User talk:Callanecc/Archive 2

(Chat about the question with User:Kim Bruning)
On this topic: Apparently it's a good question, because you get varied responses. And Sarah's solid answer is what I'd expect from a teahouse kind of person. :-) ("I thought she was an admin already!").

But I love puzzles, and I can't resist providing my own question/answer: I love strategic minimum actions. What if all one were to do would be to rollback the rollbacker? What would happen next? --Kim Bruning (talk) 15:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC) ''I can think of at least 2 diverging paths resulting from that action, with various options for more or less desirable actions along the way. What do you predict will happen?''


 * Hi Kim 'strategic minimum actions'? I'll get back to you about it probably tomorrow (not really in the mood for actual thinking right now ;)). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, not to blow my own trumpet, but I think the question is quite good. It gives an indication of how a candidate will act, how well they know applicable policy. Plus, regarding the section of how I suggest they answer, it gives me an idea if they will read what I write (ie the policy basis for each) and if they will take a hint (ie how I suggest they answer).

Well they would get an oppose vote from me (and probably quite a few others). I can see couple of diverging paths:
 * The rollbacker takes the hint and stops.
 * The rollbacker ignores the admin's revert and continues. Which probably won't mean a lot for santions as the admin is now WP:INVOLVED and there was nothing said to the rollbacker. Hence another admin is confronted with the original scenario plus the mess caused by an admin doing following through.
 * From there is depends what the "rollbacking admin" does next - ie whether they respond to questions from the rollbacker, IP user and the admin who has to come in and clean up. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Right!
 * I'm a big fan of taking soft actions over hard, non-admin over admin, and minimal actions over complex.


 * In the second scenario, we're dealing with a bright line 3RR, so tugging someone's coattails on irc and pointing will clear up the immediate problem in a couple of minutes. (I'm also a strong believer in working in pairs. See eg. Pair Programming.)


 * How likely is scenario 1 or 2 (provided the rollbacker has a clue, vs if they don't?)


 * In scenario one: what options remain open to the rollbacker?


 * In scenario two: what should the next steps be for the (semi-involved) admin?


 * --Kim Bruning (talk) 14:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC) there's only 2 degrees-of-wikipedia between pair programming and wiki. There are many reasons for that O:-) http://beta.degreesofwikipedia.com/?a1=pair+programming&linktype=1&a2=wiki&skips=&submit=1343313687&currentlang=en


 * Sorry Kim, I'll get to this hopefully tomorrow sometime. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 17:48, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If the rollbacker has a clue and is thinking completely calmly (and not caught in the heat of the moment) then hopefully they will have a think about what is going on and either stop or at least leave a message on (either the IP's, admin's or article's talk page). However given what's already happened & that the admin didn't say anything to any one about it. I think that the rollbacker would probably continue rollbacking.


 * Scenario one. Well you would want to hope that the rollbacker finally go to the article's talk page to try and discuss. The rollbacker wouldn't be able to go the WP:DRN as there have been no attempts to try and work it through the talk page. But they could talk to the IP's or admin's, or start a discussion/RfC on the article's talk page.


 * Scenario two. The rollbacker reverts again, this is the process which should/could/will follow:
 * The admin should give them a warning for breaching 3RR and that they have completely inappropriately used rollback rights. The admin should also encourage them to take it to the article's talk page. Whether they revert back to the IP user's version will depend on the circumstances at the time (ie what is actually in the two versions).
 * The admin should talk to the IP and let them know what has happened, what they should have done, and what should happen from there.
 * If the rollbacker starts to talk and there are no further reverts to the article then the admin should step back and let them talk it through. Only getting involved if required.
 * If the admin did choose to revert to the IP's version and the rollbacker rolbacks again the admin should remove rollback user rights (and leave a note on ANI about it) and either apply fully protection to the article or block the reverter depending on circumstances. The admin should also explain why they choose the version (IP's or rollbacker's) and allow for discussion.


 * How does that sound? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting that you assume the rollbacker will choose to violate Wikipedia guidance as your most likely scenario. Why's that? Is that how it played out in a real world scenario?
 * Why issue a 3RR warning? IIRC most on-duty admins at 3RR noticeboard would just block for 24 hours almost automatically, is that still correct?
 * Note that scenario 1 and 2 converge at the point where people start talking. Scenario 2 just takes an extra 24 hours.
 * Full protection is almost always the wrong choice, in my experience doing WP:DR. It's better for mutual trust and learning of WP:Consensus to generate imperfect edits, than to take a month discussing that 1 perfect edit.


 * My general point: I figured that scenario 1 was most likely on AGF grounds; (though even the chance of having scenario 1 work saves a lot of time, from a statistical point of view ;-)).
 * In that case, a single revert would be enough to get the situation rolling, would leave the article in the better referenced state, and little or no further admin or 3rd party involvement would be necessary.
 * That's a lot of bang for our single-edit-buck. (aka. strategic minimum action)


 * Hmmm, your projected scenario 2 still has a bunch of steps btw... Now I'm actually curious what happens if we try to simplify: what would the next strategic minimum action be if we do end up in scenario 2? --Kim Bruning (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

*It is how it played out, but I also think at that point the rollbacker might be a little too caught in the moment to think about what's happening.


 * I had a quick look through WP:3RRNB's history and it looks like there are quite a few admins who won't block without a warning. I think that at least one warning should be given whenever possible because it gives the person a break and, when it is from someone who isn't involved, it gives a second opinion. Hopefully causing the person who breached 3RR some time to think.


 * Scenario 2 doesn't necessary mean that the rollbacker starts talking, it just means that there is an admin involved in the discussion, and hopefully there is someone arguing the unreferenced information side (which there would be scenario 1).


 * I disagree about full protection, from what I've seen at RFPP admins are becoming much more willing to short-term fully protect to encourage discussion, and use protection instead of blocking people. You would only need to fully protect for 24-48 hours so that there can be discussion without warring on the page. The warning in a sense is a strategic minimum action, as it doesn't use any admin tools and might just work.

Although it seems that scenario has a lot of steps, it really doesn't, I've just worked the thing through until there was no where else to a stop. It could stop at any of those numbers, that is, steps 1, 2 & 3 are the same thing. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. It's fun to talk these things through. :-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 18:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree! Fun, informative and it helped reinforce what my opinions and beliefs are. Also helpful if you are thinking of a run at adminship and know you are going to get the question...Kiiim? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 18:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Requests_for_adminship/Kim_Bruning O:-)
 * Also look up Bishonen on WP:100, then: Check the nominator. --Kim Bruning (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC) ps. Jwrosenzweig missed some early edits in 2001 for me ;-)
 * Well that seems to have stone walled :). Are you thinking of going for it again? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Article :MSRIT
First,I would like to congratulate you for being a wiki editor for 3 years. I want to introduce myself as Monalika,Bangalore,India.I m not a wiki editor.But last week i found that an article on a major engineering institute of my city MSRIT lacked some references(I mean citations).I have added state government,Central government of India,affiliating Universities Newspaper reports,citation links from companies like IBM,Scneider electric,citation from International groups like IEEE,TED. Somewhere last week you have RIGHTLY put a notice that the article lacked citations.So I have put it.Since there were no citations at that moment of time someone even went to the extent of deleting the article.

