User talk:Jayron32/Archive8

WikiProject College football August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:34, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WHACK!

Whacking with a wet trout or trouting is a common practice on Wikipedia when experienced editors slip up and make a silly mistake. It, along with sentencing to the village stocks, is used to resolve one-off instances of seemingly silly behavior amongst normally constructive community members, as opposed to long term patterns of disruptive edits, which earn warnings and blocks.

Example

Whack!

The above is a WikiTrout (Oncorhynchus macrowikipediensis), used to make subtle adjustments to the clue levels of experienced Wikipedians.

To whack a user with a wet trout, simply place {{trout}} on their talk page.

User talk:LisaLiel#Blocked for 24 hours

If you ever need help working out time differences, just let me know. ;) --Step hen 05:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am an idiot. Don't mind me... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Movement Entertainment

Sorry about that! You probably slapped the block on just before I set Twinkle loose on tacking up that deletion template. Trust me, I wouldn't intentionally advocate that kind of overkill. Thanks! - Vianello (talk) 05:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DELETION OF ARTICLE, "MATHEMATICALLY PERFECTED ECONOMY"

Why you have deleted the article "mathematically perfected economy" for "blatant advertising" is beyond me. To the whole of the article, which was dedicated to explanation which no one has refuted/invalidated in 40 years, was only the least attribution *required* by Wiki documentation. As to what else could be "advertising," I see nothing whatever. I suspect rather, that your reason for deletion is that what you cannot disprove in the article is offensive to your wrong, offensive political disposition.

If not, I think we deserve a good explanation why a singular solution to the present causes of a world-wide monetary catastrophe have been deleted from Wikipedia. Can you invalidate the thesis of singular solution? Can you disprove that the models you can download from the site project inherent multiplication of debt to this day? Can you disprove inherent multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation is terminal?

How then can you rightly deny the world this information?

mike montagne (talk) 19:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmph. *snort*. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:House1090

Ok thanks any way, but I wanted to ask you if you could delet my old sockpuppets, I dont realy want them, I just want to keep my current account of User:House1090, please and thank you. -User:House1090 71.110.203.151 (talk) 04:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Pats 1960 helmet.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Pats 1960 helmet.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Hi I was wondering if you would be able to review the article 1973–74 Philadelphia Flyers season

Thanks, Jobes23 17:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Adoption Offer

See talk page; You offered adoption awhile ago, sorry I never responded, I have been busy with other things and couldn't get on wikipedia. Mainly I need help with the basics of editing and WikiCode. If you could please adopt me, and reply on my talk page, I would appreciate it. Seems like it will be a fun experience to learn how to use wikipedia better. NitrogenTSRH (talk) 17:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

are you taking on any new adoptions? I could really use some guidance --Amyreelz (talk) 02:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CHICAGO

According to my records, you have nominated at least one article (Hillary Rodham Clinton) that includes a category at WP:CHIBOTCATS and that has been promoted to WP:FA, WP:FL or WP:GA. You are not signed up as an active member of WP:CHICAGO. If you consider yourself either an active or semi-active member of the project please sign up as such at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/members. Also, if you are a member, be aware of Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3 and be advised that the project is now trying to keep all the project's WP:PR, WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:GAR, WP:GAC WP:FLC, WP:FLRC, WP:FTC, WP:FPOC, WP:FPC, and WP:AFD discussion pages in one location at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Review page. Please help add any discussion you are aware of at this location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soccermeko

My SSP report is languishing unattended. Your assistance would be appreciated.
Kww (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason for assistance. Kww just doesn't get it. He can't be selfish when someone is providing further information. 4.129.70.150 (talk) 20:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality Tag

Hello,

I have added a tag to the Barack Obama article requesting that it be checked for neutrality. Since you’re a peer review volunteer I thought you might be interesting in coming in as a neutral editor and checking the article out. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 11:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject College football September 2008 Newsletter

The September 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American Football Abroad

Hi Jayron32, I saw that you are very active on the above subject, and was wondering if you could help me. I would like to create a page on an American Football team in Italy. I have already written the main text, however was baffled by Wikipedia's formatting. Especially, how can I insert the diagrams of their uniform and palmarés tables? Is there a specific template I can use?

Thanks in advance --Sissi 90 (talk) 22:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rudolf Wanderone peer review

A second peer review has been opened on Rudolf Wanderone; I hoped you might like to have a look at it, as one of the "daily life" peer reviewers. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo

Where have you been? What's up? Hit up IRC or reply on my talk page... or yahoo, dude. You've totally disappeared! Jennavecia ^(Talk) 19:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USRD Newsletter, Issue 6 (FINAL ISSUE)


The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 6 • 8 September 2008 • About the Newsletter
Departments Project news Deletion debates Featured member From the editors	Features Gap appears in freeway New York subproject appears on the Wikipedia Signpost New York State Routes leaves jurisdiction of USRD From the editors—newsletter decommissioned	State and national updates State and national updates
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—Rschen7754bot (talk) 03:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Kyso47sm-1-.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kyso47sm-1-.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

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

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. the suspected "Lyle123" sock:

Hi, Jayron. I just tried to follow your advice regarding a report to the SSP page instead of the AIV page, but there have been so many nominations that I honestly have no idea as to how to number it. Another sock with a similar name has already been blocked. He's been caught, so it's unlikely he'll edit with this account anytime soon, but it pays to block it. --70.104.7.231 (talk) 05:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning?

