out.--Jackaranga 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Quick Thanks

Just a quick thanks for reverting the vandalism of my user page. Ian Goggin 09:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review for Template:User no GFDL

Just thought you'd like to know:

A template you participated in a Tfd for (Template:User no GFDL) has subsequently been speedily deleted, and is now under deletion review. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   15:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I think I may stay out of this one. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Please do not edit my user page

ok? thanksGatorphat 19:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

So you admit sockpuppetting as User:Wiki Writer2? Cut out the trolling, nonsense, advertising, or whatever it is, please. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

My userpage

All good mate - and someone appears to have altered one of the user boxes to make it too tall, which is why the layout mucked up :) Thanks for the concern though. MojoTas 07:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Protected titles

Hello! What did you mean by this edit summary? Was something not functioning as you expected it to? —David Levy 03:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, an IP recreated the talk page despite it being linked to. If it was just server lag, my bad. I'm not too familiar with the process. Apologies for the insane edit summary. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you referring to the talk page link from the original entry (added by Thatcher131)? If so, that's only intended to serve as an ordinary link; it doesn't protect the talk page (which isn't always something that we want to do).

Protecting a talk page (if this is desired) requires a separate entry, so you were correct to add one. Just remember to use the following format:

{{protected title|article name|ns=Talk|optional comment}}

This ensures that the activity log link is properly formatted. It also is a good idea to add "|talk=no" to the article's entry (to remove the link to the protected talk page).

I hope that I've been helpful!  :-) —David Levy 03:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I was under the impression from the {{protected title}}'s template documentation that the link to the talk page (|talk=yes) is supposed to cascade in the same way. Hence it recommends only leaving it on there if it's known that no useful discussion will be occurring there... -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the documentation recommends removing the talk page link if it's known that no useful discussion will be occurring there (or if the talk page is protected against creation).

Incidentally, the parameter "talk=yes" isn't needed. The talk page link is displayed by default, so only "talk=no" has any effect. —David Levy 04:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Username

I meant that the username looks sexualy inappropriete in accordance to the username policy, to me. If you look back at the Wikipedia:Username policy#Inappropriete usernames where it mentions "Usernames that include profanity, or obscenities, or references to genitalia or sexual slang." That's what it did look like to me. Maybe I should have worded it like that.--U. S. A. 22:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't have profanity, obscenities, or references to genitalia, and it would honestly be a stretch to say that it's "sexual slang", especially in the way the word is normally used. wiktionary:sexy -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I may have inturpereted things wrong then. Just because the username contains sex, does not apparently mean the name is inappropriete.--U. S. A. 22:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Please accept my sincere apologies for this.--U. S. A. 22:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Nah, it's no problem. The sheer number of policies and junk pretty much guarantees that you'll misinterpret or misread something at least once. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks for getting the human-ape thing right

Thanks for this edit. I'm amazed at how often I hear smart, educated biologists correcting others by saying "humans did not evolve from apes..." when (it seems to me) we clearly did. --Allen 02:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand :\ -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks, I appreciate the kind words Crustacean, no hat doffing required. Take Care. -- Azi Like a Fox 08:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

re: removal of edits

The last thing on my mind was spamming or providing inappropriate content. But you have to agree that it does not appear to be a very consistent application of publishing rules that en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming lists and links close to 100 articles mostly scientific in nature (from which i took the specific type of referencing via REF tags), and on the Google Earth page it seems to be considered spam. Or why a free academic article raises concerns while various links to pages that include advertising in the reference section seem to be OK. By the way, there is also a broken link on the page, but I will refrain from further editing (earth.google.com/coverage/coverage_list.pdf). Ecoresearch 19:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not a free academic article, it's a sample chapter from a larger book. It's promotional. Try discussing it on the article's talk page, if you want. It just strikes me as spam. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

STOPPED!