I humbly request you to check and have a look at the article and say/edit whether it s written properly or not — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.17.118 (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry I will get to this. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:09, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the references, they look good to me, and the article has been tagged for a copyedit, which will clean it up a bit. Also make sure you sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write. It allows everyone else to see who wrote what and when it was written :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Article Ed Kosiski - Please revert
Hi, You've worked on a "Edit War" on the Ed Kosiski page before. Would you please revert the latest edit by 174.70.63.4? Additional information is on the talk page:  Thank you.
 * ✅ Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:50, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - and sorry for forgetting the signature. 174.70.63.4 (talk) 04:54, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries, I thought a little reminder might help :) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Bureaucratship
Hmm ... on the one hand I am flattered by that expression of trust. I can see the need and see where I could be helpful on the user-renaming end. But ... it does also include closing RFAs, and I don't have a lot of experience hanging out there (which might be a plus). I just worry about the time it might take.

I see you have persuaded at least Beeblebrox and someone else to go for it. Let's see how that goes. Give it a month or so more and I might be interested.

(Sorry I didn't get more of a chance to talk to you at Wikimania). Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That's okay, I wasn't at Wikimania anyway. If you are interested in a month, let me know and I'll be happy to support. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:10, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
Unfortunately, my brain does not seem to be wired up for real editing. I suspect I am destined to be a life-long Huggle jockey. I might try writing tools, I've written tons of code. Thanks for the inspiration! Jim1138 (talk) 09:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah I see, now I've had a look at your auto-edit count . If you do get interested at some stage, would you let me know. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 09:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

opinions are strong
I was not attacking, i just have a VERY strong opinion that the article is still VERY POV and that the title of the article is WONG and does not stand up to the pillars. I expressed my opinion very strongly to make a point. Aperseghin (talk) 13:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Aperseghin, the way to go about changing the title of the article is to follow the process at Requested_moves, not manual copy and pasting without discussion. KTC (talk) 14:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * ok so i added some more information on the talk page that i believe should help. its with regards to pov redirects redirecting to NPOV title. Aperseghin (talk) 20:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

(Chat about the question with User:Kim Bruning)
On this topic: Apparently it's a good question, because you get varied responses. And Sarah's solid answer is what I'd expect from a teahouse kind of person. :-) ("I thought she was an admin already!").

But I love puzzles, and I can't resist providing my own question/answer: I love strategic minimum actions. What if all one were to do would be to rollback the rollbacker? What would happen next? --Kim Bruning (talk) 15:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC) ''I can think of at least 2 diverging paths resulting from that action, with various options for more or less desirable actions along the way. What do you predict will happen?''


 * Hi Kim 'strategic minimum actions'? I'll get back to you about it probably tomorrow (not really in the mood for actual thinking right now ;)). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, not to blow my own trumpet, but I think the question is quite good. It gives an indication of how a candidate will act, how well they know applicable policy. Plus, regarding the section of how I suggest they answer, it gives me an idea if they will read what I write (ie the policy basis for each) and if they will take a hint (ie how I suggest they answer).

Well they would get an oppose vote from me (and probably quite a few others). I can see couple of diverging paths:
 * The rollbacker takes the hint and stops.
 * The rollbacker ignores the admin's revert and continues. Which probably won't mean a lot for santions as the admin is now WP:INVOLVED and there was nothing said to the rollbacker. Hence another admin is confronted with the original scenario plus the mess caused by an admin doing following through.
 * From there is depends what the "rollbacking admin" does next - ie whether they respond to questions from the rollbacker, IP user and the admin who has to come in and clean up. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Right!
 * I'm a big fan of taking soft actions over hard, non-admin over admin, and minimal actions over complex.


 * In the second scenario, we're dealing with a bright line 3RR, so tugging someone's coattails on irc and pointing will clear up the immediate problem in a couple of minutes. (I'm also a strong believer in working in pairs. See eg. Pair Programming.)


 * How likely is scenario 1 or 2 (provided the rollbacker has a clue, vs if they don't?)


 * In scenario one: what options remain open to the rollbacker?


 * In scenario two: what should the next steps be for the (semi-involved) admin?


 * --Kim Bruning (talk) 14:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC) there's only 2 degrees-of-wikipedia between pair programming and wiki. There are many reasons for that O:-) http://beta.degreesofwikipedia.com/?a1=pair+programming&linktype=1&a2=wiki&skips=&submit=1343313687&currentlang=en


 * Sorry Kim, I'll get to this hopefully tomorrow sometime. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 17:48, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If the rollbacker has a clue and is thinking completely calmly (and not caught in the heat of the moment) then hopefully they will have a think about what is going on and either stop or at least leave a message on (either the IP's, admin's or article's talk page). However given what's already happened & that the admin didn't say anything to any one about it. I think that the rollbacker would probably continue rollbacking.


 * Scenario one. Well you would want to hope that the rollbacker finally go to the article's talk page to try and discuss. The rollbacker wouldn't be able to go the WP:DRN as there have been no attempts to try and work it through the talk page. But they could talk to the IP's or admin's, or start a discussion/RfC on the article's talk page.


 * Scenario two. The rollbacker reverts again, this is the process which should/could/will follow:
 * The admin should give them a warning for breaching 3RR and that they have completely inappropriately used rollback rights. The admin should also encourage them to take it to the article's talk page. Whether they revert back to the IP user's version will depend on the circumstances at the time (ie what is actually in the two versions).
 * The admin should talk to the IP and let them know what has happened, what they should have done, and what should happen from there.
 * If the rollbacker starts to talk and there are no further reverts to the article then the admin should step back and let them talk it through. Only getting involved if required.
 * If the admin did choose to revert to the IP's version and the rollbacker rolbacks again the admin should remove rollback user rights (and leave a note on ANI about it) and either apply fully protection to the article or block the reverter depending on circumstances. The admin should also explain why they choose the version (IP's or rollbacker's) and allow for discussion.


 * How does that sound? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting that you assume the rollbacker will choose to violate Wikipedia guidance as your most likely scenario. Why's that? Is that how it played out in a real world scenario?
 * Why issue a 3RR warning? IIRC most on-duty admins at 3RR noticeboard would just block for 24 hours almost automatically, is that still correct?
 * Note that scenario 1 and 2 converge at the point where people start talking. Scenario 2 just takes an extra 24 hours.
 * Full protection is almost always the wrong choice, in my experience doing WP:DR. It's better for mutual trust and learning of WP:Consensus to generate imperfect edits, than to take a month discussing that 1 perfect edit.


 * My general point: I figured that scenario 1 was most likely on AGF grounds; (though even the chance of having scenario 1 work saves a lot of time, from a statistical point of view ;-)).
 * In that case, a single revert would be enough to get the situation rolling, would leave the article in the better referenced state, and little or no further admin or 3rd party involvement would be necessary.
 * That's a lot of bang for our single-edit-buck. (aka. strategic minimum action)


 * Hmmm, your projected scenario 2 still has a bunch of steps btw... Now I'm actually curious what happens if we try to simplify: what would the next strategic minimum action be if we do end up in scenario 2? --Kim Bruning (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

*It is how it played out, but I also think at that point the rollbacker might be a little too caught in the moment to think about what's happening.


