User talk:Crazycomputers/Archive 4

AIV
Sorry about that. Guess I was confused by the fact that it was a brand new user creating all the user pages. Couldn't figure out what was going on. Fan-1967 17:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No worries, we all make mistakes. (I've certainly made my share.)  --Chris (talk) 17:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

VandalSniper on Knoppix howto
Hi -- I made a "VandalSniper installation" page in my user space that expands on the Knoppix installation topic started on my talk page. Is it okay that I've linked to it from my user page? I noticed you are on Wikibreak, or else I would have asked you first. I haven't done any "advertising" beyond linking to that here and there. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, feel free to spread information on VS. This is after all a wiki -- be bold!  If I have any objections on something I will let you know, but I don't see that happening in the near future.  --Chris (talk) 01:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Enjoy
Enjoy your vacation :) Looks like your RfA is going to come down to the wire, good luck! --jam  es (talk) 05:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Always glad to create a positive influence on someones RfA. I've made negative influences in the past and caused me to feel guilty :(. Much prefer doing the opposite. :) -- Andeh 16:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA
I am pleased to let you know that, consensus reached, you are now an Administrator. You should find the following forums useful:
 * Administrators' reading list
 * Administrators' how-to guide
 * Administrator's Noticeboard
 * Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents
 * Administrator's Noticeboard for Three-revert-rule violations

Congratulations on your promotion and the best of luck with your new charge! Redux 19:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Very many congratulations! --Guinnog 19:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats! G . H  e  19:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I have made a generic reply at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Crazycomputers instead of posting on each user's talk page. --Chris (talk) 20:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats! I thought you were going to be away today? alpha Chimp  laudare 20:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * On the RfA I struck out that comment. It turns out that my grandparents got DSL, and I was bringing my computer anyway, so I should be pretty active.  --Chris (talk) 20:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Re stricken "vote"
Hi. It was an honest mistake, no harm done. Generally, never strike out another user's "vote", unless it is a confirmed sockpuppet, an impersonation, a double vote or something along those lines. As an example: somewhat recently, we had a situation in a RfA where a couple of users had opposed "temporarily, until candidate does something about signature"; the candidate addressed the concerns, fixing the signature, but after a day or so, the two participating users had not returned to withdraw their opposition. People left them messages in their talk pages, but only the user himself or herself can withdraw their "vote" validly. Obviously, a situation like this is taken into account by the closing Bureaucrat, and a "vote" surrounded by circumstances such as those will likely be weighed differently. (to provide closure: those two users eventually returned and withdrew their opposition before the RfA closed) Redux 20:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. --Chris (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Adminship!


Congrats on your admittance to the shiny button club! If you need any help you can contact me on my talk or e-mail. I know you'll do very well. Yank sox  21:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You know, what? You're doing good! I'm liking this so far! Yank  sox  22:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats and welcome to the cleaning crew! Kukini 22:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! --Chris (talk) 22:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No RfA thank you notices for everyone?-- Andeh 02:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe it's me... I find posting to each user's page to be somewhat extraneous. I've posted a general reply to everyone on the RfA's talk page.  If you think that the omission of thanks notices would be rude, I will distribute them.  --Chris (talk) 02:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey congrats on passing! Best of luck with the new responsibilities! --AbsolutDan (talk) 04:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Another congratulations here! Have fun with the new tools :O --jam  es (talk) 08:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Cincinnati Beacon
I just sawy you left me a message about the "Cincinnati Beacon" entry. I fail to see how someone attempting to defame me personally has anything to do with a reference to a web magazine / blog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Dean of Cincinnati (talk • contribs)


 * I reverted the edit because you removed a large amount of material from an article without specifying any reason in the edit summary. --Chris (talk) 00:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry
I was editting the content and i accidently deleted it, i am new to wiki pedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.55.216 (talk • contribs)


 * No problem. --Chris (talk) 01:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Enjoying the buttons I see!
Good work so far! -- Samir  धर्म 02:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! ☺  --Chris (talk) 02:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandal report
You reverted my report with the edit summary "rv, content dispute isn't vandalism"

What do you think we sould do about User:71.48.178.153 and Bubble hash then? User:Viridae and I have tried our best. ANI? --Guinnog 03:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrator_intervention_against_vandalism&diff=68121781&oldid=68120937


 * Or an RfC. If the community decides that this is vandalism then I have no problem blocking, but these edits don't really fit the definition.  --Chris (talk) 03:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * OK thanks. --Guinnog 03:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Church of Emo
Just because we do not share your same belief in the prophet Christ, does not mean our religion can be marginalized. We shall take our faith elsewhere and return to Wikipedia once it has changed it's bigoted system of beliefs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChurchOfEmo (talk • contribs)


 * You could also come back when you have reliable sources on this church. --Chris (talk) 04:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Follow Up
Your crack staff of heathens did not allow for our followers to finish posting all materials before our facts and beliefs were heinously deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChurchOfEmo (talk • contribs)


 * You are welcome to restore the material if you provide the sources too. --Chris (talk) 05:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

AfD dummies from your RfA
Do you want me to move the AfD dummies to your userspace? Because I'm trying and keep my userspace low. You may just want to keep it as a record of your RfA.-- Andeh 12:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you mean by "AfD dummies." --Chris (talk) 17:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The links that were in the Qs I added to your RfA, this and this.-- Andeh 00:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh. If you like, just put them on the RfA's talk page.  That will keep all of the RfA in one spot.  --Chris (talk) 00:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

82.54.99.100
hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.54.99.100 (talk • contribs)


 * Hello. --Chris (talk) 19:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

TheOilBarron
Hi, I see he just removed all the warning templates, again! Is it worth semi=protecting the page, adn/or increasing the length of the block? --Wisd e n17 20:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Already done. --Chris (talk) 20:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * As I can now see :). I thought'd you were probably doing it as I typed, but always worth the occasional prompting, especially as I'm guessing (without taking the time to look through your contributions!) you're rather busy on Wikipedia. --Wisd e n17 20:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Eutechnyx
You recently deleted the article Eutechnyx, which was empty. You probably know more about computer games than I do, but I visited the company's site at http://www.eutechnyx.com/aboutUs/, and noticed that it makes the following claims:
 * Eutechnyx is one of the world’s leading driving game developers, specifically noted for the creation of original Intellectual Property.
 * Over the course of our 18-year history, we’ve worked with some of the world’s largest publishers and have a reputation for producing titles that sell well in excess of one million units.

If this is true, you might want to restore and expand the article. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 22:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * As the content wasn't that substantial or well written, it might be better just to start from a blank slate. --Chris (talk) 22:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
For the revert. I seem to have attracted a personal vandal to my userpage, user:Kferd73 after warning a Sprint DSL IP user user:71.53.17.55 about vandalizing the Energy article. What to do about such annoyances? RfA? S B Harris 22:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Report the users to WP:AIV. --Chris (talk) 22:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Got that advice just now elsewhere and just did that. Thanks again. S  B Harris 23:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Mwa ha ha ha ha ha! Vandal Man has returned!
Last night, you banned me when I created my accounts having to do with Vandal Man! But I have returned! My name is now Vandal Man backwards you fool! Now, I shall vandalize Wikipedia!!!! All admins of wikipedia, feel the wrath of Vandal Man! Mwa ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!! Please feel free to respond to my message/warning. Nam Ladnav 00:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * ...And he's been blocked... Yank  sox  00:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Aaaaaaah...how this bores me. These foolish admins continue to block me! But now I have ONCE AGAIN returned and have revealed my secret identity, Jacob Hatton. Yes, that is me. But you will never stop me! Feel the wrath of Vandal Man! Mwa ha ha ha ha ha ha! Jacob Hatton 00:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * To be honest: this bores me. You'd be more fun if you contributed positively. Yank  sox  00:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Loserdick
I see you blocked 222.153.158.53 for only three hours. Next time (and there will be a next time) feel free to go ahead and block him indefinitely right off the bat. See: Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive126 and: Long term abuse/Loserdick. Your Vandal man seems the same sort of fellow... --woggly 05:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Please consider blocking this user
Yesterday you blocked User:202.6.138.34 for repeated vandalism. They are at it again, having made 7 malicious edits to the lichen article in a single day. Please consider blocking their editing privileges once again. Thanks! Debivort 15:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The IP's latest edit seems to be a good faith effort to impove the 'pedia. I don't think blocking would be beneficial at this point, because of collateral damage.  --Chris (talk) 16:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * What's the general principle here? The IP had received a warning that if they did any more vandalism, they would be blocked. They did a lot (at least 5 in one day) anyway. And just because they have single constructive typo fix more recently, they don't get blocked? That seems like a surefire way to be able to vandalize as much as you want, as long as every now and then you do a nice edit before logging off. My thoughts. Debivort 16:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * As the constructive edit took place quite a while after the vandalism stopped, so it seems likely that the IP has been allocated to someone else, or is a public access terminal with a different user now. At any rate, blocking is intended to protect the 'pedia, not punish users.  If damage is not being done, or isn't sure to be done from the same IP in the future, a block isn't justified.  --Chris (talk) 17:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * How does one identify an IP that is used by multiple users? If this is one of those, it should be marked with that template I suppose. Debivort 17:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * ... The talk page is already marked with this template ... ? --Chris (talk) 17:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Gosh you're right. Sorry to have been so oblivious. Debivort 17:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. We all have those days.  =)  --Chris (talk) 17:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

not an A1 candidate

 * This is the topic of discussion. --Chris (talk) 17:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

What is meant by "not an A1 candidate".

Thanks, Julian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thumbcandy (talk • contribs)


 * The "nocontext" tag is referencing CSD A1: little or no context. This article seems to provide enough context.  --Chris (talk) 17:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

deletion
i was establishing notoriety on the subject of the article, this is my first article and i was learning the interface. i was teaching myself how to use the markup commands as well. i do not believe this should have been deleted. is this how things work on here, or must i prepare the entire article beforehand and put it in at once? This individual has an established track record of notoriety, albeit i had a few silly things in there to fill the space as I learned the markup codes. Should i even bother trying again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scrummy757 (talk • contribs)


 * Sorry, which article are you referring to? --Chris (talk) 17:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

the only one in my user history, Kevin "Vicious" Geist —Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.15.3.201 (talk • contribs)


 * The article met one of Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, A7: "Unremarkable people or groups/vanity pages. An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead." The article did not assert any notability of this person. --Chris (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Patty Haskins
well why the heck did you delete the page and say that patty wasn't important to the world...i just feel that she is very important to the world and i did not appreciate you deleting that...not at all...and that is what prompted the comment that i made about your seemingly elevated ego, sorry about the harsh words, but i would like a very good explanation for the reason my page was taken off the internet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johndoe12 (talk • contribs)


 * There are a few pages that may interest you in this matter:
 * WP:OWN: You do not "own" pages -- it's not "your page."
 * WP:CSD: Criteria for speedy deletion. Note "Article #7": "Unremarkable people or groups/vanity pages. An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead."  The article did not assert any notability of this teacher in any of the deleted histories (except for blanket statements like "she is the best person in the world," which do not hold much weight with Wikipeians).
 * WP:NOT: "Wikipedia is not a free host, blog, webspace provider or social networking site."
 * If you can fix these concerns, please notify me. --Chris (talk) 17:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

GHe's RfA


blocking
I am not doing anything!!! I may have a proxy server, but the only pages i change are the pages that i know about (VMK (Lostpedia if it comes back)Toontown Disney etc.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.188.117.68 (talk • contribs)


 * I did not place the block, and it expires soon anyway. --Chris (talk) 01:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Adventures in Babysitting
This wasn't an edit dispute. The user is question added his personal fansite, his personal MySpace, and a fan petition to this article, the article for the remake, and Vincent D'Onofrio's article. Crumbsucker 02:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And when I warned him, he added bogus tags on my talk page. Crumbsucker 02:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright. I will inform him of this, but I'm not going to block unless he continues.  --Chris (talk) 02:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The other thing that I noted in my administrator/vandalism note is that the user has at least two sockpuppets who have spammed with the same links before. See:,. At the time, I gave spam warnings to those usernames as well. Crumbsucker 03:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the information. --Chris (talk) 03:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The accounts involved have been tagged. --Chris (talk) 03:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Witchcraft (band) deletion
Why was this deleted less than half an hour after I'd started writing the article? I was probably reading up on info and how to edit the page when it got nominated, and I was right in thinking there wasn't any point in writing more if some guy's just gonna delete it asap. I mean, heck, several pages in Wikipedia link to the page 'Witchcraft (band)', so it's not like I was spouting nonsense about a band down the road that has about three relatives as fans. FredTheDeadHead 09:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * My apologies if the article was deleted too soon. Before writing articles on bands, you may want to review WP:BAND, which lists various criteria that many Wikipedians use to determine if a band is notable.  The article was deleted because it did not assert notability of the band (CSD A7: "An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject.").


 * Also, it had been roughly 20 minutes since the last edit to the article. I thought this was enough time to add hangon to the page and/or explain the band's notability.  If you will be editing an article in multiple saves, you may also consider using underconstruction to alert editors and admins that you are editing the page.  (Be sure to remove the tag when you are done.)


 * Let me know if you have any other questions. --Chris (talk) 19:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I did add a ((hangon)) as soon as I noticed, and yes, that wasn't immediately after the deletion was proposed because I was busy looking up websites for info. There was no response or reasoning on the talk page either.


 * Like I said, there are pages that link to Witchcraft (band). Surely that means there is need for an article? Also, from looking at 'what links here', it's not hard to see they've had two albums from an important indie label.


 * I mean, all I was doing with the article was starting it so that more people could add to it. I'm not an expert on Witchcraft (hence why I spent a long time looking up info), but I did want to see an article, so I started one, and felt kinda annoyed when it was deleted before I'd finished. FredTheDeadHead 12:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Alright. Have you checked WP:BAND to make sure that the band meets the notability requirements for inclusion?  The article was deleted because it failed CSD A7: the article did not assert notability.  --Chris (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * From looking at 'what links here', they're with an important indie label, and they've had two albums. And like I said, the article hadn't been finished yet. You expect a new article to have all the info up straight away? FredTheDeadHead 14:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I've restored the article to allow time for expansion. --Chris (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks :). I've filled out the article a bit more, including the two albums that they've released. I really couldn't find much info about them, so I couldn't write much without making stuff up, but is it fine at the moment? FredTheDeadHead 02:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Question re: Fan-site linkage
Thank you for your constructive insights regarding a dispute I was having with another user.

My question is when a fan-site should be included in an article, specifically as a citation of a directly attributed quote regarding something notable.

I have noticed many entries that have included this information without being removed. However, I have also seen users jump all over others dismissing the additions as plugs for personal websites. In many cases, I have also seen the operators of fan sites contribute greatly to a subject they are knowledgable.

Gratuitious links aside, what is the best way to cite a source that happens to be a fan-maintained website without having it removed?

I appreciate your time, effort, and advice regarding this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiousPratt (talk • contribs)


 * You may want to look at WP:EL, which lays out some guidelines on external links. --Chris (talk) 20:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * There's no reason to link to your personal site or your MySpace (or that Vincent D'Onofrio petition you made). Keith Coogan, or the person who says he is, has a MySpace and mentions wanting to be in the remake there. So add a link to that if anything (although it's not clear that it's even him). But from all the effort you've put in (with the sockpuppets and vandalizing my talk page), it's clear that you're mainly trying to get hits to your own sites. Crumbsucker 20:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Kayak page edit
The reason I edited the kayak page is that it was inaccurate though well intentioned. The version I edited showed glaring biases and limited knowledge of native kayak history and an equally limited knowledge of kayak hydrodynamics.

Thank you,

Winterpool

Real tyler
I spoke with him after posting the request. He is a part of wikiality, and it was a "retaliation" from people from wikipedia supposedly vandalizing his site. We spoke and he apologized. Wildthing61476 03:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Good news! I'm glad that we didn't have to resort to blocking.  --Chris (talk) 03:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

AIV
Maybe I'm on crack, but in your edit summaries you're saying "MT" and "Not MT". What is MT an abbreviation for? &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  04:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * If you say "MT" out loud, it sounds like "empty." --Chris (talk) 04:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Can I just tell you, I almost peed myself laughing. Not to mention, I've been saying "MT....HAHAHAHAHAH.....MT.... " over and over for about 5 minutes now. &rArr;    SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  04:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

172.207.160.154
Your block on this IP is for 24 hours. That is an AOL IP and a block that long will cause a lot of collateral damage. If I may I'd like to reduce the block down to an hour. K O S |  talk  21:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, feel free. I wasn't aware it was an AOL IP or I would have made it shorter.  --Chris (talk) 21:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I added AOL to the talk so others don't make that mistake too. --Chris (talk) 21:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * :D K O  S |  talk  21:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

question on reporting vandals
Hi - what does "→User reported - indef, NOT MT)" mean? I thought I was at the right place to report this guy since he was a repeat vandal and also it was on a topic that has been persistently vandalized, recreated, added to other pages, etc.  What should I have done?  Thanks! --Bookgrrl 02:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It means "blocked indefinitely, list not empty." --Chris (talk) 02:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hm, I get the "blocked indefinitely" but what is "list not empty" ? Thanks! --Bookgrrl 02:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It's so that other admins who are watching AIV can see on their watchlist whether there are any users on the list. --Chris (talk) 02:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Operation Overdrive Data
I have added information to Power Rangers Operation Overdrive which is correct so could you fix this for spelling? Also the information tracked is generally based off past series so if it connects currently it needs to be included.

Lurchin
Sorry for the Lurchin page. I didn't realize that there weren't individual articles for certain characters in the video game. I've been fairly unsuccessful adding things to Wikipedia, you guys really do have everything! I'll probably stop editing or creating articles now to save you guys any inconvenience.

My apologies.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaropian (talk • contribs)


 * No problem. On the second edit, it looks like you may be using a buggy Firefox plugin that accidentally chops off the text in forms.  --Chris (talk) 04:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Urgent help needed
Thanks for blocking POVremover he has just started a new account called Harryford and reverted the edits again can you block him.--Cathyh 05:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * He was blocked for violating the username policy, and was encouraged to create a new account with a more proper name. You may want to use WP:AN3 if you suspect a 3RR violation.  (I tend to stick to vandalism and username issues.)  --Chris (talk) 05:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I know you do Chris but please help. You are much more expert at this than I am please can you help- as a girl I know next to nothing about this--Cathyh 05:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I have requested that the other editor open a dialogue with you. His edit was reverted by a user with that as his only edit.  (If this is you under another account, you may want to read Wikipedia's policy on sockpuppets.)  If the edit war continues, I will protect the article to force dialogue.  --Chris (talk) 05:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Chris all I can say is that I've tried to talk, the references are from the BBC! but he says that the BBC is not worthy to provide references from- what can I do. I think you are right if this silliness continues then protect it back to the original version before POVremover and the edits war with POVremover began--Cathyh 06:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * He is ruining the talk pages, he keep putting comments at the top instead of the bottom and he deletes my comments--Cathyh 07:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Cathyh and her POV reverts
I had requested Cathyh to come discuss this issue with me on the talk page after I made my first edits. She reverted back all my edits without talking on the discussion page. She also blamed me as a vandal and threatened me. I asked her to come and discuss on the talk page first. She did not do it again and reverted back the edits.

I put her reference on BBC under a more relevant heading while maintaining my own edits, but she reverted back again.

She is claiming she tried to talk, but she never did.

She even deleted my statements under talk page when I was using user name POVremover so that no one may know what is happening.

The references this user is providing do not correlate with the text and she has refused to listen. For example, the BBC report says "Man mohan singh was the architect of economic reforms in India" not "Architect of modern India" but she keeps on reverting these falsified edits.

She needs to be blocked for following reasons: Reverting back misleading statements, deleting my statements on talk page, not informing me of those deletions, not consulting me on the talk page before she reverts.

You have reverted my edits which did not touch the main text but only removed POV and weasel words, and now you have blocked the article to force talk. Force talk with whom? Cathyh continues to vandalize this article. Harryford 07:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Cathyh has started vandalizing the talk page of Manmohan Singh
Cathy is deleting the entire section on the talk page of Manmohan Singh. This user (and I suspect if it is a female) must be blocked immediately. Cathyh has deleted my contents on talk page for third time now. this user is not talking. this user is deleting. This user's IP address must be banned. Harryford 07:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

210.50.231.142
Hi! I noticed you placed a block on 210.50.231.142 for 1 month for vandalism. I am contacting you about this because this IP is of a school called Mazenod College in Melbourne, Australia. I noticed the block was in place today when I tried to perform an edit (fixing a spelling mistake) at school today.

I ask that this block is removed because it inconveniences me and others who will do an anonymous legitimate edit on Wikipedia. &mdash Peter McGinley 07:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Unblocked for now. --Chris (talk) 20:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocked from editing....
I recently edited some text in Wikipedia, under the heading of "Eagle Squadron". I am not sure why I have been blocked from future editing. I added some information about pilots of the American Eagle Squadrons, specifically about Chesley 'Pete' Peterson. I am somewhat of an authority on this topic, as my uncle Wilson "Bill" Edwards flew with this squadron. I have attended many of their reunions and have read just about every book published on the squadrons. While I was editing, I removed the name of a pilot, Bob Hoover, which somebody is claiming was an Eagle Squadron pilot, he was not. He was a great pilot, but he never flew with the Eagles. I have in my possesion the complete roster of the Eagle squadrons & he is not on it. There is a large monument in London at Grosvenor square with all the names of the Eagle Squadron pilots & Bob Hoover is not on it. Speaking of Hoover, as I said before, he was a great pilot, but I must say that his stories get bigger with age, which includes the story of him breaking out of prison camp and stealing a Nazi Jet & flying to freedom.

Please reinstate my editing privelages, as I have done no wrong!

Regards, Martin (elitescapes@aol.com)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.200.116.204 (talk • contribs)


 * I don't see a block on your IP address. --Chris (talk) 00:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

indefinite block for 219.88.180.38
He is a banned user. See: Long term abuse/Loserdick, and all the IPs and accounts he's used at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Loserdick. I admit it's a bit pointless blocking him when he's only going to come back in a few hours under a different IP, but in the past when his IPs were blocked for shorter stretches, he did use them again for vandalism and to create new accounts with foul names. He's a client of Telecom New Zealand, which I assume is sort of like the New Zealand AOL in that IPs are randomly assigned, so a range block is out of the question. Not sure what I'm achieving by all the individual blocks, other than keeping track of his progress. If you have a better idea, go ahead and apply it. --woggly 07:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC) BTW, all the blocks were anon only blocks, with new account creation disabled because of his penchant for totally inappropriate names. --woggly 08:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay. An indefinite IP block seems a bit extreme to me, but seeing as you know more about the surrounding situation I will trust your judgement.  --Chris (talk) 08:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Great minds think yada yada yada... :)
Was tagging the account indefblocked and ya beat me to it! Nice work :) - GI e n 06:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I do what I can. :)  --Chris (talk) 06:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Defax
But... how? User:Defax is obviously not an admin. Why is he writing the Blocked template to userpages if he can't block them? And why are the users being blocked when they have no edit history (and don't have objectionable usernames)???? Am new at this and would like to learn. Sorry about the improper block, will now unblock him if he hasn't been already. Herostratus 06:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * They were blocked because of Wikipedia's username policy. (See the users' block logs.)
 * Defax is probably just tagging blocked users that admins forgot to tag. I see nothing wrong with that.  --Chris (talk) 06:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No, of course not. Right, of course. Sorry, totally my mistake. I unblocked him at once and apologized, and hope he's not too put out. Sorry! I'm quite new at this aspect of administering. I totally jumped the gun. What happened was, with a Gale Warning out for sockpuppets, I saw an editor with redlinked user and talk pages slapping Blocked templates, I thought it was a perhaps a ploy to slip in an account(s) with Blocked templates but that were not actually blocked for later use, and some of the accounts didn't have inappropriate names (but as I now see they were blocked for vandalism). I assume an editor with a redlinked talk page is very new, and didn't think that a new editor would be starting his contributions in that way. If I had been correct it could have been a mess to sort out, so I acted without properly checking the block logs, at which I am still pretty hamfisted. Bad administering! Lesson learned. Again, sorry. Herostratus 07:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. I'm a relatively new admin myself and am in the process of listing some pages I protected a while ago at WP:PP, which I should have done right after protecting them.  We all make mistakes. --Chris (talk) 07:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Cincinnati Beacon article should be put back.
I just recently read an article on a blog where Wikipedia took the information on Jason Haap aka "The Dean of Cincinnati" and his on self published article regardig his bog, "The Cincinnati Beacon".

I'm a frequent reader of the Dean's site and I post there frequently as a reader. Cincinnati is a very divided city and one of the biggest problems we are facing at this time is media supression. It is very blatant and Jason makes a very valiant attempt, at his own time and expense, to expose the money trails and power and influence that drive that supression.

Things have regressed to the point now that a blog parody has gone up now entitled, "The Spleen of Cincinnati", to try to denigrate and make fun of the Dean's efforts.

In the words of Mahatma Ghandi: First they ignore you, then they laught at you, then they fight you, then you win.

It seems to me that since Jason has reached Stage Two of Ghandi's famous quote, he may just be more important to the Cincinnati political climate and more than deserves even a self-published page on Wikipedia. If the Cincinnati Beacon seems of no import it is only because the powers that be in our area would like to keep it that way, when nothing could be further from the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.48.38 (talk • contribs)


 * I think you are missing the point of Wikipedia. We're here to write a neutral encyclopedia.  Wikipedia is not a soapbox.  Wikipedia does not "supress" content that falls within established guidelines.  Writing articles on a subject that you are involved in is discouraged, as it is difficult to remain neutral while doing so.
 * If this person/publication meet notability guidelines, and there are verifiable sources that document them. --Chris (talk) 19:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

SNIPE trouble
schuyler@schuylerlinux:~/vandalsniper-49$ ./vs.exe

Unhandled Exception: System.TypeInitializationException: An exception was thrown by the type initializer for Gecko.WebControl ---> System.DllNotFoundException: /usr/lib/mozilla/libgtkembedmoz.so in (wrapper managed-to-native) Gecko.WebControl:gtk_moz_embed_get_type in Gecko.WebControl:get_GType in GtkSharp.GeckoSharp.ObjectManager:Initialize in Gecko.WebControl:.cctor --- End of inner exception stack trace ---

in in VandalSniper.MainWindow:newBrowser (System.String url) in VandalSniper.MainWindow:.ctor in VandalSniper.MainWindow:Main (System.String[] args) schuyler@schuylerlinux:~/vandalsniper-49$

Do you know what the problem is? I'm running Ubuntu 6.06 xxpor (  Talk |  Contribs ) 21:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Is mozilla-browser installed? You may be running a version of the GRE that is incompatible with your build of Gecko# too.  The APIs are in flux constantly, so you may just have to wait to get it working.  --Chris (talk) 22:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Hey thanks! It's always good to know I'm doing a good job.  =)  --Chris (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the quick block of could you quick delete these 3 images, it prevents him from repeating his vandalism anonymously as he needs to make an account to re-upload the images. Image:HipEmail.gif Image:HipTshirt.gif Image:HipBlock.gif thanks!--Crossmr 23:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. --Chris (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick block of was getting anoying reverting the same stuff within minutes of the last revert. Thanks again. SimonD 11:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. --Chris (talk) 11:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar
Thank you, Chris! :D It's been about a year since Gray Wolf became a Featured Article, and it's grown considerably! I'm just trying to catch up on referencing it. Thanks a bunch,  Sango 123  17:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Doppelgangers
I only created them so WoW and any other vandal could not impersonate me! --TheM62Manchester 22:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Apologies!
Apologies for creating doppelgangers! --TheM62Manchester 22:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the advice; it was very helpful! BTW, what WikiProjects are you a member of?? --TheM62Manchester 23:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Really just CVU though that's not a "proper" WikiProject. --Chris (talk) 23:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I Told you I was Sorry!
When you blocked me from editing because of the "vandalism" at iPod, iTunes, iPod Nano, and iTunes Music Store, I told you I was sorry on my talk page before I was blocked because I wanted to remove something, and accidentally erased the box because I didn't know that wasn't part of what I was trying to remove. I didn't know how to put it back. Don't report me for vandalism when I accidentally do something again. 0:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Pere Lachaise
Sorry, but I thought the several hours I put in inserting the Category:Burials at Père Lachaise Cemetery in every single biography at Wikipedia was a good reason to follow these instructions as I had completed the task. I will leave a message with User:Crzrussian that you disagree with them. Thanks. C. C. Perez 12:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry I didn't notice that. By all means continue.  From here it looked like simple vandalism or experimentation, but I can be wrong.  --Chris (talk) 12:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Manmohan Singh
Hi CC - please have a look at this article. You protected it 8 days ago, and the conflict editors seem to have quietened down. Rama's arrow 14:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Unprotected. If an edit war resumes, please let me or another admin know.  --Chris (talk) 19:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

User:FapKing etc.
Hi. There realy is not any reason to create a userpage and tag a nil-edit blocked account. The block logs shows the block - the name is obviously going to be blocked. In this case it seems pointless (although harmless), but stuff like this is encouraging people to tag nil-edit accounts with speculative tags categorizing by who might be creating it - and that just serves to glorify the vandal. My ethos is block and forget - as the only way we'll drive these people away is to bore them by ignoring them. Just some thoughts...--Doc 22:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the revert on my userpage, I saw it highlighted on the vandal blacklist box and I was like "oh no". Anyway, good work :) Soosed 02:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. He got my page too.  --Chris (talk) 02:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks !
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page.--1568 04:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Always welcome. --Chris (talk) 05:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Purported repentant vandal request
Vandal 71.197.196.45 is requesting your attention on his talk page. Claims vandalism won't happen again and wants to discuss block. Regards --Hús ö nd 18:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the notice; seems he was hit by an autoblock. --Chris (talk) 18:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Block Lifted
Gracias, I will go onto to make constructive edits as User:The_Schwantz. --71.197.196.45 18:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Again Thank you. --The Schwnatz 18:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. --Chris (talk) 18:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

César Virata and Ramón Magsaysay, Jr.
Hi, this is a request to move César Virata and Ramón Magsaysay, Jr. to Cesar Virata and Ramon Magsaysay, Jr., respectively. -- The SunKing  12:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. --Chris (talk) 12:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Book cover copyright
Actually, fair use of anything (including book cover art) is specifically not strictly defined by copyright law. There's no, ("Book discussion is ok, but displaying of cover art is not.") in the law because its writers did not want to artifically limit fair use with any short-sighted restrictions.

I'd say that a strong claim for use of the Cthulhu book cover art could be made under the educational clause of fair use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.2.62.79 (talk • contribs)

User:TheM62Manchester
Hi; I'm a friend of this user, and I can definitely confirm he's not a vandal, or a WoW sockpuppet (I've blocked WoW on my MediaWiki about 10 times now!!). I know him in real life, and I can confirm this - I just spoke to him today.

Can you unblock his IP address - - if it's blocked, it cuts off Southport. Thanks, Claire marsh 14:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and restore his user/user talk pages, they shouldn't have been deleted, as he was a legitimate contributor. Thanks, Claire marsh 14:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Please speak with the blocking admin, User:Cyde. --Chris (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Trash Money
i am sorry, i am a new user, but can you point out exactly what was wrong with this article? i could not see anything wrong with it myself, just an informative article about a band. sorry to be a pain asking, i just wondered before i wasted my time making them another page. cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Endlessspiral (talk • contribs)


 * The article did not assert how or why the band is notable, which makes it a candidate for speedy deletion per CSD A7. --Chris (talk) 14:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)