User talk:Islander/Archive 4

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

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Toto & Honey in Big Cat Week

Hi, do you have any idea where people are getting this idea that Honey is Totos mum? because i was under the impression that shes not. I've already removed 'bad data' off the main article and now so have you. Ive asked for a reffernce on the IP addresses talk page or a website that he/she might be getting their information. Just wondered what your opinion is? Thanks TheProf07 (talk) 18:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Honey is Toto's Mum - take a look here (click next to get to image 2, and read the caption). The reason I reverted was that I thought it was clear throughout Big Cat Week last year that Honey was Toto's Mum, and as such the IPs edit was a little odd. However, looking closely at the link I cite above, it seems that it wasn't in fact known until after the week, so the anon IP was right. I shall place it back in the article shortly. _TheIslander 19:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Big Cat Diary 2006 was called Big Cat Week 2006. Last Time she was seen in Big Cat Diary was in 2002. Just thought you should know. Thanks TheProf07 (talk) 20:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, come on, we both know it's the same programme. Let's not split hairs on a change of name ;). _TheIslander 21:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

With all the new information, maybe this section should be slighty rewritten to make things abit clearer. I'll leave the final word with you as your the admin. Thanks TheProf07 (talk) 21:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm sincerely flattered, but I'm not actually an admin (yet) :). Please, feel free to have a bash yourself; I'll certainly take a look later, though, if you'd like me to. _TheIslander 21:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I think i'd best leave it up to you, i'm still fairly new to this. Good luck with becoming an admin! TheProf07 (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Norwich and Peterborough Building Society

Please revert yourself and remove the warning you have placed on my talk page or I will report you for breach of the three revert rule and you will be blocked.

Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

Chrisieboy (talk) 11:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Err, take a look at the talk page - I am discussing, you're not ;). Go ahead and report me - I won't get blocked, a) because, if you take 3rr at face-value, I haven't actually reverted thrice in 24 hours yet, but more importantly b) because if you actually look at WP:3RR, one of the exceptions to the rule is "reverts to remove clear violations of the copyright, spamming or non-free content policies". So, please don't re-add the material without discussing it on the talk page first ;). _TheIslander 12:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Scrapheap Challenge Spoiler

Hey,

I recently visited the Scrapheapchallenge wiki, and I accedentilly saw the winner of a serie, that way I new the outcome of multiple episodes of the serie. I wanted to warn others by adding the "Spoiler" tag, but I saw you removed it because you didn't find it necesarry, but for me it would have been better if I didn't accedentily see the winners. So I was wondering why you think they're not necesarry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.41.212.117 (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Although I sympathise with how you were spoiled, unfortunatly it's kinda your own fault for looking on Wikipedia. We are trying to create an exncyclopedia with huge amounts of notable information in detail, which includes synopses of programmes etc. in detail. As it's detailed, you expect it to contain spoilers, and as such you shouldn't visit the articles if you don't want to be spoilt. With that in mind, see the Wikipedia Spoiler Policy, (which states that spoiler tags aren't required), and the Wikipedia content disclaimer (which basically acts as a spoiler tag for the whole site). Thanks, _Talk Islander 17:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Midnight

What makes you think we weren't discussing the article and its content? Everything I posted was in support of keeping the title in the article, which is surely on-topic for the talk page! But anyway, SaxonUnit seems to have given up for the night without providing much of a solid argument for removing the episode title from the article, so that's me finished! No harm done, anyway... :) Stephenb (Talk) 22:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No, no harm done :). On reflection, it wasn't really off-topic at all, but it really was getting a little over-heated. I think both sides needed to calm down a little, and stop with the biccering, but you're right, it was pretty much on topic. My appologies. _Talk Islander 00:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Islander 2

