User talk:Griffinofwales/Archive 1

February 2009

Welcome!

Hello, Griffinofwales, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! MvjsTalking 05:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering what to do when I find a vandal who clearly is not acting in good faith, and has vandalized several pages? Griffinofwales (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

If you were wanting to bring a users vandalism to the attention of an administrator for further action, such as a block, one can report that user at WP:AIV. When warning a user about their vandalism, there are some templates available at WP:WARN. A nifty little tool for applying these warnings is WP:TWINKLE. Let me know if you need any further help. MvjsTalking 06:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Casey Sherman

He graduated from Barnstable High School. I forgot to put that in there. I'm not that liberal in my tagging. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

It's perfectly okay. I tend to tag the most seemingly random of pages and then expect that people know why I did so. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

George W. Bush

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk: George W. Bush. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.. You must have the wrong guy with the charge of vandalism. Newguy34 (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

If there were edits that didn't make sense, it was unintential, I can assure you. Newguy34 (talk) 21:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Believe it or not, the keyboard on my new computer freaks out occasionally. I try to catch the random insertion on charcaters when it happens, but don't always get them all. As you can see, I have tried to correct the problem at Talk:George W Bush. I have been editing here for five years. Do you really think I would intentionally try to start vandalism?? Newguy34 (talk) 21:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that, but sometimes I just need to make sure. Remember to check your backspace and space bar. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Patriarch (Latter Day Saints)

See WP:LDSMOS. This can be a little confusing at first but the basic principles could be summarized as:

• we don't assume that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) is the "legitimate" Latter Day Saint church
• thus, all Latter Day Saint churches are viewed as co-equal churches claiming to be the true successor of the Church of Christ (Latter Day Saints) that Joseph Smith, Jr. established in 1830
• most topics that are common among most Latter Day Saint churches are disambiguated with "(Latter Day Saints)" at the end
• if, for some reason, we need an article that is specific only to the LDS Church, we can use "(LDS Church)" as the disambiguator

Right now, there doesn't look to me like there is enough material in Patriarch (Latter Day Saints) that would justify a separate LDS Church-specific article. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

As for Eldred G. Smith: as far as I know, "emeritus" essentially does mean retired from active duties. But emeritus general authorities are still considered general authorities—they still get the G.A. stipend, the office space, the parking lot at the Church Office Building, etc., so it's probably fair to call it a type of "calling". It's a borderline case, though. (Also, some general authorities, e.g., members of the Second Quorum of the Seventy, are "released" at a certain time, but emeritus general authorities are never "released", they are just made emeritus, so you could argue that since they were never released they still hold the calling, they just don't perform it actively.) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Bold text on List of territorial disputes

Responded, I have a feeling it's not the answer that you're looking for, though. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 17:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

You were right, that wasn't what I wanted. According to your explanation, bold text indicates one claimant's full control. But, in the article, some of the entries have all the countries in bold text. Is that an error made by the editors, or does that mean something else? Thanks for helping. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

80.68.39.212 added a few of them - and they are still active on that page. Maybe you should ask them. :) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 18:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I had always assumed and the pattern seems to fit almost entirely that if both or all country names were bold, it meant that both or all parties split or share actual control of the area (as in the Kuwait-Saudi neutral zone which was split between the two, or as in the Bangladesh-India enclaves where Bangladesh controls some, India controls some.) It also appears to be used in cases like Canada-Greenland Hans Is. when the territory is unoccupied and also not regularly patrolled by anyone. (Others are not occupied, being just specks of rocks sometimes like Scarborough Shoal, but are patrolled much more consistently by one party (Philippines in that example.) At least that's my guess....did I miss seeing it spelled out? (If not, it should be, yes?)DLinth (talk) 19:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

If the sides have agreed, then it is no longer a dispute, correct? Griffinofwales (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I had always wondered why various settled disputes (even some settled by the ICJ were still listed. Then I realized that...

a) It's "List of Territorial Disputes" not "List of Current Territorial Disputes", and

b) while the list makes no effort to include the innumerous disputes from decades or centuries past, it makes sense to include recently settled ones to both provide info on the resolution of the matter, and to preclude well-intentioned editors who haven't gotten the news from recent months/years of the settlement from just adding it back in as a non-settled dispute. So I reconsidered....Definitely some value to leaving in recently settled disputes,yes? (Kuwait-Saudi Arabia may be a bit long in the tooth by now, though??) DLinth (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Excuse the quick short response here - I am not on Wikipedia much these days. I am quite in favour of changing the article to include 'Current' in the title. Bold for more than one claimant was meant to be meaning the shared/joint control of that territory. There have been a lot of changes to the article since, but that was meant to be the issue at stake. 80.68.39.212 (talk) 16:33, 1 April 2009 (UTC) Raymi

Width estimates, etc

Thank you for your comments on my talk page. Carol was indeed my baby sister, but any COI or NPOV issues have already been hashed out on the talk page, (I don't know if you read the whole thing, but you should), and by citing every statement I've inserted or edited. I agree that utterly stupid comments should be edited out, no matter how well-sourced. The issue is whether certain sources are considered reliable by Wikipedia's standards. It is my contention, as well as others' that Bizarre Magazine is not a reliable source, however, certain editors insist that they are, and constantly revert any edits that eliminate their ridiculous sensationalist claims. They would rather have a freak-show atmosphere than an encyclopedia article. Terry Yager (talk) 02:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Redirects

Use #REDIRECT [[article you want it to redirect to]]

:) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 00:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Ooo..AAAHHH

I saw your question here. If a user is vandalising and obviously has no intention whatsoever of reforming, they can be blocked after only one or two warnings. Queenie 16:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Bure, Africa

The link in the Bure article includes reference to how the EEBC decided to place the boundary (they even demarcated this part on the ground) midway between the Eritrea and Ethiopia checkpoints on the road heading north from Bure. Bure (the main "downtown", visible even in the cloud shadown on Google Earth, is at 12-36-30N 42-16-25E, while the Ethiopian checkpoint is visible at 12-37-20N 42-16-41E and the Eritrean checkpoint at 12-38-39N 42-16-32E, so midway between them (the boundary) is at 12-38-07N 42-16-43E...some newer (former UNMEE) ? buildings right there now in that vicinity, again visible on Google Earth....all this referenced in the various EEBC reports though I'm looking at paper copies, not on line. Google Earth's yellow line boundary off as usual, in this case to the west.....hopefully that will improve soon. Bottom line: downtown Bure is 3km on the Ethiopian side of the line, and all of Bure village is in Ethiopia based on the Algiers Accord and EEBC decisions 2002-2007.DLinth (talk) 17:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

RSS feeds

Yup, you can sign up to have a feed of your watchlist from here. Rodhullandemu 17:13, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

How exactly does the feed work? I want a feed of the edits made to the pages on my watchlist. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I've never used it myself but I believe you are able to get feeds for individual articles, and the amount of detail I'm not sure of. I'd try it out and see what you get. You could also ask at WP:VPT where more technically-aware people than I hang out. Rodhullandemu 17:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines

Hi, an editor may generally delete anything and everything from his or her talk page. Don't pester them about it, or you will become guilty of harassment. Hope this information is useful to you! KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

re: archiving bot

Counter is whatever the archive number is. So if the archive points to User talk:Example/Archive %(counter)d and counter equals 3 then threads will be put into User talk:Example/Archive 3. That is, until the archive becomes full whereupon the bot will increment the number (e.g. from 3 to 4). So, if you're setting up for a page that never had any archives, set it to 1 and for pages with archives, set it to the number of the most recent archive (or that plus one, to start archiving to a new archive). Миша13 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

semi protection of nitrogen

I noticed you semi protected Nitrogen indefinitely. I think indef was a little too much, and I suggest 3 months, because although a lot of vandalism occurs with IP addresses, there are some good ones out there, and they are being restricted because of what the bad ones did. If it starts again, protect it for another 3 months. That is what I have seen other admins do. Since you are an admin I will respect any decision you make, but I would like an explanation because I am still learning about policies here. Please leave a talkback at my talk page if you reply here. Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) 21:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

And I just noticed that at the top of your talk page is Wikipedia's slogan, The free encyclopedia anyone can edit (that includes IP addresses). You may have a good reason so I am not going to pursue the subject. But please explain your indef. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Heya Griffin,