I am just curious, but what does the following passage from your user page mean?:

This editor was nominated for deletion on 2007-11-25. The result of the discussion was..... Your mother.

--Archeopteryx (talk) 22:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. See WP:EFD, and then link on either the "hall of notoriety" or the "archived discussions". Heh. Keeper ǀ 76 22:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, what he said... Be aware, however, that that page has more inside jokes than you can shake a stick at! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

Thanks for giving me a new chance and I'm sorry, I wont let you and wikipedia down. I want to work with you on makining San Bernardino, Inland Empire a good article. House1090 (talk) 02:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greek, Greek mythology and my sig

Yes i am aware of this, thankfully most people dont know greek, so it doesnt matter :P «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk) 14:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declining the unblock request

Jayron32, You say that I didn't adress the sockpuppetry issue. That constituted nothing more than communicating with another editor on his talk page. Hardly grounds for extending a three month block to indefinite. Are you the kind of judge who would lock somebody away for life if they tried to hop the wall during a three month prison sentence? The issues of the block were precisely addressed. Please review your decision. I'd be most grateful. David Tombe 81.156.1.34 (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron32, Those matters have already been adequately addressed. I don't think that we need to go over them again repeatedly. I notice that you have now even blocked me from editing my talk page. I don't think that anybody should really take this outfit too seriously. People like yourself destroy its credibility entirely. David Tombe 81.156.4.167 (talk) 10:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.4.167 (talk)

Randy White

Mr. Jayron32, I would like to know why you keep undoing the additions that I made to Randy White's page. Everything that I put in there is correct and can be verified. Randarama (talk) 17:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)randaramaRandarama (talk) 17:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, Can you please reply to this? Randarama (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)randaramaRandarama (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did. See Talk:Randy White (American football) --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN discussion

As a user who contributed to the discussion concerning Koavf (talk · contribs), you're invited to comment at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Specific_Sanctions_-_proposals also. Thanks - Ncmvocalist (talk) 04:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

76.214.115.168

Actually, he never even made any edits to the article Talk: pages. He simply ordered other editors to do so. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, you're correct, he did comment about it 3 days ago, on a couple of the Talk: pages in question. Not on the others, mind you. Thanks for pointing that out. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Hey, thanks for semi-pp! You just peeved that vandal off more than my wife was giggling at those gay pix the vandal stuck on my user page. XD Have a great weekend! ...Dave1185 (talk) 04:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS! Just doing my job. BTW, he hasn't quit, he's just changed his targets: [1]. Toodles! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Yeah, he changed his target at me and you very quickly dealt with the AIV report. I appreciate your diligent work. Thanks again.--Caspian blue (talk) 04:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well you are welcome. As I said above, just doing my job. Let me know if there are any more problems! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, his next target is now User:Baseball Bugs. ..Dave1185 (talk) 04:48, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for being vigilant. I wonder if you'd mind semi-protecting my user page and talk page for a few days? That guy might be done, but it's hard to tell. P.S. I don't actually look anything like that. For one thing, I never wear a wristwatch. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would also help fend off the User:Ron liebman socks for awhile. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, Alison took care of it. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GRassy ass... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I already got that one. But thanks and lets keep vigilant on this guy... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Simple But Difficult Math' Problem.

Hi, I have a math' problem that will shake the grey matter up a bit, but don't know where to present it, please give me some guidence, Bill Whicker, Fairfield West Sydney NSW Australia. Bill Whicker 16:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill100727 (talk • contribs)

Peer review

Hi, would you be willing to peer review Major League Baseball? Your profile of the volunteers page says your interested in sports, so I might as well ask. Cheers.--LAA Fan^sign _review 18:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for Robert Tjain move

I was trying to figure out how to do it. 903M (talk) 05:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject College football October 2008 Newsletter

The October 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No Jacket Required

Hello there! I've never really nominated an article for Peer Review before, so bear with me. I have just recently nominated the article, No Jacket Required for Peer Review. I was a major force in turning it into the bare bones article it once was, to the Good Article that it is at the time of this message. I would love to improve it and make it a Featured Article, but I stink at these kinds of things, and usually go in a totally wrong direction! I looked at the Peer Review volunteer's page, and thought that you'd be a great person to look the article over, and see if any improvements are necessary. The link to the peer review is here. I would appreciate any sort of input, but if you are too busy, I certainly understand. Thanks for reading, and I hope to see you at the peer review! CarpetCrawler (talk) 01:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I've got your help every time the troll comes to me. :) I appreciate your effort to clean up messes caused by trolls on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work!--Caspian blue (talk) 22:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AAU reminder notice

A friendly reminder from the Adopt-a-User project =)
	Hey there Jayron32! This is a friendly reminder to update your status at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters whenever it is appropriate in order to provide new users with the most up-to-date information on available adopters. Also please note that we will be removing adopters who have not edited in 60 days. If you become active again (and we hope you do!) please feel free to re-add yourself. Cheers!