Added a question. Good luck in your request. Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I really thought you were one! So, I've been thinking... (I know, a dangerous thing to do :D).. would you like a co-nomination? I'd really love to. Regards, Rudget . 17:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget, I would be truely honoured if you were to co-nominate me. After failing my last RfA, and (at the time) thinking it somewhat futile to ever try again, it really means a lot to me that you are willing to co-nominate me. Thank you :). _Talk Islander 17:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll write it now. Should be up within the next 40 minutes or so. Hope nobody dislikes it. :) Rudget . 18:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, this is really trivial, but hey, I'm a copyeditor here. Would you mind terribly if I reworded your intro paragraph to read Hi, I'm Islander, and I should like to nominate myself to be an administrator? The self-nominate myself is a redundancy that likely does not bother the vast majority of editors here, but it's the first impression most are getting. Your answers to questions are superb, your vote count is likely leading to the janitor's closet for you, and I don't want that to detract from your candidacy. I'll leave it alone unless I hear from you. Thanks, happy editing, Keeper | 76 17:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Keeper, by all means go ahead :). Now that you point it out, I see exactly what you mean - in fact, I'll go and edit myself right now. Thank you for the advice ;). _Talk Islander 17:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Saw the fix - looks great. Best of luck to you! Keeper | 76 18:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Done - Best of luck! Rudget . 19:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Rudget, I really, really appreciate your effort ;) _Talk Islander 23:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI, as promised, I changed my vote this time to support. Bearian (talk) 00:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed - thanks for that ;) _Talk Islander 08:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Islander! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β^_command 14:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

RFA Questions

Hey, thanks for being a good sport and trying the out the questions. It shows some of your personality, a great thing to have as an admin. Just so I don't leave you in the dark, Useight's question and my second qustion had to do with the movie, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, a great movie in my opinion. If your interested, the link here contains the pertaining dialogue from the movie. Any ways, best of luck on your RFA (I bet it will be a landslide!) Icestorm815 (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I thought they seemed a little too random to be completely unrelated. I keep meaning to watch Monty Python in some form or another - my friends keep telling me that it'd be right up my street. Never quite get around to it, though. Still, thank you very much for the support - I sincerely appreciate it ;). _Talk Islander 23:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear Islander, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget . 16:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

"Consensus" in AFDs gets measured against policy not headcount - see cases passim at DRV. If its against policy and 10-1 editors say to keep its still gets deleted. This obviously depends on how strong the policy is (C for example) and how well accepted it is by the community (N). I'm confident you will get through this time but just wanted to clear that up for you. Good luck. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, interesting points. Thanks for the advice,and your support ;). _Talk Islander 08:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Flags

Hi. I noticed this. I was wondering what you think the flag adds to the article. In other words, in what ways is United Kingdom better than United Kingdom in an encyclopedia for adults? Please do not ever restore material because other articles contain the same fault; if there is an actual reason why you think this is better I will listen to it, but your reasoning on this one was awfully close to WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS for my liking. --John (talk) 18:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair point, my summary did sound a little like WP:OTHERSTUFF - I didn't mean it to. However, you state "Please do not ever restore material because other articles contain the same fault" - this is by no means a fault. I edit a huge amount of TV related articles - on the whole it's my main interest on here when I'm not RC patrolling - so I'm used to the style of articles on TV programmes. You ask what this adds to an encyclopedia for adults - a very similar thing to, say, a logo, or title screencap. A logo adds an instant visual identity to an article. A reader may see the My Hero logo, and, (assuming of course they recognise it), they'll instantly associate the programme and article. A single, or perhaps couple of flag icons (for programmes with more than one origin - more than two is pushing it, at which point the main icon should be used alone) does the same thing, but links the article visually to the country of origin. WP:FLAG shows a clear list of times when flag icons are not appropriate, and I don't feel that this usage breaches any of them. Also, bear in mind that WP:OTHERSTUFF applies primarily to deletion discussions - keeping an article that may be non-notable because there are others on similar subjects is not really similar to keeping a particular style which is used in other articles. In fact, in this case it could be seen as preferable to standardise a style, bearing in mind that it does not violate a policy. I hope that you can see where I'm coming from. _Talk Islander 19:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply. I disagree with you; perhaps we could take this to a more centralised venue where it will attract wider input. Where would you suggest? --John (talk) 19:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

My initial thought was Template talk:Infobox Television, as this is the template in question. Whilst checking that I'd got that link right (I've got links wrong too often in the past, so I now double check links obsessivly :P), I noticed this, straight from the template guidelines:

"country - The country of origin for the show. (See Category:Flag templates, e.g. {{USA}} for

United States.)"

As it's actually what is instructed by the template, I'd definitely suggest that this is the place to initiate a discussion on this matter. If you do so, I'll certainly keep an eye on it and get involved. Regards, _Talk Islander 19:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've done so. can I also congratulate you on your adminship? --John (talk) 02:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You are now an administrator

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjBscribe 01:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, WJBscribe, and thanks to everyone who supported my RfA. I have left a message on my user page to this effect - please read it :). Thanks! _Talk Islander 01:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! - but don't forget about us at WikiProject BBC now your an admin ;) Tiddly-Tom 07:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your already helpful admin work ;-) ^Avruchtalk 22:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome - glad I could help ;). And Tom, don't worry, I'll continue my involvement with the BBC Wikiproject ;). _Talk Islander 22:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.