Thanks for your note. I semi-protected Nitrogen indefinitely because it was requested by another editor who was tired of the IP vandalism, and because there's been very little "good" IP activity on the article recently; it's pretty hard to try to write on a topic which is the subject of persistent IP vandalism. It's like trying to write a term paper with someone scribbling crayon on your page. There's actually been no protest whatsoever from IPs on the talk page (and in fact, the only IP edits on the talk page since semi-protection have been vandalism, heh). In theory, anyone should be able to edit Wikipedia's article on Nitrogen. And s/he still can... s/he just has to log in or create an account first. ;)

Probably there are other editors on the Nitrogen article who feel the same way you do about letting IPs have fun with the Nitrogen article. Can we possibly move the discussion there so all the interested parties can weigh in? If there are several editors there who feel the semi-protection was unjustified, and are willing to revert said vandalism indefinitely, there's no reason the semi-protection should stay, right? :) Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:14, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

question

Are you HighinBC? I ask this because you left a message at Krellis' talk page saying that you were. If you are, it would be nice if you left a note at HighinBC's user page and at your current user page. If you respond here please leave a talkback template at my talk page. Thanks. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:30, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I am, but for various reasons I do not want to leave a note on my old account. The old account is not active in any way so there is no need to show the connection. Chillum 23:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The HBC class of bots was created by HighinBC (retired), and Krellis (not very active according to user page). So, if somebody had a question about the bots, where would they go? Griffinofwales (talk) 23:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Not me. I am not operating any of those bots. Just User:DustaBot, which does point to me. I just wrote the original versions of those other bots. The AIV bot and the name watcher bot are both fairly stable. As long as the code is not changing the bots generally do their job month after month. If there is a problem with one of them that is disruptive any admin can block the bot. Chillum 01:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Editing comments

You're not, per WP:TALK#Editing_comments. :) — neuro^(talk) 06:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Copy-edit request

Hi, I noticed you are a member of the Guild of Copy-editors, the House article, needs a final lookover, and I was wondering if you could provide that help. Don't feel obligated of course. Thanks.--Music26/11 15:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for your time.--Music26/11 08:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

re: Your Message

Hi Griffinofwales, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 00:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I've left you another reply on my talk page Marek.69 ^talk 01:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for signing my guestbook! :) Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 18:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Momoelf

You can check here the log, and here his contributions. Amadís (talk) 18:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

HI, i know im blocked, im confused,

• my first block was because the user http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_Discusi%C3%B3n:Alfacevedoa#RE:_Gripe_porcina was editing without references, what librarian says i dont have to do, so i told him that i will erase those things, because there is no reference, and is they delete my contributions with references, why wont I. here is this: http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brote_de_gripe_A_(H1N1)_de_2009&diff=25864413&oldid=25864402

however, i searched for references i put them when they were: http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brote_de_gripe_A_(H1N1)_de_2009&diff=25865915&oldid=25865913 they dont say that. so i start a fight violating the etiquette because i dont like people who say oh say this dont say that and doesnt do anything at all just change a comma and think they have a lot of authority, well ok maybe a got to far however i was being prepontent because many people critic wikipedia bcause its not a good source so i thought well if this can be a good article well lets do it all from the start. But after that i decide that there were a lot of people doing a good article so i went to do others thing

• my second ban was because of this: he said to me that i should moderate my language, told him that i think i should speak as i want only if i write and do a good thing ( even thought im still thinking it, i know i was beeing stupid ). But then i told him that i would stop it because we were wasting kb for wikipedia, then he told me why do i write 2 009 instead of 2009, well i told him because i learned it that way on school, and also i told him that he didnt go to the school (ok i hate him, but i will do everything including apologize if i can write again) so i win a ban!

• my third ban was when i realized that that user amadis was erasing my contributions on wikipedia, saying i do copyvio whats not true because other librarian like HUB http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario:HUB has also edited my contribution and didnt told anything about copyvio, so i went to the cafe, and told them what he was doing, nobody read my argument nor look them, they only said you are banned you are banned and amadis repeat the same thing as always even without counting that many librarian edit my thing (because im not perfect editing) nor helping me how to do good reference of RFI - i asked once but nobody answer, so i had to do something - just saying the same, and no one answer me. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Caf%C3%A9/Portal/Archivo/Miscel%C3%A1nea/Actual#vandalismo

so banned for three month

• my last ban was because i told lucienlegray that amadis was still erasing my contributions that were made by the model of Gons and while i was banned, i was using the computer of my university to made article, and that if he could look if they do copyvio and protect them for an erasing. I love to read WSJ everyday, but i think its important that what i read must be available to everyone in the world so thats the reason i read and write. HUB says i just have to say the important and with my only words, and a politic says that what is copyrighted are the exact words not the information. But again banned: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_Discusi%C3%B3n:Lucien_leGrey#Hola_lucien.

ok im still here because im sick, so i didnt go to the university, tell me plz what was i doing wrong, i know i was being stupid. Listen, i dont want freinds here, for me thats bad because it wastes kb and wikipedia doesnt have a lot of money, also the problem of pollution. I only want to write and have someone to told me how to reference and check if sometimes i feel that im copyvio, i always need an opinion. --Momoelf (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You were banned from editing Wikipedia because you evaded your block. I would suggest that you read the Spanish Wikipedia policies thoroughly, because you do not seem to understand the policies. When you have done that come back to this page, and I will talk to the administrators about changing the block. Arguing with administrators will never get you anywhere. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

hi, i know i was evading my block, but while i was doing it because i wanted to contribute, and is ok, i only want to contribute with or without my username, but what im afraid of, is that amdis erase everthing i do, saying things thats not true. its just disgusting, taking time to do everything perfect, saying the url the author the title the acces date, the date the WSJ again and again, that come someone that just erase. So ok, i will read the policies, but plz, just dont tell me that i have to wait three months to start to edit, WSJ americas changes its new every 4 days, and i barely have time to edit, its just too much for a only person!! thats why im desperate. If i wasting time, then a news will go forever, and i wouldnt have the time to contribute, i will be more ettiquette, i promise, is only that its not fair that they just talk and dont do anything to do things better they just erase, however they are no excuse for my bad behavior and that wont be repeated even if i hated them from my deep soul.--Momoelf (talk) 19:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I am currently talking to an administrator from the Spanish Wikipedia about the specifics of the block. The encyclopedia will not collapse because you did not edit it. Please calm down and read the policies. I will talk to administrators about possibly shortening the block. Block evasion is a serious but usually accidental offense that occurs with lots of new users. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

ok ill be calm thnx for everthing. this should serve me for a lesson, maybe you are right, wikipedia is still good even without me. i will wait--Momoelf (talk) 20:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

This user was initially blocked for being uncivic, not to take into account the huge waste of time that valuable users have to invest in fixing what he edits. Nonetheless, he can explain himself and discuss the block at his talk page in es.wiki. That is the proper place, and not the village pump of es.wiki, Jimbo's talk page, en.wiki, nor cbk-zam:wikiquote.Chabacano (talk) 21:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is not an en.wiki problem: this is an es.wiki problem. You can use you user talk page there, if you please. Amadís (talk) 22:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Please take this conversation to my es.wikipedia talk page. Thank You. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Until here http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Especial:Contribuciones&offset=20090228144420&target=Chabacano , chabacano havent edit any of my pages, in fact he is not very active, i have more contributions -perhaps they are more of quantity than quality. Well, i thnx ya for saying that they should train me, thats what i wanted!! But they dont seem to see things the way everything work better. So thats why i asked jimmy walles. may you sign me XD. Good night friend!!--Momoelf (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Please don't bother Jimbo (Jimmy) Wales. He is a very busy person. I am still working with the administrators on es.wikipedia. It's not really my responsibility so if you have any more problems please keep them at es.wikipedia. Griffinofwales (talk) 03:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

sorry for bother yo again, but i have this information: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_Discusi%C3%B3n:Momoelf#Violaci.C3.B3n_de_los_derechos_de_autor_del_WSJ

• Puedes citar algunas frases de algún articulo Wall Street Journal pero siempre dando el crédito al autor y la editorial que publico ese texto. No es valido plagiar el texto del autor lo haga pasar como obra suya y peor aun no dar el crédito al autor, eso es violar los derechos de autor. "You can cite some phrases from the article WSJ but always citing the credit to the author, the editorial who published the text. Is not valid copy the author's text and make it pass as yours, and worse withoung giving the credit to the author, that is violate the author's right.
• Tus referencias carecen de autor, editorial, fecha de consulta, fecha de creación del artículo, lo cual, estas violando derechos de autor.

