User talk:Addihockey10/Archive 1

helpme Are you allowed making pages for songs and adding relevant information about it? I.E. lyrics, etc... --Addison (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes and no. Articles about songs are perfectly fine, but the song must be notable. See Notability (music) for the full definition of a notable song. In a nutshell, the song must have siginificant coverage (news articles, etc.) in reliable, independent sources, and one of the following: placing on a significant national music chart, or winning a major award or honour (Grammy, BRIT, others). See Hey Jude and (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction as examples of a song article and a guide as to what should be included. One big (and I mean BIG) no-no is the inclusion of lyrics or the linking to lyrics sites, as we will run into copyright trouble; only include lyrics of songs that are public domain (1923 and older). Remember to cite your sources. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask at the help desk. Finally, keep in mind that it is really hard to get new articles to stick, so don't get discouraged if your article is deleted. Good luck! Xenon54 (talk) 23:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Hi Addihockey, sorry but I'm afraid I didn't agree with your tagging of Irene Radford as db-nocontext and have declined that deletion. May I suggest you might want to re-read some of the categories at WP:SPEEDY, as telling new editors that their article is being considered for deletion is an area where it is really important that we give people the right message.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Heh heh, I agree with you. The version I saw when I put up the

deletion tag was the original version. Sorry for not removing the tag, I hope I didn't cause any trouble. --Addihockey (t/c) 22:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, and I'm not convinced the article would survive a week at wp:AFD but we do need to be cautious about tagging for speedy deletion. If you're interested there's a bit of further reading available at User:WereSpielChequers  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  13:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi- I've granted your request for rollback. Please be very careful with the tool, and use it only to revert vandalism, not good-faith edits. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:36, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, thank you for granting my request, I really appreciate it. --Addihockey (t/c) 22:39, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Help me
helpme Uhm... take a look at this image - could someone tell me how to fix this? in BIG text please, I currently can't read. I'm going to try changing my wiki background.
 * This should be simple. Go to Special:Preferences, click the "Gadgets" tab and scroll down near the bottom. You should see a checkbox labeled "Use a black background with green text on the Monobook skin"; uncheck it, and click "save" at the bottom of the screen. If it isn't fixed right away, press Ctrl-Shift-R (in Firefox) –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 01:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah; I see. There are a few things that you can try. First, go to Firefox's "view" tab, scroll down to "zoom" and click "reset"... I've found that holding Ctrl plus the mouse wheel zooms, so that might be it. If that doesn't fix the issue, you can try adding the following to User:Addihockey10/monobook.css:  Then use Ctrl-Shift-R and the main text content of all pages, including Recent Changes, should be larger. It's an ugly workaround, but it should work. Otherwise, I don't really know what you can do... did you install any new user scripts recently? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 01:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy to help; feel free to let me know if you ever encounter any other problems. That same thing can happen on any website when you're using Firefox, and it should be fixable the same way. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 01:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes; in my experience the zoom changes with the mouse wheel affect only a single site. However, it could happen separately on different sites if you use Ctrl + mouse wheel. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 01:54, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: RfA
Hey there! While I'm excited that you're aspiring to something that great, I'm not quite sure you're ready; YPPedia has very different dynamics than the English Wikipedia, and a lot of different processes. Being an admin on en-wiki isn't a very easy task, as you have to be prepared to deal with fairly heavy decisions daily. Do you think it would be possible for you to wait a while? :) Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  20:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't mean to discourage you; if you'd wish to run for adminship, I don't wish to stop you! It's your choice, overall. All I can do is offer my advice :) Cheers, Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  20:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Alright, well, glad I could help! If there's anything you ever need, feel free to ask. Cheers! Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  20:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure! I've got class in a few minutes, so do you mind if I get to it later? Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  20:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey again! Sorry about the RfA results. :( I know you have the best intentions, but try to remember that folks around here may not be as trusting as one would hope. Don't give up hope, though! :)
 * Anyway, on to brighter and happier things; I ran over Hello Time Bomb quickly, as you asked, and I've got a few tips. I hope you don't mind me putting them here.
 * Try to stay away from quotes. It's easy to just lay down a quote and use it as the article's backbone, but in practice this doesn't work. Supplement the quote with additional information (or rather, supplement the information with the quote).
 * Avoid 'Trivia' sections like the plague. Rather, work the information into the main article body; for example, "Recognition" or something could be a section where you could list the song's inclusion in Big Shiny Tunes 4 or as a nominee for a Juno (that's just a suggestion, of course; use your judgment)
 * Don't assert things without backing them up with sources. For example, in the lead you say that the song is considered MGB's 'signature song'; however, who said this? I'm not saying you're lying or anything, but without a source that just looks like bias.
 * As part of the last point, try to avoid sourcing things in the lead (even though a lot of articles do that); it's better to have body-text citations. Of course, you don't have to follow this, and with a stub the lead generally has to get sourced to avoid breaking all of the information up. Again, use your discretion.
 * More of a style concern; you can feel free to find a possible single-cover image and use Non-free album cover as rationale. Then you can have a pretty image in the infobox to break up the text. For example, this would be great if you just resized it to about 400x400 (generally, you want to both values on or under 400).
 * Anyway, that's all I've got for now; hopefully it helps! If you need any more guidance, you know where to find me C: Talk to you later, Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  23:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Careful
You reverted an edit [] by a user that gave rational in their edit summary for their removal of information and not an obv use of vandalism. I understand it can be missed sometime while using scripts. Just thought I would bring it to your attention. Thanks &spades; B.s.n.   &hearts; R.N. contribs 04:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Opps, my apologies. I'm a noob huggle user so... please bear with me :) I'll be more careful in the future. Thanks for pointing that out! --Addihockey (t/c) 16:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

RFA
Hello. I have closed your RFA. Unfortunately, it was not going to be successful at this time. Perhaps with more experience on Wikipedia itself you'll have success some time in the future. You may want to take a close scrutiny of the comments left on the RFA. If you ever have any further questions on any Wikipedia-related topic, I'll either know the answer or I'll know who would know, so don't hesitate to ask. Useight (talk) 13:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am sorry that your Request for adminship closed prematurely. While your edit count isn't the only determining factor, and numerous people have their own personal standards by which they judge RfA candidates, this particular RfA was all but assured of not passing. We truly hope you don't take this personally; if you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I am confident that you would be able to submit a successful RfA in the future. You may wish to consider applying for an editor review by other Wikipedia editors for feedback on how to obtain the necessary experience. Once you are ready to request adminship again, there is a great admin coaching program available, as well as a guide to requests for adminship.


 * If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck! Glass  Cobra  16:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi :P
Hi. Why automatic vandal fight? How I hate those little bits of code! /e was going to sort out something but you got it first... as I was hitting the button --Lcawte (talk) 17:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey Lcawte! I think Huggle is really useful.... you should try it... if you have the [rollback] thing. Anyways... back to my anti-vandalism ways! Hazaah! --Addihockey (t/c) 17:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Never! Manual editing always! Well, vandalsim fighting! :P --Lcawte (talk) 17:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay... but don't be surprised on how many times I beat you to revert! Just try it once... --Addihockey (t/c) 17:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine, I will do... but not today. --Lcawte (talk) 18:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Have a look at the edit summary from one of the recent vandal edits here :P --Lcawte (talk) 18:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I got rollback!
Well.. the title says it all!! Woot! We're both rollbacks! --Lcawte (talk) 18:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Don't abuse it though.. you'll be stripped of Rollback. --Addihockey (t/c) 19:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Really? Am I that stupid? :P --Lcawte (talk) 19:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