Notice delivery by xenobot 14:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't bite questioners at the Ref Desk

Like here [2]. A real life reference librarian, asked the same probable homework question, would just refer the person to suitable references. Edison (talk) 23:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. That was rather shitty of me. I'll go and redact that. Sorry to cause such stress. It wasn't right, and I will undo it now. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You are truly a sport. 90% of the time it really is a lazy student wanting someone to write out a nice answer he can hand in. 10% of the time it is a young person who is just curious. The textbook phrasing usually gives it away; this one sounded less "textbooky" than some I have seen. The ones I particularly like are the ones where they leave out part of the fact statement from the book, making the question unanswerable. Edison (talk) 02:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese New Year

I dispute Chinese New Year article, and I hope I can avoid a revert war. But I don't know how I can dispute the article without revert warring when Angelo_De_La_Paz reverts[3] my disputation with no explanation or discussion. VeryGoodBoy (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have avoided editing the article, except for the purpose of indicating that the article is in dispute. But Angelo De La Paz keeps reverting my edits that indicate the article is in dispute without saying anything in the discussion page. Is it that I can't even inform Wikipedia users that the article is disputed, and specifying which ones are disputed claims in the article? VeryGoodBoy (talk) 01:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Recent comment on ANI

Excellent. What's implied, but not fully addressed, is acceleration of bad behavior that usually leads up to an indef-block. It's not linear, it's exponential. Hence my comment that they're "begging for it" - causing as much disruption as they can, and more and more of it, before they inevitably go down in flames. Although I sometimes wonder if they're consciously aware of that. Like maybe whatever drug they're on is suppressing their reality-check neurons. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"...someone's posting at WP:ANI has led to their OWN block." Yes, exactly. I was talking with someone about that just the other day. It's a twist on the old axiom, "Never sue; they might prove it!" You've given me a hint of another insight, though. When I ask, "Why are you still messing with this guy?" the answer might be that the admin corps is letting it continue for the entertainment value. Well, there's certainly something to be said for that. It's a little like when the refs at a hockey game let a couple of guys slug it out for awhile until those two get tired, and then they're ready for the penalty box. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ho-Chunk mythology

userdiete003 has removed all of his contributions to this page, although I'm not sure if the earlier mentioned attempts at arbitration (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Ho-Chunk mythology)have taken place or helped. I have stopped reverting his vandalizing edits until this is resolved, but he is currently vandalizing what is left of the page, the stuff he didn't add. I've asked him to stop on the talk page, but I don't believe he even looks at it, yesterday he blanked it after I left a post there. I keep trying to Wikipedia:Assume good faith, and not try to make any of this worse. Would you mind looking at the page and telling me what you think? I'm not sure how else to proceed. Thanks your time. Heironymous Rowe (talk) 04:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AstroManiacs Page Deletion.

Hi, I am just wondering if we could have more information on why the AstroManiacs (band) page on Wikipedia has been deleted. The page was designed to be completely encyclopedic, for information, and was not 'blatent advertising' at all. Thanks, Scottydog27 (talk) 21:09, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the answers you obivously gave some thought to in response to my request for help with my first article. All I need to know now is whether the edit requirement to become an autoconfirmed user are for the article I am publishing or the site itself? I am assuming I have to edit ten articles on Wikipedia to qualify for rights to move an article into "production" or upload images? Thank you, Carin —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarinJohns (talk • contribs) 22:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry, I did not leave signature on last post. carin CarinJohns (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

format quibble

I hope you'll help me understand a recent exchange in Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities:

[content] -- JackofOz (talk) 21:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[content] --Alinnisawest,^{Dalek Empress} (extermination requests here) 21:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(EC with above) [content] --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(response to Alinnisawest). [content] --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This strikes me as a strange way to write it: the indentation and sequence, contrary to the labels, suggests that your first block was a response to Alinnisawest and your second was a response to yourself! My understanding of the conventions would suggest this:

[content] -- JackofOz (talk) 21:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[content] --Alinnisawest,^{Dalek Empress} (extermination requests here) 21:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[response to Alinnisawest] --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(EC with above) [content] --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And why do people announce ECs anyway? — I'm reminded of an aphorism: "Language is a code used only by code-breakers" – and I sometimes wonder whether I've cracked the code imperfectly, or everyone else has. ;) —Tamfang (talk) 01:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're a strange person

I don't like you one little bit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.6.132 (talk) 19:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have never asked you to like me. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? episodes