(Your references have no author, editorial, accessdate, creation date of the article, so, you are violating the author's right.

• Al momento de recibir su mensaje ya había eliminado la información de los artículos Crisis financiera de 2008, Economía de los Estados Unidos, General Motors e Inditex (puede consultar el historial para que recuerde lo que se retiró). De los demás es muy importante y urgente su compromiso de cambiar el texto de forma en que no sea una copia del artículo periodístico.

(At the moment i recieved your message, ive eliminate the information of crisis financial, EEUU economy, General motors and Inditex(you can consult the historial to remember what was retired.) For the rest, its very important and urgent your compromise to change the text so it doesnt come a copy of the article)

• También debes sintetizar la información que has obtenido, cambiando palabras por otras y colocas sus respectivas referencias bien estructuradas.

(also, you must sintesize the information you have obtained, changing words for others and putting their respective-and-well-structured reference.

As you can see, no one say that its forbidden to take information from the page, and as you can see from the link i gave ya, from that time and so on, i put the reference the way they told me. That's what i was doing all the time, the problem begun when i was citing a radio, i look for citing in es and en, but didnt find anything, so well i thought to myself : put "Boletín INformativo de RFI emitido el 25 de abril de 2 009" and then a librarian will come, make the citing better and you will copy the way he do it. Because of that began everything, but i must say, they are evading the points I say. Also, they say im just a waste of time, however... http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apple_Inc.&diff=25796205&oldid=25796128; if you see the page, there are only two references, one by me, -it would be three but amadis deleted me last contribution-. Its a cruel hard wikiworld...--Momoelf (talk) 03:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

In the English and Spanish wikipedias 2009 is not 2 009. I saw your explanation at es.wikipedia. However, in Wikipedia you follow the rules of Wikipedia. The rules of es.wikipedia say that it should be 2009. The only people that can ban you are administrators. Administrators are right most of the time, but not always. I am and will continue to work with the es.wikipedia administrators. I now have to go to sleep. I will talk to you again in 8 hours. Good luck! and please read the es.wikipedia policies (they are different from the english wikipedia policies [and please don't insult admins {it never makes them happy}]) I will check the references later. Griffinofwales (talk) 04:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Are you a busy person? Because i wanna talk with someone... maybe this year im gonna travel to N.Y - wish that that doesnt happen - and i want to improve my grammar. I only want to emmm talk and more improtant to write. I will be colaborating whenever is possible here, well maybe i will imoprtunate ya with some of me contributions, because you know i always need an opinion, specially on/in a language i dont manage the ebst. Well see ya, have a nice day.--Momoelf (talk) 19:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Few people see it, and i like the most ongoing process :(.--201.230.219.239 (talk) 05:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Jason Dodson Article

User "Wesley M. Curtus" is vandalizing the Jason Dodson page. Many users have tried to undo his deletion tag and explain why this article shouldn't be deleted (well referenced sources, etc), but this user continues to add the tag. This is obviously some sort of personal vendetta against Mr. Dodson because Curtus is also a user on Prince-related websites, and Mr. Dodson is a Prince-related musician, thus he must know Mr. Dodson somehow. Mr. Curtus should be reported to Wikipedia Administrators. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.173.3.123 (talk) 03:04, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RfA, which unfortunately did not pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Special thanks go to MBisanz, GT5162, and MC10 for nominating me. Thanks again, -download ׀ sign! 03:43, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, copuld you speak with HUB: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_Discusi%C3%B3n:HUB he says im violating copyright when im not! plz help me, he has also made a special page for me, to delete every contribution i made with every IP i use. Even though I give him reasons of why what he is saying is false, he dont talk to me, and Ive tried desperately to leave him message. plz help me. Momoelf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.232.152.9 (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC) --Momoelf (talk) 20:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Why do people say im doing copyvio.... that's not true. Well, other thing may be that u all say that as an excuse for wasting all the information at the net, and not doing anything with that. Go on. Ban me forever. Thats what u ali as you highest and best policies. --Momoelf (talk) 03:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

I know him, it's a well known sockpuppeteer that's going on for a year and half on wikiquote. -- m:drini 16:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Nope no popups. You could use the recent changes tab to spot something and revert. the idea would be to train you into being able to pick off suspisicous edits as was done before these useful scripts came, gives more apprciation to them as well :) Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I would not see a problem with using roll back providing it wasnt used with software (like huggle), And also using multiple browser windows i dont think thats a problem either for this. Just no automatic tools from software to detect and revert vandalism. All old school, well mostly.... :) Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Standard warnings (you should include the name of the article for good practice(but dont be too discouraged if you forget)) use a template if you can. Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly as its said there, any example of this will do (providing its been in an article for over a year). A good example of this was the jacques plante article. Some edits were made 3 years or so ago and his statitistics for 5 years were deleted. No one noticed for over a year or so, that would be a good example. If its extra sneaky, then there be more kudos for finding it, but im only looking for sneaky ones :) hope that clears it up Ottawa4ever (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Really dont know how many people read WP: reward board but i figured for those who do why not a lil reward. I tried to do this once myself when i first started with wikipedia, it takes about a day I think. I would imagine a tech savy person could find a way around using pop ups to help, but your still fighting vandalism and going through the process and thats what its all about. If you do the sneaky vandalism one make sure you post the diff showing which one. Happy hunting Ottawa4ever (talk) 13:36, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, what would that be, 3 awards potentially? (My worry there would be three antivandalism awards from the same account lol, might not be as prestigious but i could find away to make them different and noticable). Whole idea is working to reduce vandalism, and why not get recongnition for it? For the user page, Nah its cool just a little easter egg award for those reading the user page (that is unless you really want to). I do think its a cool idea for a user page, but using huggle some users could have 10000 of these little ticks so it can get crowded. Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Wont stop you form doing another 100, Not really defined that its a limit of one per person (kinda implies it but doesnt say that), but there can always be exceptions for great anti vandalism work. But Id go for a sneaky one. They exist but theyre hard to spot unless you know the subject matters well Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Good job with the challenge. and keep up the fight, I awarded you a barnstar on your award page for all your anti vandalism fighting  :) Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Kentridge High School

Why did you remove the POV and OR tags? mynameinc^{Ottoman project} 20:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. Thanks for the explanation. mynameinc^{Ottoman project} 20:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit of "Flight 447" (with question marks) was necessary. "INTOL" waypoint is not on Google. I can't figure it out. Is it a buoy? Is it a virtual reference? Question marks might annoy someone into explaining it.Anthony717 (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Rasputin fan editing my user page

Ha, thanks for the revert. At least he didn't leave a barnstar. CliffC (talk) 21:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

my recent edit

Sorry I forgot to login...I am reverting to my original edit. Nice to see people still patrolling the recent changes old school style! You deserve a barnstar! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.106.183 (talk) 04:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't an unconstructive edit. Carradine died yesterday, not today, and already had an entry for yesterday. Someone put another one for today, so I got rid of it. Sheesh! 82.18.188.56 (talk) 19:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Griffinofwales,

Thanks so much for your help :-). I just went to Rodhullandemu's talk page and asked him- that's the right way to do it, right? Thanks a million!!! Thanks. Sincerely, Airplaneman (talk) 16:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC) Thanks for all of your help. I think I've got Huggle down. You know, I've always wondered how users could post such fancy warning templates with the right levels so fast. Now I know the answer: Huggle. Right now, I have a pretty old and slow computer (1.81 GHz AMD Sempron from like 6 years ago with memory maxed at 900 megabytes...)- I'm going to get a new one soon. Does Huggle use a lot of processor power? Thanks --Airplaneman (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

It should work fine for your computer. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Barnstar moved to User:Griffinofwales/Barnstars. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Straw poll on displaying time since last edit

Hi, you weighed in on the "display time since last edit on article" discussion at the Village pump. I have now started a straw poll on the subject at WP:Village pump (proposals)#Straw poll. Your opinion would be appreciated. --Cybercobra (talk) 04:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:RB

From User talk:Rat at WikiFur

According to policy at WP:RB, you have to change the posting date because it is a new post. So, change the posting date to January 1, 2009 - present, and you are within policy. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a new post. It's a renewal of an old post. The offer date is irrelevant; what the policy says is that at any one point, expiry date must be less than one year in the future, and it is. You could change "Date offered" to "first offered", though. GreenReaper (talk) 18:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

From WP:RB, Challenges may remain open for a maximum duration of one year. I think that is pretty clear. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It's also pretty silly, and doesn't properly reflect the discussion, which was to set a "max expiration date at one year". We have merely renewed our offer, to a date within the one year expiry period. GreenReaper (talk) 18:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you leave a note in the offer saying that the offer has been extended to 2010, and provide a timestamp. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I could, but it's not necessary. You just need to check that the expiry date is not more than one year in the future, at the time that you are checking. That's it. No other date matters. GreenReaper (talk) 00:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Per comments made here, could you please leave a time stamp on your post at WP:RB, and I am undoing your edit to the top of WP:RB, also per the comments made at WT:RB. Thank you. Griffinofwales2 (talk) 16:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

There is already a timestamp in the page history. I refuse to add another one. You are trying to make the process needlessly bureaucratic. GreenReaper (talk) 16:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Using tb

Hello. I wanted to point out that {{talkback}} is really supposed to be used with regards to user talk page discussions, not article talk page discussions since those are watchlisted by interested editors and already provide a means for centralized discussion. The template is useful when centralizing a non-mainspace conversation between two editors. Just FYI since you recently used it to point me to the RB talk page. —Eustress ^talk 14:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: template:unsigned?

