User talk:Daniel/Archive/15

Not like I've been stalking you or anything, but...
I just came to your talkpage and noticed you've hit the big 10K - congratulations! For all your hard work, I present you this shrub(bery). Good luck with the arbcom elections, too! riana_dzasta 04:51, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Cheers! I've always wanted to be honoured like the Knights Who 'Till Recently Said Ni :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 04:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way Daniel (and I swear the previous message wasn't just buttering you up for this), if you have time, would you mind reviewing me again? It's been a while since the last one, and some people have been suggesting I should run for adminship, so I'd like some opinions from people before I jump headlong into anything. Take your time, it's not a big deal. Thanks again! riana_dzasta 05:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look. First, I have to review your contribs :) Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ta very much! riana_dzasta 05:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Done :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, Daniel, you're a champion :) I've responded to your concerns on the editor review, if you are interested. And eek, I should have moved the image myself. Thanks again for the input, it's much appreciated! riana_dzasta 05:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problems :) Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Australian collaboration of the fortnight
Hi. You voted for United States-Australia relations for WP:ACOTF. It has been selected, so please help to improve the article in any way you can. Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 13:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Will do. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Football AID 12 November – 19 November
Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week. Central Coast Mariners FC has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

(Untitled)
Hi Daniel, Re the Just What Is It that Makes Today's Homes So Different, So Appealing? site, it keeps getting stubbed by people who nothing about the subject matter so rather than spend countless hours trying to get the truth out to the public it seems better for us to hold off and wait until the art world catches up and responds in due course.ottex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottex (talk • contribs)
 * I agree with them. Please source your additions, per WP:V and WP:RS. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Altered Comment
By the way, I noticed you altered your comment on Walton monarchist89's recently-closed RfA, citing that it appeared someone had changed your comment. However, that was your original comment. --  tariq abjotu  11:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm...that's weird. I would have sworn I had said something along the lines of "consider this RfA" as opposed to "support this RfA". However, the diffs don't lie, so I guess I mustn't have... Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Userpage help!
Hey, I was planning to have something on my userpage on Wikipedia and the Rare Witch Wiki Project similar to your header. Could you give me the source code or tell me how to make something like it. Thanks! -- Andre ( Talk) 19:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * User:Daniel.Bryant/Sandbox/8 :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 21:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Banning User:NisarKand
After continued racist remarks as well as vandalism (his edits cannot be considered "good faith" anymore), I believe that banning NisarKand, especially after his most recent racist attacks (calling an entire ethnic group "rats" as well as openly taking pride in the actions of the Taliban; User:Golbez reverted his latest racist comment ), would be the best solution. In fact, this is not only my opinion, but also that of User:Sikandarji, an academic at Oxford University who is a specialist in the fields that have been under POVish attack by NisarKand.

What are the steps to such an action? And what are your views in this regard? Tājik 22:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I would suggest WP:PAIN for the racist remarks in the short-term, and WP:RFC for the general disruptive behaviour. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I mentioned you in an RfC
Hey there. I have mentioned you in an RfC that I have filed. Could you possibly read over it and take a look? Thanks! :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 22:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not sure whether this is one that I want to get fully involved in. I'll monitor the situation, and add my input if needed. Watchlisted for now. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 13th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Missed one
Thanks. -Will Beback 08:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problems. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 09:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks also for the "SockpuppetCheckuser" adjustment. I had it on my to-do list to go back and change those, but I see you've handled it. Cheers, -Will Beback 10:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ditto my last comment :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 10:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Solicitation
Please do not solicit other users' opinion on an Articles for Deletion debate, as you did here.        It is considered canvassing, and you can be blocked for it. As such, the AfD debate in question may be voided because of these actions. Please do not do it again - repeat attempts at creating a false sense of concensus may end up with you being blocked. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 22:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're misinterpreting: all of these people were voters on the previous AFD in question and the AFD I was directing them to was clearly created in bad faith. I also noted it on WP:ANI to request Speedy Keep as you no doubt noticed. RunedChozo 22:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's still solicitation, as I noticed you didn't notify everyone, rather only those who agreed with your opinion. So no, I'm not misinterpreting. Notify everyone, or notify no-one at all. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 22:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Heh
Since you were amused by the shrubbery, you might find this amusing as well. DS 00:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

James Hol
Daniel, I noticed this user was accusing me of rubbish, that I don't understand. Could you please check this out. James Hol has also vandalized my user page, check it out Kelvin Williams.

Could you please fix this probalem for me Kelvin Williams 01:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Indefinitely blocked, especially after this. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 04:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Signature
I changed it again and guess what? Dfrg.msc adopted me. Yay! Drizzt J  a m  o  03:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Good for you :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Thanks for the note. However, I'm not very active user here, so I'm not gonna waste my time going through all the formal procedures and so on. I suppose vandalism is a thing which doesn't require lots of formalities to fight with. My user page is a subject to vandalism on purpose, that's clear, you may just look to the history. User vandalizing it has dynamic IP adress or maybe uses proxy, so blocking is not a proper solution. All I ask is to lock that page. Otherwise I will be forced to delete my account (don't even know if that's possible :) ). Please don't get me wrong and thanks again :) --Windom 07:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Lock which page? If it's your userpage, I'll get someone to do it for you. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 07:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you very much, Daniel :) --Windom 08:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe its the fact it's 4 am, or maybe I'm just bored but

 * No way! /me eats, IRC style! Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 09:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

User:68.52.206.175
No worries, I dont think protection is necessary yet but absolutely let me know  Glen  03:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. However, if he/she finds an open proxy/reassigns IP addresses and resumes the behaviour, it will become needed. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Happyisgay
Should I continue putting the sockpuppet notice back up or not? -WarthogDemon 03:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe not... Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 04:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * O.o Maybe I'll just let you handle it. I've been confused on 3RR as of late anyways (with the removal of the wr templates and all...) -WarthogDemon 04:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * We reached a solution :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 04:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's good. This was getting confusing. oO -WarthogDemon 04:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Malformed RFCU
There is a request on the IP check subpage that looks like it should be formatted as a regular check (and in any case should not have been posted on the subpage). It's midnight here and I need to finish up another problem and get off for the night. Thatcher131 04:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Will do. Responded on Essjay's page re: the DougH check. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 04:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Sockpuppets are Tintin1107 (talk • contribs) and Deepujoseph (talk • contribs), and the possible sockpuppeteers below. on Requests for checkuser/IP check subpage. Thatcher131 05:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, the subpage. I'll hop to it. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser Policy
I saw your response to a checkuser request, and I believe it is in accordance with the checkuser policy. I would like to know whether the same policy was followed when this checkuser was conducted on the user who has placed this request now. My interest is just academic and I am just curious to know whether there are exceptions to this policy.  Dakshayani  തമ്പുരാട്ടി   09:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, the same policy was followed, and the exception was procedure-based and not policy-based. Diffs are added to demonstrate to the editors with the checkuser tool that abuse occured; if a editors with the checkuser tool finds abusive editing occuring, there is no need to list the diffs, because there is no need to prove to themselves that abuse occured. So, yes it was followed, and no, that wasn't an exception to policy. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 10:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thankyou. What about the indicators?  Something like "The following are all the same person" is acceptable?  If an editor with  the checkuser tool conducts one check sue motto, is (s)he supposed to declare the result in full.  That is, even if some users are not related, is (s)he supposed declare that as well. Dakshayani   തമ്പുരാട്ടി   10:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Because that isn't explicitly set out in the Checkuser policy, I as a clerk am in no position to interpret it. You'd be better to ask a checkuser (see Special:Listusers/checkuser), especially an active one (see which checkusers are active at WP:RFCU). Sorry, and cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 10:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC) (By the way, I noted your edit summary, which I suspect was meant to refer to mine - the addition of "bad" by me was a typo - I meant to write "dab", which means "disambiguify" (see WP:ESL)
 * It was indeed meant to refer to your "bad", which I took as the usual wikipedian response. Since you did not mean it, please consider my edit summery as cancelled. Dakshayani   തമ്പുരാട്ടി   10:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Dakshayani, the rules and guidelines on the WP:RFCU page are intended to help the checkusers determine which cases are both important enough to spend time on and serious enough to warrant making a check. However, the checkuser admins have the discretion to run checks on their own when they encounter a situation that deserves it, and in fact most checkuser activity is not in response to public requests but arise out of the fact that the checkusers are also arbitrators or bureaucrats who deal with various forms of disruption on a daily basis. If you have a concern about a particular check, really the only person who can answer you is the person who ran the check. In the case you cited, there was ongoing disruption of an AFD, and no IPs were disclosed, so it seems ok, but the only person who can really answer is Dmcdevit. Thatcher131 12:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Exactly. For a specific answer in this case, is the best to ask. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Arbcom Elections
You're a good editor. Good luck with the elections; I will be voting for you. BhaiSaab talk 17:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser
I'd like to implement checkuser on my own personal wiki. Do you know where I can find instructions on how to do that? I've found the code on meta, but no instructions. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 20:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * m:Help:CheckUser is the only place I can think of. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser Formating
Just curious, am I not formating the checkusers properly. Thanks. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 03:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * and are making some large changes to the process at the moment. Maybe ask them - I'm going to wait 'till they finish before inspecting the changes. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not changing anything, and Essjay was just changing the location of the page where pending requests are listed.  TDC's request in the DU case looks fine. Thatcher131 12:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Re:Primetime, there is a discussion on Dmcdevit's talk page with Will Beback that seems to address the concerns raised. Thatcher131 12:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, no problems :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 12:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

NotAWeasel
Thank you for reporting the continuation of gross behavior by this user. I was offline at that time, but Netsnipe blocked him for a week and warned him that next time he might get an indef block. I watchlisted his talk page and will effectively block him indef if he continues in this manner after the block expires. Once again, thanks. Regards.-- Hús  ö  nd  15:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, cheers. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 20:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for Formatting My Checkuser Report Correctly
Hello Daniel.Bryant, I noticed you corrected some of my formatting mistakes in my checkuser report. I must apologize for my novice, I'm entirely new to the process of reporting a user this seriously (I am a vandal fighter and the farthest I have had to go is a report on AIV, an admin talk page, issuing a template, etc.)  Once again just wanted to say thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk)  20:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problems - that's my job :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 20:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Revert
of my userpage. That's the "Quebec Vandal" for you. -Royalguard11 (Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 04:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problems. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you ...
... for the barnstar! I appreciate all your work on the checkuser, etc. pages also, and I hope my comments over at the editor review were helpful to you. Regards, Newyorkbrad 09:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problems - your comments most certainly were helpful :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 10:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thanks for the congrats :) - I've replied to a WP:PAIN you submitted to - just an FYI :) M a rtinp23 01:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're approved to use NPWatcher. When you log into the program, wait a few second while it queries wikipedia before screaming at your PC for crashing (unless you see an error, of course).  Please give me any feature requests, bugs, etc.  Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the appliction page to see if I've made a new release.  Finally, enjoy! M a rtinp23 01:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC) PS - I'm going to make this message into a template now :P
 * /me watches the new pages :) Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 09:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * heh! New release - please download from the same link as before! Thanks M a rtinp23 20:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Creation
In amm trying to created an article and you keep deleting it, why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmesowhatofit (talk • contribs) 02:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Answered on user page. M a rtinp23 02:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)