 * I had a quick look through WP:3RRNB's history and it looks like there are quite a few admins who won't block without a warning. I think that at least one warning should be given whenever possible because it gives the person a break and, when it is from someone who isn't involved, it gives a second opinion. Hopefully causing the person who breached 3RR some time to think.


 * Scenario 2 doesn't necessary mean that the rollbacker starts talking, it just means that there is an admin involved in the discussion, and hopefully there is someone arguing the unreferenced information side (which there would be scenario 1).


 * I disagree about full protection, from what I've seen at RFPP admins are becoming much more willing to short-term fully protect to encourage discussion, and use protection instead of blocking people. You would only need to fully protect for 24-48 hours so that there can be discussion without warring on the page. The warning in a sense is a strategic minimum action, as it doesn't use any admin tools and might just work.

Although it seems that scenario has a lot of steps, it really doesn't, I've just worked the thing through until there was no where else to a stop. It could stop at any of those numbers, that is, steps 1, 2 & 3 are the same thing. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. It's fun to talk these things through. :-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 18:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree! Fun, informative and it helped reinforce what my opinions and beliefs are. Also helpful if you are thinking of a run at adminship and know you are going to get the question...Kiiim? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 18:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Requests_for_adminship/Kim_Bruning O:-)
 * Also look up Bishonen on WP:100, then: Check the nominator. --Kim Bruning (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC) ps. Jwrosenzweig missed some early edits in 2001 for me ;-)
 * Well that seems to have stone walled :). Are you thinking of going for it again? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Article :MSRIT
First,I would like to congratulate you for being a wiki editor for 3 years. I want to introduce myself as Monalika,Bangalore,India.I m not a wiki editor.But last week i found that an article on a major engineering institute of my city MSRIT lacked some references(I mean citations).I have added state government,Central government of India,affiliating Universities Newspaper reports,citation links from companies like IBM,Scneider electric,citation from International groups like IEEE,TED. Somewhere last week you have RIGHTLY put a notice that the article lacked citations.So I have put it.Since there were no citations at that moment of time someone even went to the extent of deleting the article.

I humbly request you to check and have a look at the article and say/edit whether it s written properly or not — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.17.118 (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry I will get to this. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:09, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the references, they look good to me, and the article has been tagged for a copyedit, which will clean it up a bit. Also make sure you sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write. It allows everyone else to see who wrote what and when it was written :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Article Ed Kosiski - Please revert
Hi, You've worked on a "Edit War" on the Ed Kosiski page before. Would you please revert the latest edit by 174.70.63.4? Additional information is on the talk page:  Thank you.
 * ✅ Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:50, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - and sorry for forgetting the signature. 174.70.63.4 (talk) 04:54, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries, I thought a little reminder might help :) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Jet injector
Was updating info on vaccine page....guess it hit highlight all thanks for undoing it also....how do you remove up adds — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.118.77.216 (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you're asking, could you rephrase it please?. Also make sure you sign your comments on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 11:54, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

CVUA
Hello and Welcome to the CVUA! Please add yourself to the status page. Thank you, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 22:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC).

Talkback
 Kangaroo  powah  23:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

A Regal Hello
Now that you're officially a member of the CVUA Staff, I just wanted to extend a huge welcome from me, deputy coordinator, as well as Dan653 and Achowat, coordinators. Please watch all pages related the the CVUA (don't forget the Wikipedia Talk pages as well!), and if you see a student you'd like sign up on the enroll page, by all means, snag 'em! Happy editing, and all the best from the crew here. Let us know if you ever have any questions! :)  Theopolisme TALK 02:26, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * And a regal bow in return :). Thanks very much, and I look forward to grabbing my first student. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Pizzighettone and Pergolettese
Pizzighettone has changed its name in U.S. Pergolettese and so the page should be referred to the new page that contains the story of the original club. The previous changes have been made ​​without any consensus and not referenced, they would. http://www.cremaonline.it/articolo.asp?ID=18364 http://www.e-cremonaweb.it/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1669:si-chiama-pergolettese-1932-soluzione-trovata-grazie-ad-alloni&catid=116:attualita&Itemid=477 --93.56.244.167 (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest you still propose it on one or both of the articles. As the community will need to make a decision on what to do with the two articles. It will probably be a straight-forward discussion which will support your redirect, but with major changes it's better to discuss it first. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The practice in these cases is to make the redirect as in recent cases of A.S. Pro Belvedere Vercelli and G.S. Capriatese; otherwise you have two pages with the same information. --93.56.244.167 (talk) 07:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, feel free to add the redirects back. But make sure you leave an explainatory edit summary. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Sodium chloride
I can revedelete but not oversight. Such edits are coming daily, especially from around India (this one was from Bangladesh and about Bangladesh) and are typically just reverted. Materialscientist (talk) 07:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I knew that bit :). Ok thanks for the info. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Christian Identity
I see you warned the IP about this. In fact, the IP was correct and I'm sorry I didn't fix it earlier. I've sourced it now. Dougweller (talk) 09:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Cathedral of Saint Mel in Ardagh
Hi there,

I'm not very familiar with editing on Wikipedia and have only recently come to use the messaging system here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeomoonwalker (talk • contribs) 12:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You can ignore that message, I took a different course of action. Though from your comment you should read WP:NOTSOAPBOX and particularly WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK. Let me know if you want any help or advice in the future (and well done with signing your message). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding. I have read the articles you suggested and I see what you mean. So to be clear, even though this archaeological site was once a cathedral, this does not allow for the near duplication of the title St. Mel's Cathedral? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeomoonwalker (talk • contribs) 22:52, 9 July 2012‎ (UTC)
 * No worries, my suggestion would be that it is added into the article I redirected to. For example, under a section header of "==History==" or "==Archaeology==" . Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Missed something, make sure you sign all comments you make on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:59, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Bgpaulus (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Replied to two different conversation threads, which have also been changed from sections to sub-sections. Bgpaulus (talk) 18:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Molly_Pitcher
not sure if usable for Wiki. Interesting historical marker of the land where the water was drawn for the battle.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/417256/thread/1341788571/Sometimes+We+Do+Not+Realize+What+Is+Right+In+Front+Of+Us...