I substed the template, which means making it so the raw wikitext of the template appears in the page rather than just {{unsigned|foo}}. I also added the date and time to the unsigned template. The unsigned template should always be substed, so write {{subst:Unsigned|<blah blah blah>|00:01, 12th of Never (UTC)}} rather than {{unsigned|<blah blah blah>}}. Graham87 01:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Why does the raw wikitext have to show? All it does is take up editing space. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Because Template:Unsigned is heavily used, and if it wasn't substed, it would cause major problems if the template was edited. The problems aren't as bad as they used to be, but editing a heavily used template still causes a huge increase in the job queue. If you don't subst the unsigned template, a bot will come along and subst it eventually. Graham87 02:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting this edit from my talk page. Newportm (talk) 04:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Template: Silver Surfer

It was until I messed it up and I don't know how to put it back were it was. The template was my creation in the first place. I fixed it sir it was missing two of these }} at the end! Captain Virtue (talk)

I reverted all the edits you made, so it should be fixed. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What sandbox? Griffinofwales (talk) 20:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, two things. When you mess up, go to the history page at the top (next to the edit button) or click alt-shift-H. Then, click the Compare edits button (something like that, I can't remember the name), and click undo, and then confirm the undo. 2. Always use an edit summary. Happy editing! Griffinofwales (talk) 20:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Recourse for Edit War?

Hi. I've been trying to establish a 'politics' section on the . I would sign with time/signature every time i entered my info but failed to place anything in the edit summary. Every time I posted the same material an anonymous user would delete not only my section but my time/signature, and leave no trace of him/her self. I was then blocked by , not only from posting but from any type of editing or contacting other adminstrators. This all left me with no way to follow Wiki guidelines for dispute resolution, from conscensus to admin. appeal, to third neutral admin. to arbitration. When my block was lifted I re-posted the article information and left an explanation on 'my talk', but someone erased that too.

Do I have any recourse for settling this matter either by being able to contact the anonymous editor to reach consensus or settling with Ckatz? Could you please recommend my next steps? Thank you. Wednesday vagabond (talk) 01:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, let me give you several suggestions. One, the newest section should always go at the bottom of the page, and two, never add your signature to article space. If you want to contact Ckatz, go here. I cannot find the anonymous user you speak of. Also, read the comments at Talk:Bowen Island. Remember to edit with a NPOV (neutral point of view) and to add sources. I hope you enjoy your time here at WP (wikipedia).Griffinofwales (talk) 03:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeremy Browne page

Griffin

If you take a look through this pages history you will see that all i do is add in full quotes and parliamentary data. OldTauntonian is obviously a political enemy who cuts out fully referenced information to spin against Mr Browne. I do not remove his text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.34.40 (talk)

Thanks for the message. However, you are putting your notice in the wrong place. Post it at the talk page. If you need help, contact me here. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Userpage?

Hello Griffinofwales. How's the editing going? It's great to have some nice people on the Wiki, and here's why: SOPHIAN blatantly copied my (now old) userpage and used it as his/her talk. See here User talk:SOPHIAN . See this old diff of my page to see why. Now I know I published my work under the GFDL free license and all, but I'm not sure what to do. I'm not very experienced on these kinds of issues. I can't just ask him/her to take it down, can I? It's under the free license. But honestly, it upsets me that he didn't even bother to contact me about it. I just left him/her a message. What is your strategy to combat this issue? I would greatly appreciate your input. Thanks, sincerely, Airplaneman (talk) 02:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Quote from the text under editing box, Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 and the GFDL. You agree to be credited, at minimum, through a hyperlink or URL when your contributions are reused in any form. See the Terms of Use for details. So, although anybody can copy what you create and use it in any way they want, you have to be credited. For example, This user page is copied from Airplaneman's user page. Hope that helps. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep an eye on his page and I'll notify him if he doesn't come to his senses soon. Thanks again, Airplaneman (talk) 02:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, it is a matter of trust. Although, it is likely that he/she copied it from your page, you have no proof because it wasn't a direct copy. So unless SOPHIAN admits to copying, you don't have a legal right to credit. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. It's no big deal, for that format is old now, but it did feel like a punch in the gut. I'll just keep an eye on his page and see what happens. --Airplaneman (talk) 02:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

It's a closer copy than I thought, and your current user page still looks a lot like SOPHIAN's. Tell me what happens. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009

Sorry I deleted it by mistake. -- 02:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wheeloffortune26 (talk • contribs)

No problem, remember to always leave an edit summary and to sign your posts. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Cerritos High School

Sorry, but i am a rookie at edititng and i mostly do local events that i edit, and i believe you deleted a headline in a Cerritos Document. I know i messed up, but is there a way where you can bring it back? and can you fix the format for me? thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irashi0 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I am assuming that you are writing about yourself. You have zero proof that you are notable enough to have a section named after you in the article. Do you have any sources that name you? Also, remember to sign your comments by typing this ~~~~. Griffinofwales (talk) 03:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Video Game Guidelines

The Wikipedia Video Game Article Guidelines are located at WP:VG/GL. Hope that helps --Teancum (talk) 23:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

NP

No problem.--WillC 23:25, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Attack

Dont attack people on wikipedia as you just did on Jimbo's user talk; remain civil at all times. Thanks, SqueakBox talk 21:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

When did I attack you? WP is not censored and you're not supposed to change other peoples' comments. I thought you knew that. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Your note

Moving an uncivilized comment to the page's history is not censorship, since the information is still there for anyone really interested. We try to keep WP a pleasant place for everyone, and we don't use profane language against other editors. Crum375 (talk) 22:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

When was profane language used? The user was quoting the IP's comments. Why does WP:CENSORED exist then? It's for these types of situations. FYI User:Rodhullandemu agrees with me (admin), and User:Ryan Postlethwaite (admin) has protected the page. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

The fact that an admin agrees with you makes no difference whatsoever as admins do not get extra rights or have their opinions count for more (God help us if it were like that) You havent explained why you needed to restore this offensive comment and make such a drama in a public place; by restoring it you were yourself engaged in calling another user an asshole The PR guy not spoeaking English natively mayu not have realised the offensiveness of what he wrote; you have no such excuse. Thanks, SqueakBox talk 01:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Let me make this clear, I don't for one second agree with you. Labeling any other editor as an asshole is totally unacceptable. WP:CENSORED exists so graphic content can still be described in articles - it's not a free pass for incivility towards other people. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 23:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

That was a translation of something in spanish, and nobody else objected to it. Rodhull agrees(d) with me about this. WP:TALK says that users should not change other users' comments, and this is censorship. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

If someone makes uncivil remarks like the anon did then they usually get reverted. In this case, the comment was refactored so the incvility was removed - this seems acceptable. Call that censorship if you will, but it's nothing to do with why we have WP:NOTCENSORED. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 23:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

FYI All users involved in the refactoring and the derefactoring of the word have been notified of this thread. In this case, the comments were constructive to the discussion, because it was at the request of a user, and it gave an example of what this user had done. You are right however, that if this had been done maliciously then it would have been removed. In this case though, I don't think it should be. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments here, if it matters. I don't think protection was helpful as it wasn't a full-blown edit war, just a disagreement over applicable policies. Perhaps User talk:Jimbo Wales/Talk should be created to work out what is acceptable on Jimbo's Talk page. Or we, er, could leave it up to Jimbo to manage his own Talk page? Rodhullandemu 23:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I knew you could handle this much better than I could. Could you remove the protection now? Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