KillerChihuahua^?!?

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.

I'm almost edited it myself - you've got a typo in your message. Unless your new status has given you a Messianic complex, striped should be stripped I expect! Stephen B Streater (talk) 10:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks for pointing that out ;). And thanks for the tips, KillerChihuahua - made me giggle somewhat :P. _Talk Islander 10:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to add my congratulations on your promotion! Well earned. I wish you good luck for the future! TheProf07 (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for Rollback

Hello, I'm a non-admin, and I would like to request the rollback feature. Every so often, I encounter a really badgering bit of vandalism, and I hope that this feature will make it easier for me to OBLITERATE it for good.

Thanks for your consideration! ~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical? 05:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but looking through your contribution count, you have only been active a couple of months, and have a fairly low edit total. Also, more importantly, you have very, very few edits to the mainspace, where you would use the tool. Get a bit more experience, and when you have real need for rollback I'll happily grant it :). _Talk Islander 13:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Will do! Thanks for the feedback. ~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical? 22:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Saint John Mary

Why this article is deleted, when it follows the same criteria WIKI allows to other international school like Samakkhi Witthayakhom School, Harrow International School, Ruamrudee International School, Nantawan Trilingual School, etc. please consider this. WE always support WIKI in good heart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.162.63 (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Take a look here - the article went through a deletion discussion, and the consensus reached was to delete it, thus you should not just recreate the page. I was therefore deleting it per CSD G4. Sorry, _Talk Islander 23:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Colosseum

Protection is fine. I just declined it because I blocked the two persistent vandals, but chances are more IPs will vandalize anyway, so protection is OK. jj 137 00:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Protection for C. Vernon Mason

In re my request at WP:RPP - I'm familiar with the Protection Policy, but did not think that Full Protection was warranted. Guess I was right! You're correct, though, that Semi Protection is not appropriate in this circumstance. In any event, Both editors have been notified, and a discussion has been started on the talk page. We'll see what we can do. Thanks for the insight, UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 19:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The Exquisite Death of Saxon Shore

Not sure how I go about doing this, but if it's at all possible I would like that article back. I was working on it when I was interrupted. Any chance we could work something out? SenorPsychotic (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I was about to restore it to your userspace, but looking at what it contained when it was deleted, it's really not worth it. Here's the entire article, just before it was deleted:

{{db-band}}

{{Infobox Album <!-- See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums -->
| Name = The Exquisite Death of Saxon Shore
| Type = Full-length [[studio album]]
| Artist = [[Saxon Shore (band)|Saxon Shore]]
| Released = 2005
| Genre = [[Post-rock]]
}}

That's it. Before recreating the article, make sure you cite everything you can, using third-party references, and ensure that the subject is notable. Cheers, _Talk Islander 18:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Belatedly thank you

for protecting Mount Fuji. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 07:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for your quick response. I now know who the backup pilot on Gemini 11 was. :-) --Jtir (talk) 12:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all :) _Talk Islander 14:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks for undoing my [superfluous] addition to Young Dracula, a mere two minutes (!) after posting. I always hope to learn from my mistakes, and appreciated the heads-up as to the reason per the entry's Revision History.

It is also clear that, without such active monitoring (and undoing of certain contributions), the entry would be much the poorer.

Cousteau69 (talk) 14:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, no problem whatsoever! It's rare indeed that someone thanks me for reverting their edit, and I'm glad that you saw why I did it. The Young Dracula article concerns me, as there seem to be a number of users (or one user under multiple IPs) that keep inserting both speculation and personal opinion, which is why I patrol it heavily. I'm glad that someone sees the merit of this :). Thanks for understanding the revert! _Talk Islander 14:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

RE:Young Dracula

=) No problem, the page needed the protection! Cheers!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 00:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Kansas