162.58.82.135 (talk) 21:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)lostdiver61@yahoo.com
 * I wouldn't use it as a reference (see self-published sources & BLP self-published sources), but the image might be a useful additon to the article. Although files aren't my area, see image use policy, and the File Upload Wizard. Sorry I couldn't be more help, maybe try the help desk if you need more info. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Message at my talk!
Here is the message: User_talk:Titodutta -- Tito Dutta  ✉  04:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

HELLO
THE PAGE IN QUESTION IS MY COUSIN AND IM TRYING TO CORRECT IT SHINA RAMBO WAS NEVER A BANDIT HE IS ABOUT 20 YEARS OLD SO HOW CAN HE BE BORN IN THE 60S — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toluaina (talk • contribs) 13:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It is quite possible that your cousin has the same name, but the bio for this person is reflected in the references & a Google search. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:14, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also make sure you don't write all in capitals as this can be read as shouting (which is obviously incivil) see WP:SHOUT. Also make sure you sign any comments you write on talk pages (when it says "talk" in the article title) with four tildes ( ~ ). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * ok


 * http://www.notjustok.com/2012/03/02/video-hkn-gang-davido-shina-rambo-b-red-on-factory78/


 * thats my cousin shina rambo


 * and you know how it is when media starts using this against them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toluaina (talk • contribs) 13:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

DUDE WTF
Refers to Action Theater Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC) My edit to the acion theater WAS NOT vandalism i put it there for informational perposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.172.135.130 (talk) 13:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason it was reverted by both the bot and myself is that you added it as part of the reference, you need to add it outside the " " tag. Also I don't believe that that would be an appropriate additon to the article, nor is it in the formal tone which is expected. Not knowing the article the thing about the motion seats being removed may be notable. However you need to have a reliable source as original research shouldn't be included.
 * You need to be careful how you word messages to other editors as it can be seen as a personal attack or incivility (refering to "WTF"), not that I consider it to be as such - just be careful.
 * Also make sure you sign your comments on talk pages (which have "talk" in the title) with four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, thank you for not adding it straight back after my revert - well done :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Alright Ill find a source 24.172.135.130 (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, good job with signature :). Also note that another editor has reinserted the information so you just need to insert a source (and remove the tag and possibly reword it. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Just as a note on the reinsertion, I apologize for stepping on your toes in any way. There's some discussion going on at WikiProject Editor Retention that involves the affect automated vandalism reversion tools are having on new editors.  It appears that it used to be more common to add a citation needed template to unsourced information.  That is much more difficult when using Huggle, so currently most unsourced information is removed.  It's a difficult change for me to make in my own editing; however, I'm attempting to use cn more often, especially if I have no reason to believe it is maliciously false.  I don't generally apply this same rule to BLP's either. Ryan Vesey  Review me!  14:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Here i found a source but i dont know exactly how to put it in heres the link http://www.themeparktourist.com/news/20120419/6550/kings-islands-dinosaurs-alive-3d-movie-be-free-2012-season 24.172.135.130 (talk) 14:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the citation for you. Thanks for finding that. Ryan Vesey  Review me!  14:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Have a read through referencing for beginners and it will show you how to do in the future. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Ryan Vesey Review me!  14:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Russian Wikipedia
Thanks a lot for making a great job, and Thank you for the Invitation to the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy I'm really appriciate your activities today. МаксФрад (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you again. Can you inform me how to get the admins rapidly in situations like this? МаксФрад (talk) 16:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I just asked the same question of an admin I personally asked to intervene. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:33, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * o.k. thanks, hope to co-operate with you in the future in the same cases like this to prevent optional vandalism. МаксФрад (talk) 16:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the smile (WikiLove), and it got a smile from me. Interested in joining the Academy? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 17:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Very much МаксФрад (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * what should I need to do to joint the academy? МаксФрад (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:МаксФрад. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Valenciano (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Trinidad DC
I'm not sure but the page keeps getting reverted to a former version by you even though the information is out of date please explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobbyCU (talk • contribs) 06:19, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The information you are adding I'm not overly concerned with as long as it needs to be cited to reliable sources. My concern, as you can see from the warnings on your talk page, is the addition of external links see the warnings on your talk page for more information. Within the article links should be to other Wikipedia articles - I have reverted again please don't readd the external links (feel free to add the other additons which I also reverted). Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I think I follow you, I dropped all the external links is it okay now. The information is as accurate as I know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobbyCU (talk • contribs) 06:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes that look better, thanks.
 * A couple of housekeeping items for the future, when you are replying to a message (such as this) click the "[edit]" button next to the section header (which is Trinidad DC) then write the message (so everything stays together). Also make sure you sign your posts on talk pages (with "talk" in the title) only, by typing four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write.
 * If you need help in the future feel free to let me know. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:50, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have added a maintanence tag (regarding references) to the article, have a read through referencing for beginners and see if you can add some reliable sources. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Playground Surfacing Link Removal
I do not agree with you removing a valuable link for people looking for pricing, standards and additional information.

I contributed far more to this article than one external link that provides valuable insights into this subject.

This link follows Wikipedia guidelines and is in the proper section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senordiamond (talk • contribs) 06:22, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * My opinion is that it is a clear breach of the WP:SPAMLINKS policy because it is there for the purpose of advertising the company. I have reverted again, please don't readd the link.
 * Also make sure you sign your posts on talk pages (with "talk" in the title) only, by typing four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:32, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Oops!
I'm sure you didn't intend to restore a bad revision with this edit. I made the same mistake, as well, so I thought you'd like to know just so you can be more careful in the future. Cheers! Evanh2008 (talk 07:32, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that :) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Reply
Hey, I havent even thought about using one of those tools. I'm going to request for permission to use rollback :) Oz   talk  10:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Bte99 (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

The Irish Warden
If I enrol what does it mean? What do you do? I have been attacked by another user for 'trolling' does my edit history look like trolling? As if it does I may wait a bit longer until I enrol. Please reply. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You will be taught what vandalism is and is not, what to do when you see vandalism and how to report vandals. There wasn't anything in your edit history, which I noticed, which would through up a red flag. I don't think you would need to wait, so check that you mostly meet the guidelines then add your name here (following the instructions on the page). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * On another look there are a couple of things which might cause a problem, but it's probably worth putting your name up and see how it does. Remember that you will need to be able to take criticism and learn from it (I'm not saying you can't just a comment). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I feel threatened and troubled by Egg Centric, I am going to leave it until I reach 2 months old. I am nearly a month old now. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok good, idea - I hope to see your name around CVUA in a month or so. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:55, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks for recognising my work! Will be enrolling soon! TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 15:57, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Mario Gómez
I semi-protected this BLP per your request at WP:RFPP. What template would you like to add? Bearian (talk) 19:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I added a standard template, but it takes a few seconds to load, for some reason. 19:27, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, sorry about not replying but by that time I had already gone offline. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * And thank you for the barnstar :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation
Dear Callanecc,

thanks for the invitation, I controll at a daily basis the pages I've ever made contibution to. but I do not have any clue what you mean with your invitation. I quess it will take some serious study too. Up to now I did "some" work on the Fukushima nuclear disaster and some related pages in this field. Actually my main interest is lying in the field of typography printing and printing machines, especially casting lead character. But for this there's is not much time left... At the moment some serious printing needs to be done...