No prob. No point removing protection as it will expire in a couple of minutes anyway, and I don't want to incur the wrath of the mighty Ryan. If there was going to be any wheel-warring, it would have happened by now. Rodhullandemu 23:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I will remove the censoring. Thanks for your comments. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

One more revert and you'll be blocked - simple as that. That goes for anyone. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see your message until now. Sorry about that. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Blocked

Barnstar moved to User:Griffinofwales/Barnstars Griffinofwales (talk) 01:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Given that you decided to continue the revert war on User talk:Jimbo Wales after the protection expired, I've blocked your account for 12 hours. Take this time to read up on our edit warring policy. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:16, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Ouch...not expecting that. Read the comments above and Rodhull's talk page. I know about 3RR, requesting unblock on condition that I don't get involved in the edit war again (besides talking about it). Griffinofwales (talk) 00:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, well I'll gladly unblock you should you self revert - if you agree to this and do it immediately after I unblock you then I think that is satisfactory. If you let me know here now whether or not you agree, that would be much appreciated. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

...and go against policy as cited above? No thanks I can wait. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Unblocked. Storm, teacup; teacup, storm. Not worth a piss. Rodhullandemu 00:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Rodhull. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Please disable autoblock. I still can't edit. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, I will be checking your logs Rod to make sure this is a one off - should I find any other instances I can assure you I'll take this further. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Autoblock? Griffinofwales (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not undoing your autoblock - I think you should still be blocked. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh...I still have to wait :(. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

"I'm not undoing your autoblock" - now THAT is wheel-warring. But I don't see you being autoblocked at present, per your email. I'll take another look at it. Rodhullandemu 01:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I have been de-autoblocked. I logged out and I logged back in. That may have been it. Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) 01:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize you had given me the exemption when I added the comment. I am autoblocked. Sorry about the inconvenience and the delay to your sleep. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Exemption granted. Sleep? Luxury! Rodhullandemu 01:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

  Thanks. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

  I've removed IP block exemption because this is not proper use of IP block exemption. Instead, the autoblock should be removed. Prodego ^talk 05:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

  Remove it then. You should have removed it and then removed the exemption. I'm blocked one moment and unblocked the next. Griffinofwales (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I've restored the block as well. I don't mind you being unblocked, but I an involved user's removing it is wholly inappropriate. Could you explain exactly the situation, and I'd be happy to review the block. (or you could email unblock-en-l, or use the {{unblock}} template, or you could join #wikipedia-en-unblock on IRC). I don't want to seem mean, just want to ensure everything is handled correctly. Prodego ^talk 05:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

It's entirely unfair to Griffinofwales to keep revoking and reinstating his block. It's becoming little more than punitive, in my opinion. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Check Rodhull's talk page too, that gives some info. I noticed on my watchlist that squeakbox had replaced a word with [refactored]. I undid citing WP:TALK and WP:NOTCENSORED. Squeakbox reverted and left a note saying I attacked (see above). Black Kite (admin) undid that, citing WP:NOTCENSORED. Then, Crum375 (admin) undid that edit, and then I undid that edit, and then Crum undid my edit, and then Rodhull undid that one, and then Squeakbox undid that one, and then Ryan protected the article. At that point, I notified the participants in the edit war so we could have a discussion here. At Rodhull's suggestion, after the protection expired (it was for an hour), I undid squeakbox's edit. At that point, I was blocked. After sending an e-mail to Rodhull, I got myself unblocked, but autoblock was still on. Rodhull couldn't find a trace of it, so he gave me the exemption. You know the rest. Griffinofwales (talk) 05:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I've asked uninvolved User:King of Hearts to review, but it sounds reasonable to me. Prodego ^talk 05:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

OK. Griffinofwales (talk) 05:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Now it's not OK. His user page says that he could respond in the next 12 hours. My block ends in 6 and I am logging off soon. I want to be unblocked before then. Griffinofwales (talk) 06:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Yea, that isn't really ideal. Although I am sort of involved, I'll remove the block myself, and consider it a third party review of the initial block, if that is ok with you? Prodego ^talk 06:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Works for me. Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) 06:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

(EC) No, I'm here. :-) Unblocked. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks like King of Hearts just came though. :) Good luck Griffinofwales, also, I sent you an email. Prodego ^talk 06:16, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

NOT! I read the block log and it says I'm unblocked, but there is an autoblock on the IP. Griffinofwales (talk) 06:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Nixeagle's tool isn't showing anything. Try purging cache? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

All fixed. Not sure what I did but I'm not autoblocked. Thanks to Prodego, JC, King of Hearts, and RodHull for getting me unblocked. Griffinofwales (talk) 06:22, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Logging off now. (I usually update my status early just so I don't forget; I don't want to go back on my "promises." <irrelevant>Today I just updated it to automatically account for the night in my local Pacific time. Feel free to use it: User:King of Hearts/StatusTemplate.</irrelevant>) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Prodego ^talk 06:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) 06:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC) Now for bed

CoM content on Wale's talk page

Yes, that is a personal attack. I don't appreciate you reverting it either. Scribner (talk) 03:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not a personal attack, and I will remove it again. Griffinofwales (talk) 04:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Scribner, while it probably wasn't wise of User:ChildOfMidnight to reply to your post, given that you were complaining about him.. his reply to you on Jimbo's page is in no way a personal attack. Stop removing it. --Versageek 04:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is a personal attack it'll take an admin warning before I stop removing it, I do not see that you're an admin. Scribner (talk) 04:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

You are confusing me. First you say that it will take an admin warning, but then you say that I see that you are an admin. The admin warned you. Enough? Griffinofwales (talk) 04:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Untitled section

could you block Momusufan keeps deleting my comments i am only trying to make a point could someone please report this is the 10th time today he has delete them i dont understand why thank you If you are not vandalizing, and he is removing your comments in bad faith, you can leave anotice here. Griffinofwales (talk) 15:07, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

these are the only point i am trying to state

i dont think we should place Jackson in a separate table entry between the Elvis/Beatles section and the ABBA section, with a range of sales of 350M to 750M beacause if your read everting above it tell you elvis and beatles have not sold this much

even the wall street jounal article you keep bringing up says they have not sold this much

we should either change elvis or the beatles sales or change michael jackson sales back to how they orginaly were

i can see the sales will never change beacuse people are treating them differntly to michael jackson

And we can not use Recording Industry Association of America beacuse the only state usa sells

i am just saying we should never treat people on list of best selling music artist differently even if you not a fan of them or you are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.156.126.203 (talk) 13:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Momusufan has deleting my comments 10 time today i dont understand why thank you

he is also say i am using someone else ip address how can he say this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.162.220 (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah...this is a content dispute. Discuss it with other users on the appropriate talk pages. Griffinofwales (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

...for reverting this. See also ANI; it's being watched. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  23:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. All in a day's work at Huggle. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Untitled Section

THIS WAS THE "CONTRIBUTION" I MADE ON THE WENDY JAMES WIKI..

It is to counteract a very DELIBERATE ATTEMPT by certain individuals to RE-WRITE Miss James career history in the most IN-ACCURATE and BLATANTLY SELF SERVING WAY..

I stand by my contribution and when you CHECK YOUR FACTS you will see I am right and this should STAY on the page in some form or other..

Duncan Bridgeman who actually DID produce this album will be interested to know it was in fact produced by Nick Sayer & Wendy James..! (according to the box on the right of this wiki entry..!) Especially when his NAME is clearly printed on the back of the album sleeve.. Produced By Duncan Bridgeman. Mixed by Alan Moulder That is what you get when yet another "enthusiastic" fan contribution is posted.. Unchecked and Unverified. In a blatant effort to BEEF UP Wendy James' career history For industry eyes which may be reading this entry. At a time when she has no record deal,distribution deal or publishing deal.. And is currently trying to acquire any of the above to survive financially. Instead of the ACTUAL FACTS.. Can we expect the actual SINGLES from Bubble Of Babble to be listed one by one.. Without their unflattering ACTUAL chart positions no doubt. Stop this cynical attempt to give WENDY JAMES the creative status (and commercial status) she didn't actually earn at the time. It is also the SAME people and indeed the SAME person...singular. Doing these "Wendy James Friendly" wiki entries. Across any place where TRANSVISION VAMP or WENDY JAMES can be found. The history page of this entry will easily show exactly who the culprits are. Why not click on it and find out for yourself. They won't mind. After all. They were quick enough posting this INACCURATE wikipedia entry. Without seemingly any public demand or request. They must stand by it now.

Nothing I wrote breaks any rules of Wikipedia but the orginal entry breaks about 5 of them..!

Also the TWO SINGLES listed in the box did NOT come from the album Velveteen which was released in 1989.

(Both singles were released in 1991...)

But of course they are being DELIBERATELY linked to a SUCCESSFUL album (Velveteen) rather than a high profile flop one (Bubble Of Babble)

This all part of a carefully orchestrated plan to present a very positive COMMERCIAL image for Wendy James in her current circumstances.

I stand by my claims.

You can expect more ALTERING of wiki entries associated to Miss James and her previous bands by these cynical people.

In their effort to "help" her gain the trust,support and of course financial INVESTMENT of the music industry which currently regards her as a joke.

Check the history page on each Wendy James wiki entry and you will see the same names cropping up RECENTLY again and again.

Will you allow it..?

I will highlight it publically wherever I can.

This might lead to this crude commercial behaviour stopping.

86.42.181.101 (talk) 23:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Comements about the content of the article going on the accompanying talk page. Keep your opinions off the article. Fix what should be fixed, but make sure that it is true and does not violate the policies of the English Wikipedia. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

can i have a moment ?

read subject —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.155.12.176 (talk)

What do you need? Griffinofwales (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

article about vietnam says "The Vietnam War was a military conflict that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1959[1] to 30 April 1975. The war was fought between the communist North Vietnam

should be changed to socialist

people are really playing with word communist and comunism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.155.12.176 (talk) 14:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

then also commanders of the war on vietnamese side says :

Mao Zedong Nikita Khruschev , Leonid Brezhnev

this is the most stupid thing i ever heard

what army , batallion , paramilitary group , a company or division did they command ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.155.12.176 (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I have checked and I cannot find any proof that North Vietnam was not a communist state. Read this article for a definition. Next time, use the {{editsemiprotected}} template. Place it on the talk page of the article with the request. Griffinofwales (talk) 14:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking on the other request now. Griffinofwales (talk) 14:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. The reason they are listed is because Soviet troops or government officials died in the war while they were working for the N. Vietnam side. The Soviets would have been working under orders from their government and the 2 heads of government of the USSR at that time were Brezhnev and Khrushchev. Griffinofwales (talk) 14:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Same with Zedong. Griffinofwales (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

untitled section

Hi, my name is Austin Sheridan and I am Member of the Scottish Youth Parliament for Glasgow Govan, on the Govan constituency page there is an election box which should say ind. Scottish Nationalist next to my name, however I have a vandal changing it to SNP all the time. I was wondering how I go about getting the information protected from being changed if possible, I loom forward to your reply.

Austin —Preceding unsigned comment added by A Sheridan (talk • contribs) 20:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Go here. An admin will review your request and act on it if necessary. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for youe help, I am fairly new to wikipedia so I was unsure on how to deal with the situation. If there is anything I can do to help (I dont think there is though) please let me know and I am more than happy to help.

Austin Sheridan MSYP —Preceding unsigned comment added by A Sheridan (talk • contribs) 21:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you even know what the meaning of de facto means? Read the Honduran Constitution and you will understand there is no impeachment process, but there is a constitutional succession when there is no president. The president was removed, as per the Constitution because of the illegalities. http://www.laverdadenhonduras.com/index.php/documentos/ http://www.honduras.net/honduras_constitution2.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by True Honduras (talk • contribs) 05:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

What is this about? Please provide diffs. Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) 22:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Well now I guess we've met on two wikipedias. See you around.--WillC 14:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Bugs

Just fixing the link for Baseball Bugs. Thanks! More Openly (talk) 19:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for helping to close openly. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:45, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Anna Anderson

Hiya!! Well, there's lots of stuff that is considered not too constructive over there, and I appreciate the genteel and kind warning. I think the heads of the project are churning out an award-winning entry. However, as has been pointed out, they aren't great biographers or even good journalistic writers, so I wonder what is constructive over there? Do you know that people who even disagree with them seem to get permanently booted off here? Anyway, thanks again for your gentle kindliness in the message. Bye-bye for now.75.21.156.77 (talk) 02:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Just don't call them names. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, as my Jewish uncle used to say, "I get." No names. I use colorful metaphors for bad writing or to describe an idea someone has had, but no name-calling. Which incidentally is more than can be said for what was done to me in past. A great second thank you. I'm of a rogueish nature.75.21.148.15 (talk) 06:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Question

What are you talking about? I just received the message that i was "playing" in Wikipedia (commons). Please explain that message. Kind Regards, HiddenKnowledge (talk) 14:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Checking... --Griffinofwales (talk) 23:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Checked..Sorry about that. I'm new on commons. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:12, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Now i recieved another message.. Please explain that message. HiddenKnowledge (talk) 23:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

A welcome? Griffinofwales (talk) 14:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

O, ok. I thought it was some kind of warning.

I won't use my account much on the english wiki.

My primary wiki is nl-wiki.

Kind regards,

HiddenKnowledge (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Canyon Lake, Texas

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to Canyon Lake, Texas. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I am kind of mystified by this -- lots of community listings on Wikipedia include information about the local newspapers and they have not been deleted as "advertisements." You will note that this is the case with the afore-mentioned Canyon Lake entry, which lists a number of publications under external links -- including a dead link to a newspaper that went out of business a couple of years ago! So it is only OK to list publications that no longer exist but not ones that do? None of this seems to make a whole lot of sense.

Sorry if I am not responding by the proper means, but it was kind of unclear how else I should do so.

Mike 08:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ithacan (talk • contribs)

You have a direct relationship to the paper in question (I did some research), so you shouldn't be adding that link. I will look at the above article, and remove links as necessary. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I certainly never denied having a direct relationship to it! You could have easily saved yourself the research and just asked me; I am somewhat less weasily than a lot of people online these days and would have just told you. And as noted, all I did was add a listing similiar to those for newspapers that appear on the entries for other communities on Wikipedia. While you are clearing out the links to defunct papers, could you please go ahead and add one for The Hilltop Reporter? It really is somewhat strange and misleading that it should be excluded while other papers are listed -- and you, of course, have no relationship with the paper.

Mike 22:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ithacan (talk • contribs)

In my opinion, newspaper websites are not needed in the article, because they do not help the reader any more than the CoC website or some other more informative website. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

tech point!

erm.... was this edit (and summary) removing the auto sig correct? [[1]] It actually looks to me like the thread was archived, then a German IP editor went and copied and pasted it back without a sig hoping no-one would notice, then the bot added his IP, then you removed it! I guess that's fine if your intention was to un-archive that particular thread, but technically it was a repost of a thread? Yup, picky I know - I only noticed because that thread disappeared and then appeared again but with the original timestamp (which seemed impossible); the diffs revealed what had happened! Best Little grape (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I just thought that he was a logged-out user, using his username as a sig. I will undo (since it will mess up the archival bots). Thanks for catching that, Griffinofwales (talk) 23:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Actually I would have thought such a topic would have brought some replies and thus staved off the bot, but seems it died on the vine... Little grape (talk) 23:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle

Yes, no se mucho of english. --wexeb (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikicup

Sorry about that I didn't know there was abot. After talking to a couple of the other editors you can strike me from the list of participants. You can see my comments for why on the Wikicup talk page but basically it takes to long for the articles to make it through the process for me to participate in this contest. The time spans between elimination rounds is just too short. --Kumioko (talk) 18:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ecuador

WP:SOFIXIT Kevin McE (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Not enough time, and I'm not very active on this project. I just happened to be reading the article and decided to leave some comments. Why don't you fix it? Griffinofwales (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Nobody else seems to think there is a major issue with the page. You have not cited examples of what you object to. If you are not willing to be co-operative, frankly, keep your nose out. Kevin McE (talk) 12:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

After speaking with others (off-wiki), they agree that the article does need cleanup. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Ref Fix Thanks

Moved 4 barnstars to User:Griffinofwales/Barnstars. Griffinofwales (talk) 01:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Category:Animated maps

I think you should clarify the deletion reason or perhaps use {{db-reason}} here as otherwise the combination of the two templates may lead to confusion over whether the category qualifies for deletion or not. Note: I found this on IRC and have no familiarity with the page itself. —Soap— 17:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I have asked the user who added {{empty category}} why he did so. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Griffinofwales. You have new messages at IngerAlHaosului's talk page.
Message added 09:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IngerAlHaosului (talk) 09:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Fredericktown-Middlesboro, PA

Thanks for the info. I am thinking of buying property there and this is the first good info I've found. How can I find more info about the places you mentioned ... the library, the two stores ... And do you know how to look up public records from there?