Hello there. It seems a bit hasty to semi-protect Kansas. The main culprit of the vandalism was an IP address that has since been blocked, and there really hasn't been much vandalism other than that. I see about one bad edit per day for about 3 days prior to that, and before that about a week without editing. Though it does seem that vandlaism was fairly high before that. Anyway, it's been about 5 days since the block, that should be good. Would you consider lifting it? Okiefromokla ^questions? 01:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I would agree that the levels of vandalism could have been higher, but I don't think that I was hasty in blocking. Perhaps the only thing was that it could have been blocked for a slightly shorter period; perhaps 3-5 days instead of seven. Having said that, what's done is done, and bearing in mind that protection expires in only a couple of days, I see no particular reason to go back on my decision and unprotect it. _Talk Islander 13:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Question concerning troll's nuisance

Hello, I'm the person who made a request lately concerning the protection of the Classic metal which was declined for some reaons. While I kind of understand your reasons, I didn't get your suggestion and what I'm supposed to do about the nuisance. You suggested that "Vandalism is mostly from one IP - deal with that one IP, and it would appear that the vandalism will drop " But what do you mean by "deal with that one IP". Frankely speaking, I don't know what to do. This guy has been trolling the page ad vandalizing for months and months. We did whatever we though what could be possibly done to prevent his mischiefs try to calm him down by discussing politely, then made requests for banning after countless attacks and vadalism, protected the page for a month during December, followed the guidelines concerning trolls including" ignoring him for a while" but the guy is still harassing us and attacking us either on the article's talk page or on our personal talk pages. I sure will do anything you suggest. Maybe there's some other part of the wiki guide line I'm not aware of...but for the moment we real feel helpless with this nuisance. Tell me what we should do about this IP. Thanks in advance. GreetingsFrédérick Duhautpas (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Right. The problem is, though he may have been trolling for months and months, he's been warned very little. Wikipedia operates a system whereby people are warned for vandalism, trolling etc., and when they reach a 'final warning', and ignore it, they are blocked. This user cannot be blocked, as they haven't been warned much. I have warned them against personal attacks; one more warning, and they'll be blocked, and then maybe they'll stop. I'll try and keep an eye on them, but let me know if they continue. Regards, _Talk Islander 18:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply but I'm not sure I get it. Not enough warnings?? But this user has been permanently banned for months after several warnings. Isn't that sufficient? No matter he has been banned, he's still coming back as an IP. Doesn't he abuse your system? How can an already banned bloked user still come back and ruin the article and the discussions for months? And there's no doubt it is him not someoneelse since this is the same style and the IP aknowledges himself to be the banned user...So how am I supposed to do? Thanks for your care and your patience. GreetingsFrédérick Duhautpas (talk) 20:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

This user hasn't actually been blocked at all. If, as I think you're doing, you're suggesting that this IP is a sockpuppet of another previously blocked user, then it cannot be blocked until this is proven, and unfortunatly I don't have the tools to do so. Go take a look requests for checkuser - that is where a case like this belongs. I appologise for not understanding first time 'round ;). _Talk Islander 20:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

WNST

I live in Dallas-Ft. Worth and a local sports talk radio station (KTCK) intimated that listeners should vandalize the page. Both stations have representatives at the Super Bowl and a dispute between on-air personalities arose which caused the recent spate of vandalism. It's likely that the calls for vandalism will continue until Friday, and likely into the early part of next week. Already one account has bypassed the semi-protection on both pages. Full protection would avoid any additional sleeper accounts from hitting the pages, as well as new accounts that get autoverified between now and the expiration of the protection.

Let me know if you need any additional info on this. Caknuck (talk) 17:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

There's also a thread on WP:ANI on the incident. I've left my comment there as well. Cheers, Caknuck (talk) 18:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Per my comment above, there's already a thread at ANI. I have no problem with a sanity check over there. However, considering three sleeper accounts vandalized the pages after semi-protection, I didn't feel this was a pre-emptive block as much as a preventative one. Caknuck (talk) 18:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

How to request block?

Regarding your having declined to PP Chrysler K engine because the problems are currently being caused by a single editor: I see your point. I'm hopeful your warning and my explanation will be effective; in case they are not, will you please point me at the page explaining how to request a block on an individual unregistered editor? Thanks, and I'd appreciate your replying on my talk page. --Scheinwerfermann (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

A system of warnings is in place on Wikipedia: if, after receiving a final warning, this editor continues, then he can be blocked. Unfortunatly, though this editor's contributions look dubious as a whole, my warning was the first he received. Feel free to contact me if his behaviour continues in this way; I will warn him appropriatley, and block if necessary. If you'd like to go through the central 'channel', for want of a better description, blocks can be requested at WP:AIV. _Talk Islander 19:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)