But... what are you offering ? and where would I get the information, without making it a daytime job ?

best wishes 1947enkidu (talk) 05:24, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Enrolling in the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy won't be a huge drain on your time, it can (within reason) take as long or as little time as you and your instructor want. In the Academy you will learn how to identify vandalism, recognize other kinds of disruptive editing, warn and report those who persist in vandalism, and (perhaps most importantly) how to recognize when they have done wrong and deal with good faith editors who are upset at their contributions being removed. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I quess I will receive another invitation from my future instructor ? I will wait for that. Best wishes 1947enkidu (talk) 13:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes you will, your instructor will welcome you to the Academy and check that you don't mind having them as your instructor. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Would not know any reason, why I could be not content with the man/woman it would be, the experience is all together new for me. I've seen enough vadalism, and experienced it too, although not particular at the english-wikipedia site... 1947enkidu (talk) 13:53, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!
For catching and AIV-ing that vandal at Hosni Mubarak. I appreciate it! Evanh2008 (talk 06:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. On another note I noticed the message you had at the top of your talk page, this page may be of interst to you. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, cool! Thanks for the link. I just might have to shamelessly steal that... Evanh2008 (talk 06:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, if you do (and your are welcome to do so, or if you want put a link on your talk page to it) note that I have anchored each list code eg User:Callanecc/reversion. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Since I'm lazy, I'll probably just link for now, but I'll keep that in mind. Thanks again, and keep up the good work! Evanh2008 (talk 07:14, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries (probably better than duplicating it), I'll leave a note on its talk page if I'm planning to add something to it (so I suggest you add it to your talk page). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Title change
Dear Callanecc, if I am right: you will change the title from M. Walter Pesman to Michiel Pesman? Kind regards, FKvS (talk) 13:21, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:22, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Howling II
Hope I didn't throw a monkey wrench into the works! I won't comment on the matter. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No it's okay, I saw what you did and soft redirected the deletion discussion to the original. Out of interest how did you change the page name without moving it? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I'm using my brain now . Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:44, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Been there, done that! Jim1138 (talk) 08:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Weirdness
Thought you might want to see this. Don't understand it myself, so did not revert. No need to reply. Special:Contributions/137.166.152.101 Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:31, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I will anyway - it was me (logged out) so I resigned it (logged in) to avoid confusion. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 09:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Maryam Nawaz Sharif
There is some serious sock puppetry going on with those IP'S on this article, any idea who sock puppeteer is? TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 12:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Just a quick note - it's usually helpful to link the name of the article in the section header (especially with rollbackers (etc) who are usually involved in a number of areas). I've filled a request for page protection so hopefully that will help. I would have gotten you to do it, but it didn't occur to me until after I'd done it. Once it eventually gets answered that should do the job. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:14, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Only admins can protect pages, so don't add the template if you haven't protected it (as only admins can protect pages). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:19, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh sorry about that, allow that mistake as I haven't encountered a situation like that before. I have filed a sock puppet case which has around 15 IP's which are all connected on it, only problem I can't see a sock puppeteer. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 12:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's okay, requests for page protection go here and I have already submitted one and personally asked and active admin to protect it - so it shouldn't be too long.
 * Seems to have stopped now although it did about 20 mins ago for about 5 mins and started up again. All IP's are from Pakistan. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 12:23, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Knowing the pattern of edits the sock puppeteer is probably getting new IP'S right now. Hopefully not. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 12:24, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's protect now so that will fix the problem. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:25, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Good! That should stop it! TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 12:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * For further information read Protection policy. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I wrote this at 11.30 last night on an iPod, so please excuse any wackiness.  Theopolisme TALK 13:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Sock
I think 1.39.20.114 and 112.79.137.193 because they made the exact same edit here 76.26.179.26 (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably the same person, both IPs are registered to Vodafone India. Though it isn't sockpuppety, the person probably doesn't know they are using different IPs; plus there has to be a logged in account for there to be "sockpuppety". Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:43, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Assistance Please
I see you signed for the Wiki I created for speedy deletion. The Wiki was meant as a page for any independent running for Florida Governor 2014 to be able to sign up on.

May I ask why you did so? I feel you did so saying it was redundant. Yet I see no pages allowing any independents to have their name listed in a wiki for the Florida Governor 2014. When I tried to edit a page to allow Florida Independents to be listed the editor threatened to ban me from Wiki edits for doing so. ( This on a page that has links to Tim Tebow in the polls for Florida Governor... yet he isn't running for Governor of Florida and he has obviously no place on the page, so why is he listed on the page and that is ok?

Thank you in advance for your reply.

Dnblumberg (talk) 15:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I've asked an admin I trust (User:ItsZippy) to help you out, so hopefully you should be some help soon. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:12, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Dnblumberg. The page Callanecc requested be deleted was the talk page of a page which had itself been recently deleted - 2014 Governor Race in Florida Independent Candidates. That was deleted, as it is unnecessary to have a talk page discussing an article which no longer exists. The article was deleted because it duplicated another article about those elections which already existed - Florida gubernatorial election, 2014. If you believe that article can be improved, feel free to do so (there is help here). Remember that any facts you add to the page must be supported by reliable, independent sources; if not, they will probably be removed from the article. Also, I strongly recommend that you do not edit any pages about yourself; Wikipedia has a policy of neutrality, which is difficult to adhere to when you are the subject of your edits. If you are going to write about yourself, please read WP:COI first. If you have any other questions, please just ask me. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 16:23, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
"Talkbacks are fun because they're spammy. That's why." Enjoy! XD  Theopolisme  TALK 03:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for TB (for the future I stalk your userpage so you don't need to worry about it for me). They are indeed (plus they make me feel good when I look through my archives :)). And so it that the discussion isn't centralised I'll reply here. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * (clicks frantically between watchlist, talk, and your talk before realizing that "here" and "there" are not the same words and he should probably stop typing long parentheticals)  Theopolisme TALK 03:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha ha, tricked you [[Image:Face-grin.svg|20px]]. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Your RfA question
You may want to see the discussion on my talk page, this discussion at TT:PROD, and the resultant AfD. As I am also sure it will be an issue, it's a perfectly valid question, I just thought you might like some "light reading". Cheers, --kelapstick(bainuu) 06:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links, and I've put my 2 cents in on the TT. Hopefully a good and reasoned answer to the (RFA) question will calm everything down a bit and let the normal (haha) process go ahead. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly, but do we really want the normal RfA process?  Cheers, --kelapstick(bainuu) 07:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No probably not, but it's better than everyone seeing the neutral !vote then opposing. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed you are correct, and it seems he has now answered your question. It's been a pleasure doing business with you. :) --kelapstick(bainuu) 07:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I've asked another two now. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:12, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I did the levels 3, 4, and 4im warnings. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 00:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've just made a minor change to the bolding. You wouldn't happen to know what to do next? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We go to WT: TW and ask them to implement our warnings in the next update of Twinkle. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 12:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking we might have to get Okeyes ok, since AFT5 is his thing. I've left him a TP message so we'll what he thinks. I'm also think that we may have to talk to WikiProject User Warnings (but that may be something Okeyes wants to do). Anyway we'll see what the thinks of them. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:44, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Oops, missed that, sorry. Dougweller (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Left response to your Talk on my talk page.

Talkback
talkback template added by User:7kingis


 * The thing to look at is: Talk:Japeth as well as the talk page (here) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:48, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

AWB
Hi, I have not rejected your application for AWB. It is just when I looked at your contributions I did not see enough yet of what you do non automated. If you want to hurry up my consideration, perhaps you can find a toolserver or otherwise report that shows your non-automated (+non rollback) edits so that I can take a quick look. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not concerned about time, I just thought you may have declined it (and not left a template) - but I see that you just meant "I'll get to it". This is the only toolserver report I could think of, and it doesn't show non-rollback (plus I imagine you have already seen it). Sorry I couldn't be more help, and I'm happy to give you as long as you need (enjoy searching through my contribs :)). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, there is this, though I'm not sure how useful it can be. KTC (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

CVUA Talkback
Left another...