Yes, O.K.! Of course! Doma-w 02:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, though it looks like the site might already be fixed. Wheee. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 02:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I am really sorry! I have no idea about these things! I only use ths page to give a reference. Doma-w 02:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It's no big deal, and it doesn't actually seem to be doing anything (just trying to do something). -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 02:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I found this: Have a look here: User talk:71.107.183.141 This anonymous user gave a few minutes ago a link to dataOlympics - but there is no reason to give this link on this page... Doma-w 02:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, he's just trying to screw with people. Luckily, like I said, the site doesn't seem to actually pose a risk. It looks like it's trying, and failing, to spread a virus (i.e. the site owners mostly fixed the issue). -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 02:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Is the problem solved? Can I use dataOlympics for reference again? Thanks! Doma-w 16:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, as far as I can tell. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for all! :) Doma-w 23:30, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

You will be eaten tomorrow with butter and garlic.

Please make sure all your worldly affairs are in order before then. HalfShadow 03:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It would have been a lot nicer if you didn't let me know it was coming. Now I'll be tormented in my last night by nightmares of drowning in seafood sauce. And after all that lucid dream work with my therapist to get rid of that cursed recurrent dream. :( -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Given your name, I figured you'd have gotten used to, nay, even resigned to the fact that being eaten was to occur at some point in your future. You're the shrimp version of Prometheus. Except without the superpowers. Because what fun would that be? 'Eat me'? I DON'T THINK SO!!! *CRACK*HalfShadow 03:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Resigned to, yes, but that doesn't mean I'm afflicted with overwhelming thanatos. Joking about it is one way to avoid overthinking its real consequences. I'd really rather not think about steaming and breading all day. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

And just why not? It sounds delicious. And you're bringing people together over a steaming basket of...your...corpse. ...Well then.65.33.59.183 (talk) 19:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Martonte

Would you be interested in speedy-ing the user's hoax article, Travis Kellman? --Rrburke^(talk) 03:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool Cat MFD on DRV

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 May 30#Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cool Cat -- Ned Scott 05:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Return of User:Martonte as User:T-Kellz

Hi... User:Martonte, whom you blocked as a result of this ANI report, appears to be evading the block as User:T-Kellz. I submitted another ANI report here --Rrburke^(talk) 19:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Transformers episodes

Uhm, how exactly those articles are supposed to cite sources if they contain nothing but plot summaries? The episodes themselves are the sources. I think you're being overzealous with these templates. - Sikon 14:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

FYI

I blocked Vranak (talk · contribs) as a sock of Cjwright79 (talk · contribs). I figure you'll need to know as he's already requested an unblock... — Scientizzle 17:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Block this guy

Its Moo12321 He keeps on deleting the tag article of deletion and wrote DONT DELETE ON THE ATRICLELone Shadow Wolf 02:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It just looks like he was removing a {{prod}} tag. That's okay. Annoying if he does it without correcting the issue, but not block worthy. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Minor edit

SORRY ABOUT thst i think it does the minor edit thing automatically. Smith Jones 01:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

?

YOU HAVE TO RESIGN ALSO SMART ASS TOTALLY CRUSTED AND CONSUMED! BY OCTOBER THE 12!!! #&%@^()&^#^&@(^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.230.32.77 (talk) 16:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

What? -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Heath Ledger

Okay, so when I view it in IE6 I get no text wrap and an infobox that takes up almost half the page, just because of the caption. Any ideas? Pairadox (talk) 07:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I've literally never seen that before. It's only supposed to do that when it's one continuous word. Do the below boxes have a different width? It's using the infobox vcard class as the template does so it should render about the same... -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 07:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Wait, damn, I have to think about this for a second. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 07:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Y'know what? Let's just leave it. I can live with a very wide infobox, even if it is really distracting. Pairadox (talk) 07:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Problems are fun though. I even fixed the test. The blue ones should be the same width (and are rendered as in the article), the pink not (no set width). This is pretty much exactly as rendered in the article. If the blue ones are indeed a different width, something very interesting is happening with your browser, as it's fairly simple rendering. The only thing I can think of is that if you're using something third-party to force IE to increase the font width past what it normally does, it's not also increasing the size of a single em. That'll mess up a lot of CSS layouts. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 07:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The blue ones are indeed the same. I couldn't really tell you about the setup of the browser, as I'm using a friend's (old) laptop at the moment. You know how some people can be about settings and such, so I don't dare try to change anything or even investigate too closely. :) I'm sure when I get back to my computer everything will be fine. Thanks for taking the time to try to figure it out. Pairadox (talk) 08:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Heath Ledger at the Berlin Film Festival (2006) with some extra text for fun

Photo credit: Howie Berlin.

Heath Ledger at the
Berlin Film Festival (2006)
Photo credit: Howie Berlin.

Heath Ledger at the Berlin Film Festival (2006)

Photo credit: Howie Berlin.

Heath Ledger at the
Berlin Film Festival (2006)
Photo credit: Howie Berlin.

Dr.Jhingaadey

I've been watching this exchange. The editor is new here, at least by this name, and clearly has things to learn.

But what does it mean to say "stop spamming" to an editor who has only made ONE edit outside their own talk page. Spamming one's own talk page?

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 06:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, spamming one's own talk page. External links and overlong essays for the purposes of advertisement are spam no matter what namespace they're placed in. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

See this thread on AN/I, it wasn't my decision. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, good to know. Thanks. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The Maddox anon

Hi, sorry if this should go elsewhere... But I've tried to get some help with this person for a while. User:67.149.157.177, User:200.67.71.119, User:Panelgets, User:Arisedrink, User:Peapee and User:Amazing cow all appear to be the same guy having an issue with Maddox (and those who're trying to save the article from complete butchery). My English skills aren't very good and I can't find my way in enwiki's dispute resolution chain. Any help or advice would be appreciated. --Saber^Excalibur! 06:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Well I really wouldn't be surprised, though the two IPs seem to be from different ISPs altogether. Considering their editing pattern, of obvious vandalism, dispute resolution probably isn't required so much as blocking is. Maybe a WP:RFCU if it gets too out of hand, but I think it's obvious enough that we don't need that. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

One other thing: don't bother reverting on their own talk pages (ie. reverting an edit by 67.149.157.177 on 67.149.157.177's talk page). It's fairly accepted here that people can remove comments on their talk page after reading them. Removing comments on other user's talk pages is not. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, if you add User talk:87.105.143.103 to the list I think it's apparent that he's using some form of proxies. I'll take it to checkuser if he gets started at the Maddox article again. Anyway, thanks. --Saber^Excalibur! 06:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

If it is, he's using the same ones pretty frequently. There's Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies if you want to report suspected proxies too. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

If you look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maddox_%28writer%29&action=history there may be more proxies used by Panelgets that have NOT been marked as open proxies.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/213.180.164.121
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:67.149.157.177 = Had been blocked before, but I am unsure if he is still blocked and this is not marked as an open proxy

WhisperToMe (talk) 20:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Anti American

Your edits are very anti American. This should not be acceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.39.23.16 (talk) 22:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Who is this bell-end and why did he feel it necessary to post this exact same message on my talk page three times? HalfShadow (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Weird. I haven't a clue where he came from. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Earth Hour image

I thought wider image actually shows a better idea and understanding of the Google website, while reading the information of Google's participation in Earth Hour. The size that the wider image takes is not that significant.. same size as how much the quote takes up vertically. While the previous image takes a more space vertically but wider space for the quote to show, going over another section's space. Well if the previous image actually looks better to you then revert it back. --staka (T ・C) 22:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just figured that it wasted a lot of space (just about half the width is pure black space). -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Every supporting city (as of March 27) is on Toronto star Section X page 6-7. I tried searching Toronto Star's database but apparently they don't include special sections. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 01:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Indefinite block on sock IP?

this seems a little excessive, no? I know the user has been evading blocks and posting frivolous cases to AN, but an indefinite block to an IP without a history? Enigma ^message Review 04:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It's 55 hours, wrong template. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just went and checked the block log and saw. I was misled by the template. :) Enigma ^message Review 04:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I need a big blank box so I can just write stuff, but still have it look big and colorful and spiffy. The templates are nice, but annoying. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Although I suppose class="user-block" accomplishes that. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Citing

That's odd; a person can do an interview and use a doctor such as a geneticist in a research paper. (79times (talk) 18:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC))

Yes, I realize that is true to a degree. However, this is Wikipedia. There's probably several reasons we don't allow this; no doubt anonymity is the major one. Anyways, the vast majority of citations you tend to see in well-written research papers (I'm talking Journal-level) are of other research papers; people need some way to seeing things for themselves, rather than just accepting them at face value because they come from someone of authority. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Serial accuser of anti-Americanism

Back in March a wikipedian left you an accusation of anti-Americanism. They left similar accusations on half a dozen user's pages. You might be interested in my invitation for them to be more specific.

Yours in cooperation and collegiality. Geo Swan (talk) 21:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. He seems to be removing non-American spellings from articles as well as removing anything that could be remotely construed as negative towards the US. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

user:Fhawd

I'm trying to see if I understand, are you saying that with those contribs I should have re warned and waited for him to disrupt a BLP again, and then gone to AIV?--Cube lurker (talk) 03:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying that's the normal process. If you think it warrants immediate action, just post on AIV. For that particular user I would have agreed and blocked the user regardless personally, and most other admins would have as well. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. My understanding was that AIV was only for vandals that followed the strict warning procedure. As you blocked this one you saw why I thought he deserved no further chances. Next time I see a similar one I'll try AIV and see if other admins see it as you do. Regards.--Cube lurker (talk) 04:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

That is, usually if it's rejected at AIV and it's obvious vandalism, then it's not serious enough to block without giving the user a level 4. Taking it to WP:ANI won't usually change that. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Help with Sock

Hello. I noticed that you were currently active on AIV, so I'm hoping you can help me with what I believe is an obvious sockpuppet of User:Swamilive. This is my first time dealing with a sockpuppet, so could you please point me in what direction I should go, or, if you can help deal with it now, tell me the best way to handle it next time? I started to go to AIV since a sock report had already been done, but wasn't sure if that was the appropriate place.

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Swamilive is the report for reference. In July, one confirmed sockpuppet of Swamilive added this section [4] to James Bay. User:P199 removed it [5], and then Swamilive restored it [6]. Today, User:JeremyJamesJohnson added a slightly expanded version of this section [7], which I reverted leaving an edit summary saying that it had been removed a few times before. While I was trying to figure out exactly how I should handle this, I was reverted by JeremyJamesJohnson [8], who left an edit summary saying "no it hasn't". Since the first half of the section is word for word the exact same as the edits in July, it's obvious that they knew that it had been and, I think, helps to confirm that the user is Swamilive. Thanks for your time, which is probably being wasted as there's probably a better way for me to handle this :) Apparition11 (talk) 02:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Usually adding an extra case to Wikipedia:SSP#Reporting_suspected_sock_puppets is a good idea; if it's an urgent concern, a report to WP:ANI as well would be good, or straight to AIV if it's obvious. I'll definitely block this guy and put a notice on his talk page though, this one seems pretty blatant. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 02:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for your help and advice. I'll remember for that next time. I'm slowly catching on to things around here :) Cheers! Apparition11 (talk) 02:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

If this one does it again it's probably obvious enough to go to WP:AIV right away, as long as you link appropriate diffs (ie. one from the new account, one from the old one). -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 02:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've seen Delicious carbuncle deal with this user a lot on cocktail articles, so I'm sure he'll be back again. I'll make sure to do that next time. Apparition11 (talk) 02:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:No_arrow.svg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:No_arrow.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 02:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. G7'd. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Sock Block Template

Hi there. I don't mean to try to bite you :) but please try to remember to subst all of the sockblock templates that you use. Thanks and if you would like to reply to this please use my talk page. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 15:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

D'oh -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Main Page redesign

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, Pretzels^Talk! 15:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll have to take a look at these once I get home. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