Thanks, Sandy151.202.60.121 (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Fredericktown-Middlesboro, PA

Thanks for the info. I am thinking of buying property there and this is the first good info I've found. How can I find more info about the places you mentioned ... the library, the two stores ... And do you know how to look up public records from there?

Thanks, SandySleibler (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

RM 2424

In response to your question, yes I do have photos. I'll try to upload them to Commons sometime this evening. I'll write back with the links once they're up.

Fortguy (talk) 17:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. Much appreciated. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

RM 2424 photos posted

Please follow these links:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ranch_Road_2424_(1).jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ranch_Road_2424_(2).jpg

I see you have already created the article. May I ask your interest in the road? Do you live nearby?

I wish the pics were of better quality. Unfortunately, the display on my camera is barely visible on sunny days. I should have also shot the photo with Kent in the distance with my camera on zoom. As it is, I take pics and see how they turn out once I get home.

Fortguy (talk) 00:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

No interest at all. User:Mitchazenia gave it to me as a project to work on. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I also see he rated your article a "B". I'm jealous. None of my articles have ever gotten better than a "C". Fortguy (talk) 01:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Pyramid Lake

Hi Griffinofwales,

It's been so long, but as I recall, I mistakenly IDed it as Lake Castaic and named it as such. But someone told me it was actually Pyramid Lake. You can find it here...

Forgive my lack of editing skills in this message. I don't do much on Wiki anymore and have forgotten much about it.

Mactographer (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Need your email address

Hey Griffin. I have a couple of emails that regard you. If you send me an email, or tell me your email address, I'll forward them to you. Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Will do. Griffinofwales (talk) 10:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Yoplait

Why do you say the article has nothing to do with Israel? Yoplait has cornered half the Israeli market and produces a unique kosher line: "Yoplait in Israel is managed by Tnuva, Israel's largest dairy[2], and products are kosher. The company's drinkable yogurt comes in an innovative 100g shot-style bottle with a center opening for easy gripping.[3] Yoplait brand flavored yogurts account for 42-52% of the Israeli market.[4] Tnuva and Yoplait entered into a partnership to set up production facilities in Romania in 2007.[5]"--Geewhiz (talk) 03:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Bah..I see now, although if Yoplait keeps growing, we might see 100 wikiprojects covering the page. Griffinofwales (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Redirect

Re. redirect to personal life section

Ooh, glad you did that; I clicked it just before, was puzzled, found section, went back to change redir, found it *already* pointed to the section, was *more* puzzled, and then figured it out.

So - nice one; others will be less surprised. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  01:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a bit confusing. Although I hope that Hussainy's life gets better detailed in that section, since all you learn from the redirect is that she is with Cowell. Griffinofwales (talk) 03:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reward board expired requests

I noticed you've archived several expired requests on Wikipedia:Reward board expired requests, so I thought I'd ask you: How are the expired requests organized? By expiration date, by offering date, by archiving date, or by some other method? liquidluck✽talk 20:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I've always put them by archiving date as it's much simpler that way. Of course, that could always be changed. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I have responded to your post "June 2010"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:78.150.0.39#June_2010 78.150.0.39 (talk) 18:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Huggle usage

Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BalticPat22&diff=367259944&oldid=367259851 this diff], this is an inappropriate use of Huggle. There is no reason for you to be removing this comment from another person's user page. Next time, allow the user to do it themselves. Regards, ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 20:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay in response. I seem to have forgotten to reply. It is vandalism, no? Griffinofwales (talk) 11:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

No, it was not vandalism. It was a valid comment. Even so, unless it's blatant vandalism like blanking, or a wall of penises or the like, you should generally allow people to choose what they want to view on their own talk pages, rather than make the decision for them. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 03:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Whatever. To me, that's nonsense from an immature user (at the time I thought it was a random vandal). Forgive me for the misstep though, I agree it wasn't something I should have huggle reverted. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:21, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. MBisanz ^talk 02:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Uh, thanks! Didn't request it but might find it useful. Griffinofwales (talk) 11:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Untitled section

Dear Sir- I submitted an edit to Sen. Byrd's bio stating that he had voted against both the LIBERAL Thurgood Marshall, and the CONSERVATIVE Clarance Thomas, who were nominated to the Supreme Court. It was not accepted because it was thought not to be neutral. I felt that this was important information, as most-or all- votes usually reflect a preference for either liberals or conservatives, and his votes did not. I did not express or imply a preference for either liberals OR conservatives in mt post, but merely pointed out an unusual fact. Please reconsider. Thank you.24.246.201.177 (talk) 23:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Whether someone is conservative or liberal or not (especially within the US justice system) is often not as clear-cut as it may seem. Now if you could find some reliable sources to back up your argument, I would be happy to reconsider. Thanks for your inquiry, Griffinofwales (talk) 23:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

I think you deleted several edits that I made of Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. I don't plan on going into an editing war. In other words, I wrote a table comparing the cleanup efforts of the current oil spill to past oil spills (i.e. Ixtoc and Exxon Valdez). I think people would be interested in the current progress of cleanup as compared to previous efforts. We are certainly not getting it from the media, who mention little of the cleanup or are very negative about it. Using the current flow data and information from the NOAA, ~40-70% of the oil spill has been cleaned up, which is important to know, since only 6% and 8% of the Ixtoc and Exxon Valdez accidents in total were cleaned up, respectively. I can give you the information and you can add it yourself. That would save me some time.Artsbiotech (talk) 23:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The problem is, no one knows for sure, and the US Government, BP, and many other agencies are still (IMO) unreliable. The table is (IMO) not needed for the risk it is taking. If you can gather consensus on the talk page, add it by all means. Thanks for your work, Griffinofwales (talk) 23:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewing

Not sure if you know this, but when you review a pending change, you should always include a comment (if accepted) or an edit summary (if rollbacked) Merci Ronk01 (talk) 01:11, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Really? For the rollbacking, the default rollback does not provide an edit summary, although if it is not clear-cut vandalism, I often use undo. What is the point in providing an edit summary for reviewing? I'm not sure why it is needed. Could you enlighten me? Griffinofwales (talk) 01:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Mitch Miller

Hello, on IRC I didn't have the chance to thank you for your info about the death of Mitch Miller; I was busy updating our article on it.wiki; I initially found very strange that no-one wrote about it in Italy, but I guess he wasn't famous enough for us. Thank you very much, and have a nice day! --Austroungarika scold or call 13:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to help. Griffinofwales (talk) ^{Come and join the}_{Simple English Wikipedia} 19:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Personal Attack

Protector of Wiki made a personal attack against me, I'm pretty sure.

" Do you bother to read pages you cite? Your nescience is astounding. You have completely misapplied Notability is not temporary. A lapse of time diminishes not the notability of a subject. Protector of Wiki (talk) 22:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)" (here). Insulting a user is a personal attack regardless of how it is done. Admittedly, I did use it wrong, but (s)he should have handled it better. Battleaxe9872 ^Talk 00:39, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Dealt with appropriately. Next time, use e-mail or IRC, thanks. Griffinofwales (talk) ^{Come and join the}_{Simple English Wikipedia} 00:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs

I agree with your comments at Talk:Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs that the article needs to be updated. --TommyBoy (talk) 10:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Replied on linked page. Griffinofwales (talk) ^{Come and join the}_{Simple English Wikipedia} 11:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, the article has subsequently been updated. --TommyBoy (talk) 03:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: Jones

Yes. A quick Google search will pan out only that the announcement was made on the 8th, along with a ton of commentary about it. But even without that, it just wouldn't make sense: you can't just walk out on White House job without a transition (indeed, the custom for a two weeks notice); and in D.C., this kind of secret would have been leaked long ago. bahamut0013^words_deeds 02:23, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Raymond of Sabunde

A week or so ago, you questioned this antique edit; I was merely restoring the text to exactly as it was in the reference, the 1911 Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, see here, following an unsourced, unexplained edit by an IP editor. Also, it's my casual understanding that Catholic doctrine is that revealed truth is delivered to at least some of us by God in every age. Studerby (talk) 03:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Randy Rhoads

My edit onRandy Rhoads simply fixed a broken link. May i put my edit back up? It did contribute, as i stated, by fixing the referral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.206.123 (talk) 03:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah..I see. I saw it as you removing a reference, and adding "Wah" (gibberish) in its place. You may undo me, but please use edit summaries from now on. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 04:13, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Mormon Mill, Burnet County, Texas

Thank you! It was a typo, and I never even noticed when I set it up. So glad you caught it! Maile66 (talk) 23:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Lol..no problem. :) Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 23:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Coryell County

Hi! The reason why I removed the "county" designator from the template is because, from my understanding, the "location" template is supposed to provide a list of Wikipedians who can assist in having the photo taken. There is a list for Texas overall, but none for Coryell County in particular WhisperToMe (talk) 04:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I actually have no idea. I classified them by county, because IMO, it makes it easier on Texan photographers to find articles by the area they happen to be in at that moment. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 16:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Walking

Griffinofwales - I have noticed that you have contributed to the List of people who have walked across the United States, and cordially invite you to participate in a new WikiProject Walking that I have proposed. Your support for the project, active or passive, would be appreciated. Bezza84 (talk) 19:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, a revert 2 years ago.. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 05:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Legal status of Texas and Republic of Texas (group)

An article that you have been involved in editing, "Legal status of Texas" and another, "Republic of Texas (group) has been proposed for a merge with Texas Secession Movement. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Otr500 (talk) 04:39, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The Addams Family

I recently corrected the episode description for "Gomez the Politician". The description that was (and is now) there is incorrect; it's from a completely different episode. It was reverted back however and I was told my changes were unproductive. I was correcting a mistake though. :) I won't change it again but I would like to ask you to reexamine it and perhaps revert or even add the correct description yourself. The correct episode summary is available on IMDB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.176.21.30 (talk) 02:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I have reverted my edit, as you are correct. I do not recall reverting that specific edit, so it was probably an accident. Please accept my sincere apologies for the inconvenience I have caused. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 02:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Fruitella Edit - Not By me,

Dear GofW, I just saw that I was supposed to have made some changes to the entry for Fruitella. Nope. One reason why I didn't, is because I have no idea what that is, and another is that I am currently banned from editing until sometime in the future. If you look at what is supposed to be my userpage (I say supposed because I have a Blackberry which seems to share an IP with probably 28 million other people), you will see a whole catalogue of entries I am supposed to have edited in a negative fashionn to the extent that I was banned from making further edits. The problem is that I only edited 2 entries - for The Russell Tribunal and Stop The War. I firmly disagree with the reasons given for reverting these 2 edits - both organisations are openly anti-Israeli (and actually quite happy to be portrayed as such). I merely pointed this out. The problem with Wiki is that people who really know nothing of such entities are charged with protecting them, so the result is detrimental.Often in a language which they don't speak very well. Discuss! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.186.23.236 (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

First, you say you were blocked. The two IPs you have posted with have not been blocked in the past month. Second, the Fruitella edit was made by someone using your IP. To solve this issue in the future, I recommend that you create an account. This will stop any confusion between your edits and those of someone else. For more benefits, and for help on creating an account, click here. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 01:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

cannot

Hi GofW. I just tried now to do that by following yourlink, but was informed that i am banned from editing until July 2012. What is Fruitella? I haven't changed it or made any of the other changes I am accused of doing from my IP. Surely the problem is that Wiki isn't using sophisticated enough technology to distinguish between different users? Can you sort this out? Tony Riley (----)

Are you trying to create an account on a different IP than the one that you are using to contact me? None of the IPs you have used so far are blocked currently (otherwise, you couldn't edit this page). If you are still having issues, click here to request that an account be made for you. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 14:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Sir I did not realize you were an expert on the Canadian Military and you did not know who Kevin Kelly is. Furthermore I would ask you to not edit topics that you do not have sufficent knowledge of. Thank you on behalf of The Royal Canadian Regiment.

Please provide me with a reason as to why your edits are correct. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 01:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

List of Mayday episodes

I responded to your talk page entry and took action. You may want to comment on what I said and done plus keep a watch on the list and its talk page. Feel free to delete this heads up after you read it.- William 19:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Image request

In your image request of the US map, did you want the district boundaries removed, or all boundaries removed? Rarkenin (talk) 14:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow..we're talking something old here. Could you link me to the request? It might jog my memory. Thanks for looking into it though. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 01:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Unsigned comment

I don't lift though - Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarwarsh (talk • contribs) 06:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC) I'm sorry, please explain how your edits should not have been classified as vandalism. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 06:45, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:165.69.2.3&redirect=no

No idea what you're talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.69.2.3 (talk) 06:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

My warning refers to this edit made by you (or someone using your IP address). This edit adds information that is not sourced, slightly opinionated, and refers to habits (smoking) which must be backed up by sources to be included in the article. If you still want this content included, please provide a source and I can work with uou to find a way to properly fit this information into an article. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 10:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

General Motors EV1

Less than neutral? Sure if you consider many of the conspiracy theories about General Motors sabotaging their own EV1 lineup in the 90's to suppress technology in favor of oil companies. Wikipedia is slipping. It's becoming nothing more than a conspiracy site. You might want to check that part out in the EV1 list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.122.59.128 (talk) 19:05, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. The General Motors EV1 article does need improvement and I encourage you to be bold and help us clean it up. I reverted your edit because you did not cite a reliable source for your claim, and you came across as trying to push a certain point of view. If you would like help from other car or green vehicle enthusiasts, I encourage you to visit WikiProject Automobiles or the Green vehicle task force and seek help there. Let me know if I can be of any other assistance. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 23:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Leoesb1032

I'm sorry, I did provide a reason and I was defending myself against something I didn't know was wrong on the Sockpuppet page.

Instead of blanking the investigation page, form a discussion regarding the investigation. If your point is deemed valid, the investigation will be closed. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 23:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Bruce Farr

Minor correction, NOT a test.

"PLANNING" is making PLANS. "PLANING" is the correct term. It's when a vessel climbs it's own bow-wave and exceeds it's theoretical maximum hull speed. Also the grammar was poor, so I made a couple of very small minor edits. You immediately changed it back without giving any proper explanation. This petty behaviour is what I HATE about wikipedia and refrain from donating to date - it seems to encourage edits for the sake of making edits. If I had made spelling errors, used poor language or had been factually incorrect or libellous, I could understand. BUT NONE OF THAT APPLIED. Seems that because I am not a "logged-in" person, every time I make a simple edit, some dweeb has to undo the edits I made.

PLEASE EXPLAIN why did you make these changes back to the old page? Do editors get "power points" or something for the number of corrections they make? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.174.187.241 (talk) 23:24, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your constructive edits. After reviewing the context of the original edit, it is obvious to see that you are indeed correct. Your second edit (correcting mine) has not been reverted and stands in the currently published article. I apologize for the inconvenience to you. Thanks for making a better Wikipedia! Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 23:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Pansexuality

I must admit that I temporarily edited the article for a screen capture.

Next time, either use the sandbox or the preview window. All edits made to an article are saved and published immediately and anyone viewing your edit will have a negative view of the standards of Wikipedia. Thanks, Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 00:00, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. It will most certainly not happen again. Thanks for being cool about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.46.157.236 (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Boots

I've reverted the change you made to "These Boots Are Made for Walkin." The previous information was incorrect, as the three cites demonstrate. I provided three cites because I know some editors are uncomfortable with profanity, but accuracy is one of the tenets of Wikipedia. Please contact me about anything else that concerns you. Thanks.71.190.131.105 (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Having reviewed the sources, you are indeed correct. In my haste, I saw the language used and assumed it was vandalism. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better! Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 02:06, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Slalom Information

Hi there -

Noticed you have contributed to the Slalom Consulting Page. Would you be interested in receiving factual information from Slalom to contribute to the page in the future? I work on behalf of Slalom representing their communications program. Ktgeralds (talk) 18:44, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

My edits were strictly focused on reverting vandalism, which is why I visited the article. If you would like assistance in creating a neutral article on your company, may I suggest talking to the folks at WikiProject Companies? We take our neutrality and conflict of interest policies seriously, and we want to make sure that none of users or articles violate these. All members of your program editing your company's article should read and understand our FAQ for organization editors to know how to work within our policies. Let me know if I can be of more help! Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 23:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Interested in adding more content to Slalom website?

Please let me know.

yamani@airfoilgroup.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by JRYamani (talk • contribs) 22:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 19:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Griffinofwales. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Griffinofwales. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)