What I'd meant so that you don't get confused is that I ALWAYS add correct information. --98.192.44.39 (talk) 02:05, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need to prove that by citing which sources you got the correct information from, AND you still can't violate the 3RR EVEN if the information you add is correct. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 11:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did give the user the source, but he was for some reason ignoring it. --98.192.44.39 (talk) 17:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, you still may not edit war to force your version of the article to appear. If you are correct, seek outside help where others, who are uninvolved, can judge the situation and make an impartial comment on it. If you are right, other uninvolved people will back you up. Places to ask for this help are listed here: WP:DR. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

responded

I responded to your comments --Feeling free (talk) 14:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)Feeling free[reply]

Red Horn (legend)

Would you mind taking a look at Red Horn (legend)? There is an editor making POV editions, original research, conflict of interest, etc. He wont respond on the talk page, he just keeps reverting everything I do to maintain the neutrality of the article.Heironymous Rowe (talk) 03:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread

Unfortunately, no-one seems to have notified you yet, so here it is: ANI thread here. Carcharoth (talk) 05:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also my comment here. I'm referring to your block here, where you quote the same diff twice. Did you mean to quote two separate diffs? Carcharoth (talk) 05:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, saw your checkuser request for User:Astutescholar et al. I'm not sure how involved I should get, given my prior activity on the Oxford Round Table page -- but I'd like to suggest you consider adding two users to the request: User:PigeonPiece and User:Obscuredata. Astutescholar was the sock, Pigeonpiece was the earlier account -- and Obscuredata was even earlier (long ago blocked for sockpuppets). It seems obvious to me that Pigeonpiece was a reincarnation of Obscuredata, with the same agenda & dodgy English. Perhaps too much time has passed to do anything with Obscuredata, but I think it would be worthwhile to include Pigeonpiece. cheers, Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Astutescholar. It was on my list of things I wanted to do today. Toddst1 (talk) 19:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please review my first article

I am pretty much done with my new article on my user subpage New Article. Would you kindly verify the format and let me know what I have ommitted that may compromise the publication of the article if I were to move it to the main space? Thank you, CarinJohns (talk) 17:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: User talk:Epic GX

Classic behavior if you see the deleted contribs. They make ~10 edits to their userspace, weeks after account creation to get autoconfirmed. See also, another account doing the same thing that I just blocked, User talk:Epic RX. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, checkuser says not the real grawp. But quite obviously an impostor. See the history of my talk page too ;-). - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Dear Jayron. Thanks for the help re the book Hendrix was reading. It was bugging me.--Stroika (talk) 09:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jayron#2, thanks for the so-dry wit about McCain's fitness to lead. :) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and you're welcome --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:07, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks fom InfoArt

Hi Jayron, Thanks again for all your help and patience. I really appreciate your comments and advice, is very generous, and sorry again for all the troubles I've caused. I do hope all this can be resolved quickly and positively, and perhaps I might contribute in a more constructive way in future. Very best, Infoart --Infoart (talk) 13:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

		The Reference Desk Barnstar
		Thank you for answering my IQ question on the Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 01:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 10:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ip check

Hi, the username you just blocked, do you think its time for an IP check through checksuer? Check the history of Brian Mulroney and you will see what i mean. Same person do you think? I know its pretty easy to block and revert but getting a clearer idea would be nice. Thanks 211.30.16.21 (talk) 14:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Article

Hi again Jayron, I sincerely appreicate your feedback and guidance as I attempt to publish a first article. I changed the formatting of the headings and I searched for independent sources to support information supplied. Please take another look at it and let me know whether I am establishing , whether I should format references differently (they are after all web articles and URLs might change once they are archived?), and what else I can do to establish credibility. Also, would it detract from the article if I listed all the communities? Thank you so much. CarinJohns (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another needless post

Jayron always makes me think of Rerun (pronounced Reron) on What's Happening. Did you ever see that show?

I'm reposting this from the ANI discussion because I didn't want you to miss it:

I much prefer to be characterized as a mountain rather than a mole hill, so if this metaphorical comparison is in any way an attempt to diminish my notability, I reject it totally. I trust you are referring to the "thread" and not me personally. As a measure of my abiding generosity, and as an act of good faith consistent with the guidelines and policies supported, though not always lived up to at Wikipedia, I will let your comment stand.

"Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; For you are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they confort me." Psalm 23:4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9WyeVQd6e0&feature=related (Wallamoose (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

One of yesterday's blocks

Hey, have a quick look here User talk:Dstebbins. I've made a few comments that I hope the editor sees and acts upon. Any type of what they perceive to be a WP:BITE for an Aspie can be, errrmmm...detrimental? BMW(drive) 18:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. If you have some methods of encouraging this editor to abide by our policies, that would be wonderful. Until he shows initiative in both retracting any threat of legal proceedings, and assuring the world that he will no longer be personally attacking other editors as he has, I am not sure that any changes to the status quo are forthcoming. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For your further comment/attention?