• Hi Consumed Crustacean, and thanks for your support with my proposal. I'd like to ask you just to hold off for 2 days on creating alternate versions of it, as the straw poll is to determine the top five original designs that have been in progress since July. Your creative input would be hugely useful after the straw poll closes, when the top five designs will be developed and merged. Thanks again for your ongoing help. Pretzels^Talk! 22:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

  I'm not using it as an alternative (as whatshisname was doing whatshisname is in Firefox's dictionary. Interesting), I was using it to make a point on my comment in the comment section; namely that it looks nicer without the icons. And that it has potential beyond what those in the oppose block are stating; really, some of them are in there prematurely, considering that this whole process is still in the semi-early stages. I'm going to stop typing now as I've lost my train of though. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

  I am actually curious about a couple other large changes but those I will hold off until after the straw poll, if the design is kept and no one else tries it. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

noticeboard achieve

Not sure if achieve pages are monitored. Added examples of bot problem. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive177#User:OKBot

Dragonmaster88

This editor has, for some reason, reverted my good faith edit at Punisher: War Zone for no apparent reason. Does this count as vandalism after a final warning? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Just looks like plain edit warring, I don't think it's vandalism. I'll put a message on his talk page. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 14:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

He did it again. It pisses me off because there's a message that appears when you're about to use the undo feature. It says: "If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary rather than using only the default message.". Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

My userpage

I'll ask you again; why did you remove a short and simple statement about God from my userpage? Is it because you are an atheist? Is it because you think the Flying Spaghetti Monster concept is the perfect retort to religious belief? Why, in the name of UP and NOT are you violating DBAD? -Zahd (talk) 05:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I have already stated why. Please take the time to read my comments. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

re: Software cracks

re: your comment at the Reference Desk: That might be the most tactful and yet informative response to that kind of question I've seen yet. "Good Form" — Ched (talk) 11:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I'm a little pissed

Because I had thought I had helped change this user into a constructive contributor, and now I've been betrayed.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 06:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's understandable. Bleh :\ -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

my "inflammatory comments"

ok maybe my comment was a little "soapboxy" but I was just getting a little P.O. by all the things people were saying about how well IVF works and stuff...but I wasn't attacking anyone personally, so I thought it was ok, sorry! :0) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.226.79.168 (talk) 05:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Actismel

DARN, that was fast!! (You did all that while I was still looking for a clear basis on which to suggest a CU!) Nice to see an admin with turbo-boost is watching out, good eye! :-D ) Edit Centric (talk) 03:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I just happen to have Don Murphy watchlisted, and something smelled fishy. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I was just about to write you about this. He posted what he thinks is the location I live on the adminstrator's noticeboard. I tagged his talk page this afternoon. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

ANI revert

Hiya :-) Are you sure you meant to do this? ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 09:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I did not. Must have been a bad click. Sorry. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 09:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

That's OK ;-) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 09:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

hey CC

awesome handle!Troyster87 (talk) 09:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Norton

Hi there CC, I stopped by, well for one thing to say hi .. Hi. The other was a post from the help desk. I was wondering which AV program you prefer yourself - I like Nod32 and AVG for the free one myself. Anyway, another editor asked me for some help on the Norton article, not that I particularity wanted to because I'd lost much of my respect for their products in the last 8 - 10 years or so for the very reasons you mentioned on the HD .. overhead, bogs things down, hard to remove ... all the stuff you already know. Anyway, what I didn't know (until a month or so ago), was that apparently Norton 2009 has made some very good improvements to their packages. Lot faster and lighter ... ya-da, ya-da. I read through not just the wiki article, but a lot of the various test sites, references, etc. Thought it was interesting, not enough for me to go buy it .. but still interesting just the same. Well, that's my "FWIW" post for the day/night. Have a good one. ;) — Ched ~ ^(yes?)/_© 07:48, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey. I've heard that it's improved with 2009, haven't actually bothered to check how much though. I may have to do that. I don't actually use any AV on my personal computers (not recommended ;), though I've used NOD32 elsewhere and found it to be fine. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

CFLs

Please see my question at "Energy saving lightbulbs" on the Science Reference Desk, regarding "free" CFL recycling and "mercury-free" CFLs. I grant that some bulbs probably have less mercury thanb others. Edison (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Your help is requested.

