User talk:(aeropagitica)/Archive 13

Comment without context
The comment without context from CrookToe was about the deletion of Rapsody in Blue created by Tip02. Note where Tip02 then blanks CrookToe's talk page after you responded. I have reason to believe that they are both socks of Mattisse. First, Tip02 after claiming to be leaving Wikipedia with a message very similar to the one Mattisse left, had to go put a citation tag into Dattatreya an article which another of Mattisse's socks, Dattat was interested in (I think only to harrass 999). Second, CrookToe created a copy of Art Tripp titled Allen Tripp changing the name only in the lead paragraphs but leaving "Art" in the rest of the article. This is getting to be a pattern with Mattisse socks: create a duplicate article or copy an existing article. See Articles for deletion/Headingley ground. &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

P.S. looks like my speedy of Allen Tripp has already been processed...

Articles for deletion/The Peoples' Mag
I have noticed when you closed the above AfD, you did not remove the category template, "". By deleting this when closing it pulls the discussion out of the category. I have deleted it from this discussion, but if you could review any other closures you have done recently and remove the tag from them it would be greatly appreicated. Thanks.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 11:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I have actually removed the template from a number of other closed AfDs that I was also monitoring; I am sure there are still others. Thanks.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 11:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Your comments are not clear to me. Can you refer to the part of the process on Deletion process that I am missing out, please?  (aeropa gitica)  12:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have now seen and understand. Thanks for the information.  (aeropa gitica)  12:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. Based on your comments, I reviewed the deletion process page and there is a need for this new feature to be explained there as it has not been placed in those instructions.--Gay Cdn  (talk) (email) (Contr.) 12:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Sig
Could you please minimize your sig because it is very large.--//Mac Lover TalkC 02:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Tagging email username blocks
Hello (aeropagitica). Please don't tag email-username-blocked accounts[1]; doing so exposes the unverified email address (quite possibly owned by someone else) to search engine indexing and spam harvesting. // [ admin ] Pathoschild (talk/map) 06:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

about deletion of: Side effects of technology
I have 2 commnets:

1- why not following the deletion process, so that I can re-edit it to follow standards in the period of discussing its deletion?

2- Really I edited it - (didn't copy form original reseach), I just refered to one (without violating copyrights).

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notopia (talk • contribs)


 * Firstly, sign your comments on Talk pages using four tildes  ~ . This makes it easier for editors to communicate with you and not have to search the Talk page history for the editor of a particular comment. Secondly, the article was speedily deleted rather than AfDed or PRODded, so there was no five-day period of dicussion/editing. If you wish to propose the undeletion of the article, please make a business case to this effect at deletion review. Regards,  (aeropa gitica)  14:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Go raibh maith agat!
 I see you around all the time and finally have a reason to talk to you! I've wondered this for quite a while; to what does your user name refer to? I'm assuming it has to do with the Milton oration, but it's spelled a bit different. I thought it might have to do with the french word "aero" (air)... let me know! Cheers! hoopydink Conas tá tú? 23:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello! Well done on your RfA! Yes, my name is from Areopagitica and I have misspelt it partly as an in-joke from years ago and partly because someone used the proper spelling on another forum, hence the brackets to avoid accidental cross-posting. As a Librarian, I particularly like the quotation; "As good almost kill a man as kill a good book; who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye.".  Also, the name is nice to say, yes? Please ask if you have any questions about being an admin, I will do my best to answer! Regards,  (aeropa gitica)  15:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok, thanks for sharing the etymology! That's a great quote from a great oration.  Thanks a lot for the offer, by the way!  I'm sure I'll be bending your ear a bit!  Cheers   hoopydink  Conas tá tú? 15:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
Thank you, (aeropagitica), for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. That means if you have any questions, feel free to ask me. —   09:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiLove!


Here's a set of Encyclopædia Britannica books for you! Encyclopædia Britannica somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others using Template:smile! Happy editing! --TBC TaLk?!? 21:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Get it? Encyclopædia Britannica for aeropagitica? Anyhow, you've contributed a lot of great edits to Wikipedia, so keep up the good work! :D (another ackward attempt at comedy by TBC TaLk?!? )


 * blushes* You're too kind! Thank you very much! (aeropa gitica)  21:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Evening
I know it's a real ball ache for you, but would you mind leaving a message on the talk page of those you've blocked please, that they're blocked. Not having your godlike powers makes, it's a pain in the proverbial when I'm looking at who I've given warnings to over the last couple of hours or soto see if they've carried on etc. Cheers muchly Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 22:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I thought that I always told people/IP addresses that I have blocked a) that I have done so and b) the duration of the block. Can you provide a link to one that I haven't please? Your message comes across as sarcastic, by the way, but I won't intepret it as such.  (aeropa gitica)  22:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry didn't mean it to come across as sarky in the slightest. There's too few people looking out for vandalism IMHO, and I don't mean to insult in any way at all. My message just came about from 8.8.36.69 someone I'd been watching for a bit, and I saw you blocked him/her with a couple of others thats all. Don't take it in the wrong way at all, never meant as a criticism, it just helps those few of us non admins who do the occasional edits and patrol work. Cheers Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 22:31, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, be careful about using humour via e-mail/Talk pages because it is not always taken in the spirit in which it was meant by your readers! If you look at Special:Blockip/8.8.36.69, you will see that the IP address was blocked by Ahoerstemeier rather than myself. Can you direct your comments towards them, please?  Perhaps I cleaned up WP:AIV when all of the IP addresses had been blocked and you picked my name from that instead. Goodnight!  (aeropa gitica)  22:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No problems, but you've given me the link for an admins only page. Sorry for the confusion and for clearing it up. I only saw you had cleared three from the history at the same time. If you would take two sec's to look through my history, to put it bluntly I ain't the sarky type. But I do appreciate the time you've taken to reply. Cheers muchly. Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 22:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

New New New New New New New New New New New New New New New York
you said - If this needs to be mentioned at all, it can be mentioned in the episode article itself as the city is only refered to in passing and is otherwise non-notable.


 * I'm impressed by the speed of your response, but don't entirely agree - although it's mentioned in passing, I think it's notable, as it's the ultimate punchline to what's become a very long running gag in science fiction - the original sf notion of New New York evolving in various stories to New New New York etc. It'd be nice if Wikipedia made note of this, IMHOAdambrowne666 22:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

It isn't notable beyond the episode article itself. There isn't enough content to support an independent article, better to place the information in the New Earth article. Very few if any people would search for an article with such a non-intuitive title and fans of the episode are more likely to go to the extant article for information. (aeropa gitica) 22:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

A7X 900
Hi. It seems like A7X 900 is on a warpath and vandalism Wikipedia pages. I saw your note on his talk page and would like to suggest documenting the specific edits on the page as well as using the warning templates. Some action may need to be taken against him soon and the better organized the evidence, the better. Xiner 23:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Belated thanks
Thank you for participating in my RfA. Consensus to promote was reached, and I am now an administrator. I'll be using the tools cautiously at first, and everyone should feel welcome to peer over my shoulder and make sure I'm not doing anything foolish. --RobthTalk 03:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Justin Stuart → User:Jrockstuart
I think the redirect there was a result of my userfying the article. Fan-1967 19:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Interiot's tool
Hi I noticed you stuck a link to the summary of The Halo on the Admin nomination page. Could you possibly run a version of the tool for my user name? I can't get it to work :-( Ta. --Dweller 11:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Information posted on user Talk page. (aeropa gitica)  15:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Has anyone recently told you that you're a nice person? --Dweller 15:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No, but that's made my day! Cheers (aeropa gitica)  15:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Liozna and Larger than Life (books) on deletion review
I have asked for a deletion review at Deletion review/Log/2006 September 19 Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Thank you. IZAK 06:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It finished with an amazing final tally of 160/4/1. I really appreciate your support. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 07:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Brian Lindley
Recreated! - CobaltBlueTony 15:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleted! (aeropa gitica) 15:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Sweet! Thanks. - CobaltBlueTony 16:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Usman Hashmi's user page
I saw that you were dealing with User:Usman Hashmi. It looks like his user page is a giant copy and paste of the Grand Theft Auto article. He has copied the Category links from that article and as a result his user page shows up in a variety of categories that it shouldn't. I don't think I'm allowed to edit another user's user page but since you seem to be a much more established editor, maybe you could do it? Or can I? Let me know. --six.oh.six 21:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Advice regarding WP:USERPAGE given. Regards, (aeropa gitica)  22:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sir Matthew Brown, 4th Baronet of London
Following the decision to delete the article Sir Matthew Brown, 4th Baronet of London, could you also delete Matthew Brown (Socialite), which was up for deletion on the same discussion as Sir Matthew Brown, 4th Baronet of London. Thanks. --Berks105 11:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Done! (aeropa gitica) 11:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. --Berks105 11:22, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Before a problem starts
I hope this is where to go for this sort of thing. User Havoc (I don't know how to link his name) is doing some massive editing of the World of Warcraft articles. That's fine; he can do whatever he wants. My issue with him is that when he removes information, he puts messages on my talk page telling me not to post various materials. As he has already admitted he is not a moderator / administrator, I do not feel it is his place to admonish me for anything. I have already posted a note on his talk page telling him to back off but I would like someone in authority to be aware of this. This is not about article content! I want to make that clear. If those in charge of Wikipedia want to repremand / police me, that is fine. I will not accept it from someone who is not. Hyde v 19:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleted from my talk page at 4:44pm central U.S. time.

"I am giving you a friendly warning as the information you are adding is against Wikipedia policy. And please get acquainted with what Wikipedia is not. I might not be an administrator, but I can warn whomever I want, and I help uphold the policy set by the community. Thank you. Havok (T/C/c) 21:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)"

I am now considering this harrassment. Hyde v 21:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hyde_v"


 * Firstly, posting to an admin's Talk page is one way of bringing a dispute to wider attention. Another method is to use Requests for comment, sections on either article content or user conduct as circumstances dictate.  I take it that  and  are the difs that Havok refers to in his/her comments?  If so then they may well cross the line of being too game-related rather than an encyclopedic record of notable aspects of World of Warcraft.  This being the case, I would recommend the following course of action.  Firstly, state a factual and policy-based case for the inclusion of the material in the article on the article's Talk page and invite a response. Do not make it personal or allow beliefs to cloud policy.  If the information can be justified then it can be included.  You might want to read Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information before compiling your case.


 * I don't consider the issuing of warnings to be harrassment per se but I do think that this discussion of the inclusion of game-related information in an article could have been handled with a greater degree of sensitivity, keeping WP:CIVIL in mind. Not all editors can be expected to know the ins-and-outs of policy and to quote them at the drop of a hat.  When one finds an editor such as this, it can be easier to take the time to explain just why an edit has been reverted.  Often, depending upon duties being performed, an editor doesn't have the time to explain in such a fashion as this reply, they do what they have to as per policy and move on.  This can appear to be terse and cold for the receiving editor, such as yourself, all of whom may well have been editing with the best interests of Wikipedia at heart.  I have had a couple of editors react personally to reverts and deletions that I have performed and subsequently informed them of, although no vindictiveness was evident in my actions.

Havok's issuing of warnings doesn't look like harrassment or Wikistalking.


 * To sum up; 1) debate the inclusion of information on the article's Talk page. Quote relevent policy to justify its inclusion. 2) clarify your feelings of harrassment with Havok on his/her Talk page.  Offer them an opportunity to explain in their own words. 3) If you still feel that you are being treated unreasonably, take your complaint to Requests for comment, offering difs as evidence. Difs are to be found in the edit history of articles.  They will appear as the links to Classes in World of Warcraft do in the first paragraph of my response.  I am off to bed now, as it is close to midnight here in the UK, so I wish you best endevours for the remainder of today. Regards,  (aeropa gitica)  22:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

If posting to a talk page is not the proper thing to do, then please delete these comments. However, as I stated previously, I am not discussing content or edits. I'm annoyed at the fact that a poster with no moderator or administrator status can admonish me for what they believe is invalid content. If an user wants to make edits, fine, let them. But they should not be allowed to inform other users that what they wrote is not allowed. It is not another user's position to admonish those who came before him. At my job, I do not answer or justify my actions to another employee. I answer to my boss. In this situation, Havoc and I are on equal standings. I do not feel it is my place to police him and then slap him down if he does wrong. Nor do I believe that is his place either. If it is Wikipedia policy that someone who is not an admin or moderator can act like a parent to me, then perhaps I need to leave Wikipedia. Delete these comments if you want. You are, after all, an admin that I will submit authority to. Hyde v 22:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I think perhaps I am doing something wrong here. Please read the above passage and comment. I will delete the contents afterwards. Hyde v


 * I see a difference of interpretation here. Use of phrases such as "...they should not be...I do not feel...Nor do I believe..." demonstrate an emotional response.  This is quite understandable, as no one likes to be warned about editing in good faith.  The quotation below demonstrates that all users are effectively equal.  We all edit in order to improve Wikipedia.  Some edit to harm the encyclopedia and others watch for this and prevent their efforts from succeeding.  This is one method of growing admins, reverting vandal edits and warning the vandals.  Honest editors can sometimes be caught in the crossfire as a false-positive.  This is unfortunate.  Wikipedia doesn't operate under a Manager-employee heirarchical system.  Admins have reserved powers of deletion because it would be terribly destructive to give these to vandals. They are given these powers when they have demonstrated that they edit and cleanup vandalism according to policy, as it is policy that takes the role of the Manager, rather than one or a collective of individuals. If you feel that you are being parented then we all are from time-to-time, as those that understand a policy inform us of our actions in order to make us better editors.  As you continue to contribute in the future, you will find that you will be able to inform other people of places where they can improve their contributions.  I would request that you don't leave the project because of this exchange as your contributions really can help the encyclopedia to grow. I really must go now, goodnight!  (aeropa gitica)  23:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)