IP vandal
Do you see any reason not to indef block 66.183.251.59 for a vandalism only account? Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 22:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I blocked the IP for 1 month, for using a vandalism only account. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 23:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * IMO, if this new editor had made even one constructive edit, I might have a bit more leniency towards them. In this case, not so much... Notice how their second edit goes straight to a particular User page. Also consider the nature of the edit there. It strikes me as being a bit "rich," and somewhat of an advanced kind of page vandalism; advanced in the directness of the language and the target. I suspect that this IP user has been blocked at some other juncture, and has come back to exact some "revenge." I'll know for sure once my user page gets vandalized in the near futuer from a "66 blah blah 250-255 range," if you know what I mean.
 * A "Checkuser" would confirm, but I'm not personally willing to tax the time and energy of one of our estimable Checkuser's on this. If you are, however so inclined, please do so. You might also consider asking for another admin to reduce the block length.
 * Additionally, I perused your contribs and feel strongly that you are doing a fine job. Keep up the good work! Best regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 02:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I read your RfA. It's a real shame the way things have gone over there in the past few years. When I was nominated, I had barely 1000 edits (but, they were all done the "hard way" before Huggle and rollback were introduced.) Let me know when you're up again, and I'll be there.
 * If you want to see a really nice user page, go look at User:Master of Puppets. Killer. Except for the sheep. They make it hard to read the bottom of his talkpage, IMO. (I already warned him that I plan to steal all of his cool toys!) See you 'round! Hamster Sandwich (talk) 02:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

My revert
I probably shouldn't have tagged it as vandalism, but I thought I should revert it since it deleted the CSD tag. --SquidSK (1MC•log) 01:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't I already have it? I see "Rollback" on the recent changes/new user contribs pages, as well as on individual diff pages... --SquidSK (1MC•log) 01:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I put a request on an admin's page. Thanks for the help! --SquidSK (1MC•log) 01:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

RE: Isobel DeGuard
Hi, You recently left a message on my talk page telling me if I had any queries on the subject of Isobel DeGuard to write it on her discussion page and it recieved no attention. As you can tell the page cites no information else where and this woman cannot be found anywhere on the internet. My friend made the page up as a joke and as I trust wikipedia, I feel it should be removed, I hope you can help me. Kind Regards, HerNameWasLolaaar (talk) 17:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Reversion
Anytime anyone critiques god or the nation, something or someone get's deleted. If it looks like Fascism and smells like Fascism, there's a big chance it's Fascism.--Franklinbe (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page :)! StaticGull Talk  17:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you: Dealing with Vandalism Wikipedia talk:AIV
Thank you very much for your response on my talk page to a question about AIV. The problem is that this user has made approximately *100* bad edits on about *50* different pages and there is no way I can reverse them all. That is just way too much time and energy and would take me days. I'm still new here. Isn't there an easy way for an Admin to do it? While I felt it was important to report this vandalism, now I'm thinking I should have just kept my mouth shut. I was trying to do a good deed and now I am beyond frustrated. Anyway, thanks again for your response. Logical Fuzz (talk) 02:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism reverts
While your efforts reverting vandalism are commendable, please be more careful in the choice of edit summaries, so that others editors with the same intent who are in the process of doing the same, don't get mentioned in your summaries as vandals. In [this case] it was only necessary to revert one prior incident of vandalism not all. The use of automated editors does not relieve you of the responsibility of precise action. Kbrose (talk) 19:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:Sockpuppet Invesigation
Hi Addihockey10. See WP:SPI. This looks like it's going to be a case without the need of a checkuser so you can go ahead and select that option. If checkuser help is needed, it can always be requested later in the case. Hope that helps to answer your question. If you need assistance or are still confused - please do not hesitate to leave me a message on my talk. Kind Regards,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 03:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I noticed you created the page already....But anyways, I looked it over, the case seems fine. I'll notify the "socks".  The SPIbot should transclude the case to WP:SPI in a few minutes.  Cheers,  F ASTILY   (T ALK ) 04:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess it really doesn't matter all that much at this point, but cases which request CU are usually cases which involve sockmasters with multiple registered accounts (registered users' IPs are hidden but CU enabled users are able to see the IPs). Most sockmasters use multiple IP addresses in addition to one or two accounts, so there isn't much for CU to do.  If the edits by the IPs and main account are similar/supporting one another in discussion/the same, then no CU is required because simple logic will suffice.  Regards,  F ASTILY   (T ALK ) 04:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Broken signature
You see to have an unclosed b html tag in your signature. This breaks the formatting of any page you sign. All text after your signature appears to be bold. You could either remove the b tag, or place a closing /b html tag at the end of your signature. Didacticly, Jehochman Talk 16:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

RE: Coaching
Sure, I'd love to! However, I'm really busy with exams right now; they'll be done in a week or so. Would you mind waiting until then? Sorry about the inconvenience! You're free to ask another admin if you don't want to wait. Cheers, m.o.p  05:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

RfA thankspam


ACC
Um... yeah. I just applied for ACC access. Thanks! -- Addi hockey  10  20:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Addihockey10, thank you for your interest in helping users creating accounts. Your request has been approved. I advise you to read WP:ACCG before you use the system.


 * At this time, you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day. You won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user. However, if you have reached the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:RPE.


 * Again, thanks for your interest in the account creation system. Join us on IRC at wikipedia-en-accounts and subscribe to the mailing list by going here. Willking1979 (talk) 20:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

ACC
Hi - are you aware that this request on ACC is still reserved by you? Thanks. 7 07:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and took the request over, because I am guessing that you got a message similar to the one below:

Login error
The name " " is too similar to the existing account:


 * (contribs)

Please choose another name.


 * When that happens it means that you need to let an "account creator" handle the request. Only account creators can create usernames which are similar to existing accounts.  In this case it is fine because the old account was a year old and never had any contribs.  You may want to to read through the documentation provided in the post above, and when in doubt feel free to "break your reservation" which will prompt someone else to look at it.  Thanks.   7  07:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay! Thanks. --  Addi hockey  10  00:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Coaching
I know, I know, I have a penchant for understatement! Haha. Anyway, I'm finished up with school for now; aside from the partying that comes with the holiday season, I'll have some time to be online. If you're still up for it (and have time), I'd be glad to help out now. Cheers, m.o.p  21:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:19, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, I just spotted the following comment from you on my user page: November 2009

"Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Religion in Asia has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. --Addihockey (t/c) 17:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)"

However, I did not make that edit. Also, I am not a new member (as suggested by your Welcome comment), as I have been a member of Wikipedia for several years. As I have an AOL account, it may be that I share the same ISP number as some other Wikipedia users, and one of those carried out the edit. I suspect that this must be the problem, as I certainly made no edit to the Religion in Asia page. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.160.18 (talk) 00:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

RE: Coaching
Hey, I've been gone for two months doing school work and trying to keep a social life in existence. I'll check a few of your recent contributions at random and give you suggestions; are there any things you want me to look at specifically (e.g. disputes you've resolved, things you're proud of)?

I'll also e-mail you a few questions depending on what I see in your contributions. I'll start in a few hours or so. Cheers, m.o.p  19:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem
No harm done. Are you able to delete those categories? Someone made them and put me in. I would know how to do it in the German wiki, but I have no clue how to make it here. --Plk (talk) 22:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)



Acather96 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Your RfA
I'm sorry to inform you that I've had to close Requests for adminship/Addihockey10 (2) as unsuccessful per the essay WP:NOTNOW. Hopefully a future attempt in a few months will hold more success. In the meantime, let me know if you need any help. Best, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:13, 31 May 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 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. Courcelles (talk) 02:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Looking for assistance
Hi, I'm trying an experiment. I'm fairly active at Requests for feedback, where editors ask for feedback on draft or recently created articles. The number of requests is exceeding the ability of volunteers to respond, with many articles getting only a cursory response, while many do not yet have feedback. I see that you asked for feedback some time ago and did get a response. My experiment is to contact editors like you who did get some feedback and are still active editors, to see if you would be willing to provide feedback for one or two others.

Any help you could provide would be greatly appreciated.

I'm also considering creating a list of editors and topics, in case a specific request comes up that could use someone with specific expertise. If that is something you would consider, I'd like to know what subjects most interest you.-- SPhilbrick  T  17:30, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Not assuming good faith?
Hi. You recently reverted an edit and warned the user for vandalism. The edit did not constitute vandalism, therefore it should be assumed that it was performed in good faith. Forever Dusk (talk) 04:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Oops!
It appears that I am the one who has made the mistake here. Upon further examination of the edit, it was indeed unconstructive. My apologies and thank you for your continued and constant strive to keep Wikipedia vandal-free. Forever Dusk (talk) 04:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)