Hello. I have seen some of your post and feel you are a logical competent admin. I was hoping to get another pair of admin eyes over at Circumcision. I have no idea on your views and do not expect you to support me simply because I ask your opinion, however I do/will respect what you have to say. I had opened up an RFC that has gotten zero attention from outside the page but that is secondary to a structure debate now taking place. Garycompugeek (talk) 18:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I may take a look tomorrow, not really any time at this moment. Not any guarantees that I'll have any then though, since it is Friday. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Understood. I am the same way and rarely edit during the weekend. Any help or advice would be appreciated. Garycompugeek (talk) 22:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Attempting to resore articles

I have a few thoughts on deltions. My main one is I am trying to figure out why in the past most people have done speedy deletions with at least a little warning so I could dispute or at least save the text to use elsewhere before they did the deletion.

Today Ryulong (I think that is his user name) deleted 10 or more articles I had created. While I have to admit these were not the best articles in all cases, I was confident Marie Cornwall as the editor of the [Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion]] clearly met a given criteria for notability. Unfortunantly this was not a feeling help by the deleter, and he did not have even the politness to in any way notify me of the deletion.

So if you could send me copies of the delted articles it would be creatly apprecieated. I am not 100% sure this is a complete list, but deleted were Ugo A. Perega, Brent L. Nielsen, Dennis A. Wright, Dennis A. Wright (baptist), C. Allen Ostergar, Ray L. Huntington, Marie Cornwall, Richard I. Kimball, J. LeRoy Kimball, George W. Givens and Gordon B. Lindsay.Johnpacklambert (talk) 23:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Bill Kimball, who was majority leader of the Arizona State Senate, and Walter H. Pierce are also in this list. Is there anyway to get a massive delete classified has having clearly deleted notable articles and having it massively overturned for such disregard of wikipedia policies?Johnpacklambert (talk) 00:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC) Hartt Wixom and James L. Kimball, Jr. are two more articles of mine that were recently deleted.Johnpacklambert (talk) 00:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Add Morgan Warburton to the list. I thought top scoring women's basketball players would be exempted from attack, but it appears that there was a full scale deletion of my recent additions to wikipedia, without any real discrimination about what was under attack.Johnpacklambert (talk) 00:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Sidney E. Mead also has to be added to the articles I created that were deleted without any warning by Ryulong. If I had been given notice I could have demonstrated that Mead fits multiple categories for inclusion of academics, and could have easily come up with many more sources.Johnpacklambert (talk) 01:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry that I haven't gotten to this. I should have added the busy banner to my userpage earlier. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

notices

thanks for letting me know about my comments. it just bugs the crap outta me when I see people defending stuff I don't believe in and which seems so common-sensical. I guess I really just need to cool it...sorry. won't happen again. =0( 98.226.79.168 (talk) 04:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

A note re: Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review

Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test (formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –xeno^talk 14:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Clarification/affirmation added to Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum#The clarifications. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Change Network Card

I respectfully ask you to reconsider this edit. I do not wish my IP address to be publicly searchable in the Reference Desk archive via google or any other search engine. If you feel it absolutly necessary to force the question to remain, then please edit out all instances of my IP address (don't worry about signatures, but the actual discussion about the IPs I would like gone). Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.173 (talk) 14:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought I had. I just fixed the remaining two instances. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 14:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

:D Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.173 (talk) 14:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

you seem like a reasonable person

hello, I just commented on User talk:Andor29. An editor you blocked, then unblocked.

The editor seems like a person who wants to genuinely add content to wikipedia, I just fear that they are going to face a lot of problems soon. If you could add this editors talk page to your watch list, as I have done, so that there are a few more eyes on the situation to help him. Ikip (talk) 20:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Wake Up! Aria

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

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wake Up! Aria (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

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

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)