Image
Excuse me, could you add image "Keke-keke-palmer-7228404-816-1222.jpg" into Commons? It's available only in English Wikipedia. 62.121.114.109
 * Images aren't really my area of expertise, but I am concerned about the copyright status of the image. So unless there is any extra information you can provide regarding the copyright status, I suggest you wait and someone will be along to have a look for you. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also you sign your edits on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ) after what you write (that should make it easier for you as well). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry evidence
The evidence page doesn't exist. Besides, I don't even know what I'm doing wrong. What if I want another username? So what? That's my decision. I feel very uncomfortable with all this evidence and sockpuppet stuff. Checking people's contribution history for evidence counts as stalking. Please stop. Just because I didn't contribute as TheUserPageRecreator right away doesn't mean I won't contribute. Also, my friend, a Wikipedia expert, told me that the pages were deleted for a reason, so now I know. Heymister14 (talk) 13:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)heymister14
 * A Wikipedia expert? Huh?  Theopolisme TALK 14:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

IP socks at Special Forces
See Sockpuppet investigations/ProfessorJane. Dougweller (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:47, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback from Jeffwang
 J (t)  15:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Account Creation Interface
Confirmation of registration request for the Account Creation Interface. Confirmation of identity link:. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

You have been specifically invited...
...to the Rollbackers and Reviewers Cabal by Jeffwang! Join now! -- J (t)  16:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

re: User warning templates for AFT5
Hi there. I talked with Maryana and we can definitely help out with these templates. These kind of warnings is something we gathered a lot of data about, and if it's okay, I'll be bold in proposing versions that will work well based on that data. Thanks for reaching out, Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   17:51, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Just curious... is there any reason why there have to be 4 levels of warnings? Blocking somebody from leaving feedback isn't nearly as big of a deal as blocking somebody from editing. I don't see why we need to give an unconstructive feedback-giver a whole bunch of chances before we pull the plug on him/her. One good-faith level 1 warning and one more serious level 2 seem like they'd do the job just fine. Maryana (WMF) (talk) 23:38, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Maryana. I've been watching this whole thing from afar, but I think that the one-two-trigger is quite sufficient.  Theopolisme  TALK 00:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yep sounds good to me. The three of you can feel free to edit them. (Thanks for you help Theo :p).
 * What about if we do away with level 2 altogether? So it goes level 1, 3, 4 then no more feedback; or level 4im, then no more feedback? If we put a little more info into level 3 then that should work? I think the only problem we will have it admins not willing to apply a different policy, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it. Also we will need to change them from "blocked from editing" to "blocked from submitting feedback". Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and updated the warnings, including removing the level 2 like you suggested. Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   19:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Udayar (caste)
I have replied to your messages on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:H. G. Wells
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:H. G. Wells. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 14:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Mary Lee (actor)
Hi. I was fooled by the recent vandalism, didn't look back in the history far enough, and tagged the article for speedy deletion (a mistake - aaaarrrggh). I've reverted the article back to a clean version, but do I need to do more to "un-request" the deletion? -- Bgpaulus (talk) 15:43, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Been there done that :). Thanks for asking me for advice. It's usually worth letting the page creator know that you have removed it (as Twinkle sends them a warning by default). Don't remove the CSD warning just leave a message under it. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm afraid I may be piling one mistake on top of another; since I already reverted the page back to its pre-vandalized state, that effectively removed the tag. I did drop a note on the article talk page and the page creator's talk page, but should I also manually restore the tag? -- Bgpaulus (talk) 15:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No you can just remove CSD tags, there aren't any issues there (I assume that's what you mean). While ever it's there it can be deleted any time while ever it's not there is much less chance (plus it won't clogg up WAT:CSD. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, thank goodness. I was worried that I'd automagically sent something off to some admin noticeboard somewhere (if you couldn't tell, I don't (yet) have that much experience with deleting pages -- yeeeshk). Anyway, thanks for the advice. Cheers! -- Bgpaulus (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Regarding WP:CSDs and WP:PRODs while ever the template is listed it shows up for admins to action, but once it is removed from the article it is removed from the admin category as well WP:AFDs are different (they are very hard to easily reverse). I suggest you have a read through the deletion policy as well as, WP:CSD (by the way you should have used WP:CSD on the article as it had no content), WP:PROD & WP:AFD. Feel free to ask for help in the future. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

A BOLD kitten for you!
'''Note:Kitten already moved to User:Callanecc/Awards. 17:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC) Hehe, thanks for the congrats/friendly words/etc. I'll try my best!

 Theopolisme TALK 16:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC) 


 * You better or I'll be there with the communtiy desysop decoord ready to go, jks. :P. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not RfA'ing anytime soon. A. Don't think I'm ready, B. Real scurrrrrrryyyy!  Theopolisme TALK 16:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Real scurrrrrrryyyy?
 * I'm thinking mine is six to nine months off, and I suppose I'll think more about it as I get closer (I think this is first time I've actually written that down). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 17:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Just tell me when - I'll support you (assuming you don't do something idiotic like decoording me! jk)  Theopolisme TALK 17:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks means a lot :). (There is the proof that RfA is a popularity contest based on personal opinions and has nothing to with actual ability, likewise jk)

Michael Anon
Hi, I've taken the above user, if you don't mind! However, I was wondering if you could help me out. On Saturdays and Friday evening, I'm not really that active. If you could 'look after them' at those times, say between 18:00 hours on Friday to around 20:00 hours on Saturday, BST, it would really be appreciated. I don't want you to go without. -- Chip123456 TalkContribs 18:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I can see when I'm not wanted. Jks, that's fine, yeah sure I can keep and eye out when on online. I know you've already had a student by but WP:CVUA/R might be of use. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 18:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll show that to them on respone of my message. Thanks.-- Chip123456 TalkContribs 18:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry that page would be of use to you as it contains instructing resources, so preferrably not for the student to be let lose it. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 18:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That's my fault, I should of read it. I just assumed it was a link to Zippy's reosurces for the student. -- Chip123456 TalkContribs 19:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Last time I looked it had Zippy's, Electric's and my hybrid version of the two (mainly based on Zippy's). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 19:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * They're all useful!-- Chip123456 TalkContribs 19:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Sandra Fluke
Would you take a look the article on Sandra Fluke. There is an on going discussion Here on her bio. I just would like to see if I am way off base for thinking the sources I have is good enough for including in her bio. Casprings (talk) 23:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added and RFC template (maybe too late, but you never know). I'll have a look later tonight, when I have some time to spend on it. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

FYI
Re Requests_for_page_protection, I didn't add a symbol since I thought another admin could have a look at it. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 04:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah sorry about that, probably a but premature, if the editing continues today (UTC time), I'll move it back into current requests and remove the template. Sorry about that, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 04:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No no, leave it--it's fine. No need to apologize; I'll be more explicit next time. Drmies (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Ryan Gabrielson edits
Listen, you don't know Ryan. I do. His page paints a completely one-sided view of him. Yes, he won a Pulitzer, but he also squatted in an apartment for two months, costing his roommate $1000, which with a reasonable rate of interest would run somewhere near $1500 a decade later. I didn't mention the specifics, as I am a gentleman. But who are you to dispute facts that you have no knowledge of? How about you stick to articles on which you have some shred of knowledge? I don't mean to denigrate you as an editor, but with the articles I read with opinions and godawful grammar, how about you go fix some of them instead of altering changes made in good faith in which the facts are not in dispute? Why are you out to protect the perpetrators instead of the victims?