Please note the following edit [4] for your attention?--VS ^talk 11:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Shot The Admin

Autoblock problems seem to be over - new account created. Sorry for the mess. Bencherlite ^Talk 11:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 11:40, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Die So Fluid band page

Hello Jayron32,

I am inquiring about about a page deletion for the UK London based band, Die So Fluid. It says it was deleted under (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance.) I believe there has been a mistake in this deletion for this band is not some garage band playing their local pub. What's even more interesting is the fact that both of their album pages are up, just not the band page. Also, the lead singer Grog had an old band Feline who in the 90's had a few singles has a page still remaining. My question for you is to have this page reinstated into Wiki. I am from Oklahoma and I know of this band. This band is growing in fans and reputation at a fast rate. The band has just come off of tour with Mindless Self Indulgence here in the United States and will be returning next year. I think it states something that DSF was invited to tour with MSI. So, if you would not mind, I would appreciate this article being reinstated that way the fans of Die So Fluid will have greater access to learning about this band. Thank you again.

Eighty6TA (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE ADOPT ME!!!

I thank you for trying to answer my question. I would REALLY appreciate it if you adopted me. 1. I am very lonely =(. 2. I only know how to edit pages. 3. I just became a user.

-WarriorFIRESTAR (talk) 20:19, 21 October 2008 (UTC), Thanks, Jayron32.[reply]

Reply

Replied at my talk page, awaiting for your more comments too. --Googlean ^Results 10:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heyheygimmemore

I don't know how I missed your message on my talk page (well, actually I do ... it was occupied by someone trying to defend that travesty of an article over at Nicole Parker) but no, I don't think Heyheygimmemore is Soccermeko. If it's anyone, it's MSoldi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). There have been several very bad editors with a real penchant for the Disney Channel stars, and Soccermeko has never been a Disney guy. Soccermeko is back, having gotten a Verizon Wireless account which is essentially unblockable. I have to revert his edits every few days.—Kww(talk) 11:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Soccermeko, you'd have to put a long term semi-protection on Kierra "Kiki" Sheard and Karen Clark Sheard. They've been one of his major interests for some time.—Kww(talk) 12:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, s/he is not soccermeko. I am, I appreciate if you stop blocking people thinking it's me. I can care less about this site. Also, if I hear one more statement about a sockpuppet, I will have you locked up. This is your warning. You can remove it if you want to, but you have been warned. 4.154.0.227 (talk) 16:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like an actual "threat"...care to revisit your comment? -t BMW c- 17:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Time_to_extend_some_blocks.—Kww(talk) 17:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP Autoblock

Thanks for the help Jayron. I appreciate it!Neo16287 (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Returnig Vandal

Hi, Thanks for blocking the new Ids of User:Pionier. Because he keeps coming back forever and forever, and vandalizes my user page as well, could you please grant me Rollback rights so I can revert him, and slow him down. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 15:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Rollback grant. Maybe that will slow him down. History2007 (talk) 15:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Die So Fluid band page

Jayron, thank you for the quick response, I will have no trouble at all getting together articles of the band in large print magazines. However, I would like to ask if there would be anyway to get a copy of the old page that I can work with, rather than starting a whole new page. It would save time and allow me to build and edit on what others have started. Thank you again for all your help.

Eighty6TA (talk) 15:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your help. I shall keep a note of the page you directed me to and read through it. If I have any difficulty I may take you up on your kind offer of help. Thanks again. Titch Tucker (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ayn Rand talk

Yeah, that's fine. I know I shouldn't feed trolls, but I give in sometimes... TallNapoleon (talk) 21:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Hi there! Back in January 2008, you took part in the peer review for the S Club article. Since then, there have been many major changes. I was wondering if you could take a look at it again and contribute to its new peer review. Thanks »—Mikay—talk—contribs→ 17:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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! 12:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help Desk 3RR

Well said on the help desk regarding the 3RR policy, I was thinking the same thing.--intraining ^{Jack In} 16:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no problem. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HOAX

Declined a speedy for a blatant hoax? No. Just no. This is misuse and abuse of Wikipedia. I am sick and tired of wonks letting "policy" trump common sense. A prod does not mean an article cannot be speedied if conditions warrant. In a case of a blatant hoax, conditions warrant. I am retagging as a hoax because IT IS A HOAX. DarkAudit (talk) 20:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awww... did someone not get a hug from mommy today... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be an ass. DarkAudit (talk) 20:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the tone of your note did not itself engender a spirit of collaboration. It would be nice if, when you requested someone to review their actions, you carried yourself with an atmosphere of decorum and showed a friendlier and less combative tone. Given that you left a rather rude comment above, filled with vitriol and anger, I felt that my response was a measured and appropriate reminder to "lighten up" a little bit. In the future, if you don't want people to respond rudely to comments you make, consider your initial tone when you contact people. The tone you take in your communications will "set up" the tone of the response you receive. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Hello I have been working on this article about Abdul Wali Khan over the last 2+ years. It's recently been delisted as GA and I wanted your help to polish it up and aim for a FA. thanks Zak (talk) 20:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Article

Jayron, If you find a moment, please look at my article again, and let me know whether my references (article notability) are acceptable. I have managed to upload the article logo and will insert that via a box template on the page as soon as you give me go-ahead. Also, if article is ready, how do I move into main space? Thank you for your guidance, Carin CarinJohns (talk) 20:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help desk

Thanks for letting me know. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by 216.246.142.87

This is just to let you know that anonymous IP 216.246.142.87 has continued to vandalize articles (such as the edit to Police on 29 October) even though you and others gave this IP five vandalism warnings in October alone. Please block this IP if you think it's appropriate. Thanks. JTSchreiber (talk) 03:53, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that IP is not active enough for a block to be effective at this time. Given that we only see edits about once every week, or even less frequently, a short 24 hour block will have zero effect at stopping anything. Additionally, we have no evidence that this is a "Static" IP. This could be, for example, a computer in a public location, or an IP assigned to a Wi-Fi service, where literally thousands of people have access to it. Given all of that, the act of blocking an IP where someone could come to do good things for Wikipedia, on the off chance that we might stop 2-3 vandalisms per week, does not seem all that beneficial to the project. If this, or any other IP, is currently vandalising, we will block them while they are in the act, or if there is better evidence than 3 days worth of vandalism in a month to show that they are a single-user, or a constant source of problems (and I wouldn't call 3 days in a month "constant") then we will take action. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for looking into it. JTSchreiber (talk) 02:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Article - Americas' SAP Users' Group

Hi Jayron, Thanks for your feedback although I must say you are a hard task master :) I had to swallow my pride and accept that my offering was "far from perfect", what a lesson in humility! Still, I sincerely appreciate all your help, would not have been able to figure it out this far by myself! I did as you instructed me to move the page to the main space, and I trust the page was moved, but would appreciate it if you could verify that the action was carried out successfully as I cannot find the page via Search and still see it on my sub user page where I built it? Much obliged, Carin CarinJohns (talk) 23:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heyheygimmemore

You asked once before if Heyheygimmemore was Soccermeko, and I said that I didn't think so. It's confirmed that he isn't now: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/MSoldi shows that he was a sock of Ohmygod1234. One of those weird cases where everyone turned out to be a sock except the account that made me fill out the report in the first place ... and I'm still suspicious that checkuser just missed him somehow.—Kww(talk) 12:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So basically, there's a clusterfuck of editors who, while unrelated to each other, are busy creating lots of sockpuppet accounts to create hoax articles about R&B albums and songs that do not exist? Cuz essentially, it looks like at least THREE different persons are now doing this (Soccermeko, Msoldi, and Ohmigod1234). Wow, that makes this a mess, don't it? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And then there's Yoelmo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who is going down the same path, and came back unrelated. Looks like four to me. Actually, I think there's probably a dozen or more. Tracking this shit down is becoming a hobby. I'd appreciate your opinion on the two different versions of Autumn Goodbye (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Do you really think they are two unique article by two unique editors?—Kww(talk) 12:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure on Yoelmo. A google search turns up this: [5] though nearly ALL Of these bullshit references cite back to the original hoax article, so it is entirely possible that Yoelmo read these and created a new article based on these sources, not knowing that these sources themselves were based on a bullshit Wikipedia article originally. It may just be that Yoelmo was genuinely trying to create an article that he thought was legit, and stumbled into it... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:53, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Shaped Box indefed her.—Kww(talk) 23:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Maiden City

Hi there. Thank you for referring this user's Unblock request back to myself, as the blocking admin. I asked him a question, and was prepared to unblock the user. However subsequent conversations that have taken place on his talk page seem to tell me that he isn't interested in a co-operative advancement of the Wikipedia project, but in pushing his own brand of viewpoints on the encyclopaedia. Unfortunately, due to these continued conversations, I've denied his request. Canterbury Tail talk 12:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I denied his unblock request about 5 minutes before you did. I read his mess of a conversation, and arrived at the same conclusion you did. We don't need that at Wikipedia. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ASUG Article

Jayron, at this point, only a BIG thank-you for all your help!

Carin CarinJohns (talk) 13:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome. If you need anything else at all, just drop me a note! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:29, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reworded something

I reworded it, to say what I meant in another way. Thanks for letting me know you didn't take it as I meant it to be taken. Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 21:26, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem. We all find our feet in our mouths at some point. I myself have grown quite used to the taste of my own shoes... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My only worry was that you mistook my meaning. All the best, Gwen Gale (talk) 15:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi , please help us

Dear Jayron, Thank you for your suggestion. Please help us to restore the page on our group. best regards, kishore patnaik (hyderabad) (talk) 15:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer to see Gwen's response on this before I act. I can help with the technical aspect of performing the restoration, but since she made the initial deletion, I will presently defer to her as to whether or not such a restoration is warrented. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly appreciate your position but do you think she is acting in the best way possible? I think she is complicating the matters. kishore patnaik (hyderabad) (talk) 16:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, editorial courtesy demands that we assume good faith on her part, and that we don't needlessly undo each other's actions without seeking a wider opinion on the matter. Gwen seems firm on the issue, and I do not "outrank her". Remember that there is no rush to get this done now and rather than fighting over it, lets put it before the larger community to see what the general opinion is. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with all this. But what would you think if you have to unbiasedly comment on the whole issue? She is firm not because of procedures and principles because she thinks I have not read the linke GIVEN by HER. This is, you will agree,only showing attitude and not a good adminship.

Please note that I am not contesting the act of deletion per se, but it is done in a hurry, without a discussion, in a unilateral fashion, when a hang on notice was given by me.

I am sure all this is not done in good faith but in a slipshod way, this is unfortunately, a power drunk act. This in fact seems very childish since deleting an article and refusing to reasonable suggestion of her colleague does not reflect a standard way of administration.

kishore patnaik (hyderabad) (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at this, which was my response as soon as our article was kept on notice: Hi this is kishore patnaik ; why do you want to delete our page?

Hi,

Can you please tell us why you intend to delete page Ancientindia 1?

We clarify that the page here is not meant for advertisement because we do not encourage joining of laymen into the group, though we do not bar them, as it is a professional group. However, we believe in propagating about the group because we need support from people regarding the ideas of the group.

Mostly, the membership of the group is on invitation.

"AncientIndia" 2 is one of its kind, that a professional group has been started by a non professional member and in fact, we incessantly create content and send it to group members as well as several professionals for their comment.

Often it happens that we are INTRODUCING the professionals to the content and fruitful discussions follow such introduction.

hope this clarifies and we request you to kindly remove the speedy deletion tag.

regards,

Kishore patnaik —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kishorepatnaik (talk • contribs) 07:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kishorepatnaik (talk • contribs)

The issue is now up at Deletion Review. Please make any further comments there. Thank you. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You are very fair but I would have preferred if you have mentioned that she declined because we " have n't bothered to read the links I gave you" ... Too much of I!

thanks any way

kishore patnaik (hyderabad) (talk) 16:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of my userbox

Ok you have deleted one, care to explain where exactly I went wrong with that userbox? It was POV and this is allowed on user profiles, but I don't understand where I went wrong in violating any of wikipedia's policies with that userbox. Regards Ijanderson (talk) 18:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I've re-created it but in accordance with the guidelines/ policies. Regards Ijanderson (talk) 19:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MadTv

The whole area is insane. I've gotten into the habit of just periodically culling the impression lists down to three or four elements. This is the worst I've seen, though.—Kww(talk) 04:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eh. If there is no list to add to, then we can stop the drive-by extending of the lists. Just say she does celebrity impressions, and leave it at that. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your chilling effect

HOW ARE THOSE FRIVOLOUS?

I LEFT AN EXPLANATION IN EACH ENTRY EXPLAINING WHY THE USERNAMES WERE INAPPROPRIATE. pardon the caps lock, my computer is slow. 99.167.225.149 (talk) 23:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He reposted the reports. Care to block? Grsz ¹¹ ^→Review! 23:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My ideological blindness

Yes, it makes a difference if you "just" sell the arms or put yourself on the line, I agree. But then I wanted to stress the Russian and Chinese involvement, because the new left completely blinded itself to this fact. Chomsky still does? Again, in the context of this here question you are of course right.--Radh (talk) 20:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am wholly unconcerned with ideology here. I was merely answering the question to the best extent, and trying NOT to cloud the issue with ideology... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:25, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pong

No, I did not forget. You have e-mail. -- Avi (talk) 20:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. grassy ass... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resent. -- Avi (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geography / country outline project

Yes, I'd be glad to provide more details.

So far, 29 country outlines have been moved to article space (because they are complete enough to be useful to readers and because they don't have any blatantly erroneous info - some of the outlines have temporary data that is incorrect and which needs to be corrected before they can be moved). The outlines in article space are listed at Portal:Contents/Lists of basic topics#Geography and places.

Those are still incomplete, with some blanks that need to be filled, missing links to be added, redlinks go be turned blue (called "bluelinking", usually by creating a redirect for the link leading to the relevant information), and maps and images to be placed throughout. For examples of the most complete of the country outlines, see Topic outline of France and Topic outline of Japan.

Google comes in handy for finding relevant links on Wikipedia (using Google's site-specific search feature to search Wikipedia only).

The rest of the set (drafts) can be found at User:The Transhumanist/Country list.

I've been assigning tasks to anyone who is interested. For examples of the types of tasks this project entails, see Thehelpfulne's talk page - he's a very active member of the team and has tackled every task presented to him with endless energy and enthusiasm. His responses can be found on my talk page.

Please let me know if you are interested, and I'll be glad to assign you your first task.

Sincerely,

The Transhumanist 21:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DrummerMike

Look more closely at his editing history. Other than schools he went to, or attends now, just about all his edits have been about himself and bands he has been in. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:53, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Your welcoming and forgiving attitude has saved me from infinite blocking; thank you for emphasising my wish to improve. --Mike|Talk 22:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's also vandalized my userpage. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:44, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just reblocked him. He will cause us no more problems... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, you misunderstood. I was only adding a Barnster award to your profile for the consecutive times you have blocked me. Then I thought that it was wrong and may have been seen as patronising you; so deleted it - I did not vandalize your page. Please know that I am not a wolf in sheep's clothing: I did not mean to interrupt your page and I am going to improve my ways. --Mike|Talk 16:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.107.117 (talk) [reply]

Are you choosing to ignore that apology? It's also not very nice to tell someone they are dead to you. Could you reply on DrummerMike's talk? Stubbornness is not very kind and I'm sure you wouldn't take to kindly to that.

--DrummerMike's alternative account Mike |talk 21:35, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do want to productively contribute to Wikipedia - I am currently (see my contributions). As I have been permanently blocked on my previous account, it is unable for me to edit any article - under my rights - apart from my talk page. As you would not go ahead and unblock me again, I felt I had to create a new account in which I have, in fact, played by the rules. -- Mike |talk 15:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Ebeing again

Hi Jayron32, I hope you don't mind me posting this here, but as you've helped out on this issue before I thought I'd give you the first shot, as I'm not quite sure what to do about the latest development.

This is regards Ebeing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who you blocked for spamming. He/she was also vandalizing various pages by removing all external links and in one case removing an entire reference section. Well, I believe Ebeing has started doing the same again, but sock puppeting with his/her IP address, 72.91.101.162 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log). I know it's Ebeing as when 72.91.101.162 posted something on my talk page to complain about the removal of a spam link, it was auto-signed by SineBot to say it was Ebeing.

Now this IP address has once again vandalized the External links section on Solar hot water by removing all external links. I personally believe these links were reasonable under WP:EL, but Ebeing has even removed the DMOZ link(!) so this isn't a good faith edit.

Thanks for any help you can give, Charlie Tango (talk) 20:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freewayguy

User:Freewayguy has made 4 sockpuppets since being blocked, one impersonating an admin, and another impersonating another user, so can you help keep an eye on him and any more obvious sockpuppets he makes? Thanks. —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we've already blocked all the existing ones (I and a few other roads project editors are admins) but it would be nice having extra eyes around for if any new ones crop up when nobody's around. —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just keep me abreast. I will watch out... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may also look out for User:66.162.231.5. E Wing (talk) 04:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have some questions for you...

Are you registered to use WP:AWB, and have you installed it yet?

Are you familiar with WP:LINKY, and have you installed it (and Mozilla Firefox) yet?

I very much look forward to your reply (on my talk page).

The Transhumanist 23:25, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPA

Please read up on WP:NPA and "Don't be a dick" Wikimedia essay for more information on how Wikipedia manages personal attacks:

[A]dministrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less severe situations when it is unclear if the "conduct severely disrupts the project". Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered "disruption". Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment.

Trickrick1985 (talk) 02:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was only one personal attack, which had not to do with you and is not a blockable offense. Just to make sure you're kept in check I've created Requests for comment/Jayron32. You're encouraged to assume good faith in the future, as doing the opposite hurts the project. Trickrick1985 (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read your RFC. Twas the best laugh I had all day. Thanks! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:15, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It's most important that vandals be funny. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:18, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You agree because, just as this admin apparently isn't familiar with how Wikipedia administrators are supposed to deal with WP:NPA you are not familiar with WP:VAND#NOT, calling personal attacks vandalism and vilifying other editors. Trickrick1985 (talk) 03:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't want to be called a vandal for calling someone a bitch. Okay. What do you suggest you be called? Surely, you agree that there be some sort or pejorative name attached your behavior. I have some ideas.............but at second thought, I better hold my tongue. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously guys, have this conversation somewhere else. Trickric1985 has been warned; he has acknowledged that he has received the warning. There is nothing else to gain by having this discussion, and LESS to gain by having it on MY talk page. Shoo.... Git... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been warned and you've also been warned, Jayron. Your job isn't to police Wikipedia for opportunities to flex your muscles in response to minor violations. That kind of privilege abuse will not go unnoticed. Because a policy gets violated doesn't give users or admins a license to harrass and mischaracterize another editor or their contributions. Trickrick1985 (talk) 03:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yoelmo

I would appreciate your input on the issue raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holiday (Hilary Duff album) about Yoelmo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Kurt Shaped Box apparently feels excessively involved to take action.—Kww(talk) 22:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please? I'm not shopping, KSB stated "I'd prefer it if an uninvolved admin were to review the situation".—Kww(talk) 16:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ebeing at it again

I just filed a sockpuppet report. Mfield (talk) 01:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warning WP:STALK

Please stop following me around Wikipedia or I will post a notice about the behavior. See also WP:HOUND. Thank you. Trickrick1985 (talk) 03:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop re-adding already received comments from other people's talk pages then... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Claudia Palacios vandalism

Jayron32, you helpfully one-month protected the article on Claudia Palacios after an obviously repeat vandal reappeared immediately after the one-week protection was lifted. The same vandal -- who apparently has a thing for irritable bowel syndrome -- has appeared yet again. I've reverted his/her latest two efforts over the last two days, but would you be so kind as to protect the article again, perhaps for a longer period? BTW, just before you imposed the one-month protection, I requested page protection but was told that one recent edit was not enough to reimpose page protection. You, on the other hand, were savvy enough to recognize that this was the same vandal. Jhw57 (talk) 15:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]