Wikipedia has jumped the shark. It used to be democratic, now it is an oligarchy. Ass. unsigned comment by
 * Several problems with your edit, 76. First of all, even if it is true that he owes money to someone, this is not a notable fact for an encyclopedia. It would be adding undue attention to include it. Second of all, even if you believe something non-notable is true, you must cite a reliable source to include it on Wikipedia, especially if it involves a living person. This is to guard against libel. Lastly, Callanecc's personal knowledge of Gabrielson has nothing to do with his reversion of your edit. Callanecc is simply maintaining Wikipedia policy. By the way, Wikipedia is not a democracy and never has been. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  15:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Also make sure you sign your comments on talk pages (those with "Talk" in the title) with four tildes ( ~ ). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Article Feedback newsletter
Hey all!

So, big news this week - on Tuesday, we ramped up to 5 percent of articles :). There's been a lot more feedback (pardon the pun) as I'm sure you've noticed, and to try and help we've scheduled a large number of office hours sessions, including one this evening at 22:00 UTC in the channel, and another at  01:00 UTC for the aussies amongst us :). I hope to see some of you there - if any of you can't make it but have any questions, I'm always happy to help.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

ACC request approved
Callanecc, thank you for interest in the account creation process. I have verified your Identification [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=502957468] and I have approved your request, welcome to the team. You may now access the interface here. Before you do so, please read the account creation guide and our username policy thoroughly to familiarize yourself with the process. You should also join us on IRC on  where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and to get any advice on requests as well as the mailing list. Please note that we have implemented a policy of zero tolerance on mishandled requests, and that failure to assess correctly will result in suspension. I would like to emphasize that it is not a race to complete a request, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly. Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, although you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked "Account Creator Needed" by the bot and "Flagged user needed" on the interface. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM/ACC. Please keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse will result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome! mabdul 00:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh by the way: Don't hesitate, and especially for the very first tickets come 'online' in the IRC chat. The interface of the tool is/might be confusing and we help you before you doing something wrong. Regards, mabdul 09:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you madul. I just tried to login so I could have a look around and I got a User account is not identified. Please email accounts-enwiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org if you believe this is in error response. Do I need to send an email to that address or can you direct me as to what I need to do. Thanks Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated.

Upendra article
Someone has removed maintenance templates from Upendra article without solving issues! -- Tito Dutta  ✉  12:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the edtis, thanks for letting me know. I'll keep an eye on it, but if it happens and I don't respond feel free to let me know :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent! In case if you don't know, I want to inform you, I got back my Rollback flag on the same day. -- Tito Dutta  ✉  12:47, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry which day? I noticed the conversation on your talk page about misuse of rollback and that you used it because it was quick. There are scripts available which allow you to enter an edit summary when using rollback, have a look here. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the prompt removal of vandalism from my talk page. Salih ( talk ) 15:36, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries :) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

AFT5 criteria
Under which H# criteria does gibberish material fall? benzband ( talk ) 17:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It would meet H6 at a stretch, but given the discussions which have been happening around the place. I would advocate not hiding it, but just marking it as unhelpful. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:29, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ✔️ benzband  ( talk ) 07:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Redbox
Could you please review the recent edits at Redbox and review the recently denied request for semi-protection. I don't understand how someone can introduce clearly personal edits anonymously without discussion and have the protection request denied. 842U (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It has been semi-protected by User:Joe Decker see here. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Rajesh Khanna
As you're knowing what's happening with this page.What do you think? is there any possibility to semi-protect it ? -Thank You - 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣  10:47, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not an admin so I can't protect it myself, but given the edit history my guess is that it will be protected. You just need to wait for an admin to check it. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Recent death– lots of visitors– lots of edits, similar to Dara Singh, Humayun Ahmed. I am more interested to learn what is happening at the top of the page! Semi protecting it will be bad idea, I think!-- Tito Dutta   ✉  10:55, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit
I'll not revert this editor's edit agin, as, don't know it may violate 3RR which I don't want, but, I am watching ANI! -- Tito Dutta  ✉  11:17, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't have been a 3RR violation because it wouldn't have put you over the more than three, plus it meets exemption 4 under WP:NOT3RR. But in this sort of case it is usually better to WP:DENY and leave it to an admin who can block to prevent it happening again. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 01:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

IRC
Hey, Callanecc! Could you pop onto the IRC for a moment or two? Thanks.  Theopolisme TALK 02:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 11:11, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Username
You can ask your question on my talk page or use email if you like! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Dnblumberg
Blumberg, who asked for your assistance back around Bastille Day, has now put out a YouTube video accusing us (by which he means Wikileaks, of course) of getting people tortured and killed, and saying that if we believe in freedom of information strongly enough to get people killed, obviously we should let him spam us! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20WrFZs35RU&feature=plcp -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That'd be right . There isn't much we can do except an indef block on the account which I don't think is justified in this case (but go for is you wish). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:43, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've seen a few of these like this one on Elockid. Electric Catfish 19:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Matthew Asinari
Dear Callanecc, I would like for you to consider the "Matthew Asinari" article. I am currently writing it. However, there are several issues with the article. Other editors claim that my writing is biased and written like an advertisement. However, I don't feel this is the case and fail to see anything in it that explicitly promotes the subject of the article. Could you please be so kind as to give it a look and point me to any sentences that you feel may be responsible for the issue. Additionally, it states that the article is an orphan article. Does wikipedia oppose to making references to the article in other articles to which the subject is involved? Best, Rrajan12321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rrajan12321 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * so I won't step in unless you want me too. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

RFA
I think that you are well-qualified. Have you thought about running? Electric Catfish 15:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry Electric, I've been pretty busy. I will answer the question when I have some time to spend. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for suggesting it. It came up in conversation with Theo a little bit ago and I said that I might run in 3-6 months, but your message made me think about it in more depth.
 * I've only been editing (logged in) in depth for about a month. And RFAs where the candidate hasn't been full on editing for a while tend not to pass. I probably won't think about running for a couple/few months. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:14, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, your CSD log is very impressive. That's also the reason why I'm waiting until January. Many editors told me that I should run but I haven't been actively editing since May 4th, even though my account is over 15 months old. Best, Electric Catfish 13:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC).
 * I'm not actually that impressed with my CSD log (I think there's a little too much blue), so I'll probably go for it in a 3-6 months (I'll see how I feel at the time). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Sally Steele
Hello Callanecc, You were trying to help me last night with my article. I have since done two other revisions and I keep getting denied for Copyright information. There is none in my article and no one can help me and tell me what the problem is that I keep getting turned down. The article is Sally Steele (2) and the link I think is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rocksinnerqueen. I am so frustrated after 3 days of constant concentration trying to work on this. Who can I get to help me? Can you or can you refer me to someone? the chat wikipedia help is not working. No one knows what the problem is. Thank you so much. (Rocksinnerqueen (talk) 10:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC))


 * The Sally Steele (2) submission was declined for a violation of Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living people, basically you need to add more references to reliable sources which can be checked. For example "Morocco Records 1984" is not a reliable source as there is no way to verify what it is attempting to prove/show. You need to add references, which other people to follow and check on. However I think the main problem is that Sally Steele is just not notable (general notability guide and notability of biographies) enough to warrant a whole article on her. The reason I think that is that after doing a search I can't find much mention of her (which is wat you need - significant coverage). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Williamsburgland (talk) 17:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

You've got a message!
Chip123456 18:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Panipuri


 Tito Dutta  ✉  has invited you a for a plate of spicy Panipuri! Panipuri promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can give someone else a plate of Panipuri to spread Wikilove too! Hope you'll like it

To share a plate of Panipuri, simply add {{subst:Panipuri}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

-- Tito Dutta  ✉  18:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Moved to User:Callanecc/Awards 03:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * My pleasure and thank you for the barnstar. I thought it might have been something you didn't want to remain until you logged in. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Hooman Majd
Kurdo, I don't understand why you are reverting. For example, in this example it is a quote from a reliable source so there is no reason to remove it, WP:BLP does not apply to notable (which I believe this is) things which are reliably sourced (which this is). It may be that I'm missing something so would you mind enlightening me? Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 05:55, 26 July 2012 (UTC) Above is my comment made on user's talk page Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The lead of an article is no place to put selective subjective opinions/libelous statements that essentially call a living person, the spokesperson or agent of another government, even if they're sourced. I can find a sourced derogatory statements about many public officials in editorials by their opponents, it doesn't mean that I can go and dump on their Wikipedia article. Kurdo777 (talk) 05:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll reply here to keep the conversation in one place. The example I used wasn't in the lead, could you have another look please. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's still a libelous statement, and subjective opinion, not a fact, don't you agree? Also, check the last revert on the page which basically put this in the lead again, this was done by an editor who was previously blocked for 3 months, for stalking me, and he's doing it again. Kurdo777 (talk) 06:08, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't agree that you should have reverted the example I used, the thing in the lead I think is marginal but you certainly shouldn't do anything more with it (have a look at WP:Dispute resolution). I stronly suggest you start a topic on the article's talk page about it so all of the people involved and discuss it. Regarding User:Binksternet you said that they had been blocked for hounding, do you have a link to where the discussion of that took place (not the block log but where the discussion and decisions took place such as on the admin's noticeboard, or somewhere else) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, such material, which is basically gossip accusing a living person of being an agent of another government, does not belong in a living person's article. I am hoping you study the BLP policy more closely, and remove this. If the libelous material is not removed by tomorrow, I will contact the firm that represents the subject, and they will take this up with the Wikipedia office. Kurdo777 (talk) 06:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I do hope that wasn't a threat. What I am saying it that you need to start a topic on the article's talk page about the material which has been added. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I am contacting his representation agency to notify them about the liabloues statements on their client's Wiki page. What they'll do, is up to them. Kurdo777 (talk) 06:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm back. I'm going to warn Kurdo that I will block if there is any more threat of legal action (merits an indef) or reversion without discussion, any comments before I do so? <b style="font-family:chiller; color:red;"> Jimfbleak - </b> talk to me?  06:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me, thanks for jumping in. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Up to you but it also might be worth leave a good faith note to Binksternet (or if you have a look at mine and see what you think) about warning someone that they are warring against and then reverting their revert. But completely up to you. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:40, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

A cup of tea for you!

 * Thanks for the tea, now that I'e finished (and waiting for Cluebot to do the rest) I'll sit back and enjoy it :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Puzzle solved
For last few days I have been investigating how my deleted edit count suddenly increased from 144 to 150 suddenly? I have solved the puzzle now. You deleted this page, as a result, my edits also got deleted! Very (b/s)ad! --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ED791A 0em 0em 0.8em,#F55220 -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;"> Tito Dutta  ✉  03:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * But I moved it first (to User:Callanecc/Reversion) so it should have remembered your edits, who knows. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 06:31, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Question on question at RfA
Hi there Callanecc - thanks for asking a question at my RfA. I'm a little confused by the first sentence, do you think you can clarify it (perhaps it's just a grammar or word use): "An IP user completely changes a large section of a non-BLP article on a living from being unreferenced to completely referenced." The part in italics is what I'm confused by. Thanks! Sarah (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Sarah, I've removed "on a living", the question was originally for a BLP article, but I changed my mind without removing all of the reference to "living people". Thanks and good luck with your RFA, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 03:23, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for answering Sarah, I have a few follow-up questions and I'd like the tease out a few points. Do you mind if I do it here (rather than clogging up your talk page or the RFA talk page)? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:23, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess! Sarah (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * By the way I also asked another under question 6. The main reason that is could come up (and you would need to deal with it) is that requests at AIV can sit there for a while and usually the first admin there needs to deal with everything (especially since this could just keep going). Any way to my questions:
 * Rather than blocking the rollbacker would you consider removing the rollback user right? Also what questions/comments would you have for the rollbacker (any comment on the warning used)? Where is the 3RR vio, I may not have read my own question properly (or interpreted it the same way as you) but there were only 3 reverts (and 3RR is more than 3)?
 * When you said "Depending on how big of a can of worms I feel like editing, I might accept it. If I do accept it.." what do you mean, (just looking into it?)
 * Hi there. AIV requests aren't really on my "priority" lists of interests, but, I understand your concern! I'd of course ask the rollbacker why they failed to respond to the IP and inform them of their error - how come they didn't inform them of the conversation on the talk page and ask for their input, etc? I never thought about removing the rollback user rights - and that's very well an option and I appreciate you putting that out there. That stems back to my original response - I won't be diving into "Deep waters" of AIV and certain situations without consulting a variety of admins from many different areas - especially to gather information like you just provided. Perhaps I've been misjudging the 3RR rule for the many years I've been on Wikipedia - I did mention it, I thought, in my response. Perhaps that's a fail on my part - you can't make "three or more reverts" is what I always understood but reading the documentation it states "more than three." So, I guess that can be interpreted a few different ways. Regardless, the rollbacker IMHO failed miserably to inform the IP - and surely is at fault more than the "innocent" IP. I think I stated in my response - I'd discuss with the rollbacker first, why didn't they discuss this properly with the IP, second, discuss with them how to handle the situation differently - but of course, this is all based on their initial response to the first "Why" question. In regards to big can of worms - AIV's aren't really a major area of interest for me, unless that is a major demand area and something that fellow admins believe *I* (based on my interests and my skillset) should be involved in. Every AIV is a case by case basis, and some people are attracted to some things more than others. Just because I gain the mop doesn't mean I'm attracted to dramatic cases, IMHO :) Me stating "if I do accept it," is in response to your theoretical concept. Reviewing any AIV will lead me, and probably most admins, to think about what I'd do, and if I feel like it might be more than I feel, at that time, I can or I am willing to dive into, then I might see if another admin comes along with stronger interest. As you probably know - some admins and so forth are more interested in aspects of policy (i.e. friends of ours who are involved in Arbcom, when some of us aren't) and perhaps certain AIV cases are more of interest of those types than types like myself :) Sarah (talk) 09:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me, my opinion as that the rollbacker is completely in the wrong and the IP didn't do anything (or very much anyway) wrong, so I pretty much agree with you. The only reason I asked is that you said AIV is something you would be interested in, but the above clarifies that. Regarding your response to question 6 that's exactly the response I was after :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 09:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow