User talk:Daniel/Archive/45

3RR block
Hi there. Yes, this was a case where I was a little conflicted. I was involved at the start of the editing on Saturday night, but then was off to the botanical gardens for most of Sunday. When I got back and checked what was happening in the evening, I found that User:Auno3 was reverting each attempt, each time by a different editor, to remove the material they wanted to add to the article. It seemed such a straight-forward case that I blocked the user immediately. If it had been a borderline judgement call I would certainly have called in another admin, but this seemed such an egregious violation of both 3RR and consensus that I didn't think anybody would have made a different decision. Do you think I acted hastily here? I'd value your advice on how to act in similar circumstances in the future. All the best Tim Vickers 15:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * PS I notice, looking at the material added, that it is a copy-and-paste from several other Wikipedia articles without citing these articles as sources, so as well as being a 3RR violation, it also violates the GFDL. When this copy was made, the fourth paragraph was copied twice, and appears again as the seventh paragraph! Tim Vickers 23:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that your actions were fine given the circumstances (especially what you remarked in the 23:19 comment), although to preserve the peace in future, it may be best to ask an independant administrator. Some blocked users have a habit of trolling after being unblocked, so you might as well remove the one thing they could complain about :)  Daniel  00:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice, I'll do that. However, I suspect this won't be the last we see of this user, people on a self-proclaimed mission don't often see consensus as the best way to proceed. Tim Vickers 02:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * That would be a fairly accurate assertion, from prior experiences, indeed :) Cheers,  Daniel  10:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Jake Gyllenhaal
I notice that you were the last admin to protect Jake Gyllenhaal. You are probably unaware that Jake_Gyllenhaal contains an image at IfD, and that no-one has been able (or interested?) in completing that nomination by adding the information to the caption of the picture there.

If you were able to rectify this, I think it would be appreciated. Fiddle Faddle 21:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Done, thanks for letting me know.  Daniel  00:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalproof
Hi Daniel, just wondering why it takes so long to get approved for VandalProof? I would like to try it out. Kat, Queen of Typos 00:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Whenever I get half an hour spare to go through the list, basically. You're done now, with basically everyone else.  Daniel  10:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers
Cheers sir for this, I didn't even see what it was wiki-linking to. You're not bad your job! :-)  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  08:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problems :)  Daniel  08:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

VandalProof Decline?
Hey Daniel,

I've not received notification of whether I've been approved or not and my name has come off the list. I assume you've rejected me due to <250 Mainspace edits. You'll note it's quite close to that figure, I've been on Wikipedia for around a year, and I do consistent work in Counter-Vandalism and contribute to GA-Reviews and XFD Processes. Perhaps this could be reviewed again? Pursey 12:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies that you didn't recieve the message. You were the last listed user who I did, indeed, reject access for. If you believe I have made the incorrect decision, I suggest you contact one of the other moderators (listed on WP:VPRF) and see if they'll approve you. From my point of view, you've presented no substantial information to have me change my decision, and I endorse my original decision. Another moderator can review my initial decision, as it was made without any prejudice to further review.  Daniel  04:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, all good. I'll just keep using a different tool and reapply when I've met the criteria. Cheers! Pursey  Talk 17:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Societal collapse
I noted that you recently took an adminstrative action regarding User:Auno3. Please take a look at the current debate on inclusion of controversial material on Societal collapse. My recent suggestion that a compromise version be produced on the talk page was reverted by Auno3 without comment. Thank you for your time. GwenW 03:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * beat me to it (block log). Cheers,  Daniel  04:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

VP - No privileges found
Daniel, thank you for letting me know that I was accepted to use VandalProof; I am looking forward to using it. However, this evening when I downloaded the program and attempted to connect nothing happened. Under Prvileges it simply states that "No privileges found"; am I not acutally fully approved yet? Thanks for any assistance you can provide. Cheers! --Storm Rider (talk) 05:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Does your username appear in the "User"/"Username" box?  Daniel  07:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does, but down below password, under "Privileges" it states that no privileges found. --Storm Rider (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * it works now, thanks. --Storm Rider (talk) 21:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Good to hear :)  Daniel  00:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Mine does the same thing, but it wont fix itself. Dr ea my  \*/ !$!  00:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

VP Rollback problem
Thanx for accepting my VP application. I am usin Version 1.3.6 and havin some problem. When rolling back a vandal edit it rolls back the vandal edit but in the summary it shows "Reverted edit by XYZ" where XYZ is the name of user who edited b4 the vandal user....it also warns the wrong editor, it will warn the editor who made the edit before the one I'm rolling back. Many users are having this problem any idea how to fix this???? Gprince007 08:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Eek, that's not good at all. I've let the developer of the program,, know both on his talk and email. Not good at all...being merely a janitor and not a developer of the tool, I have no idea what's going on, as I haven't heard word of a fix for it yet. Cheers, and sorry,  Daniel  12:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks very much for your prompt and personal reply to my question. That was great.

Sardaka 10:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No problems.  Daniel  12:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Photos for 1999 Sydney hailstorm
Hi! First of all, great work with the article! I do recall taking photos of my street covered with hails, however I wasn't sure if that was in 1999. However these photos are of extremely poor quality (taken with a phone camera back then....you can imagine how poor quality it is). Sorry I'm unable to help. Keep up with the great work! --Pikablu0530 12:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries - if you know anyone who has photos, please whack them over the head and get them to give them to you to upload :) Cheers,  Daniel  12:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Sysop bit granted ...
... for three months. Well done, indeed :) - A l is o n  ☺ 17:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Time to delete some stuff and edit some MediaWiki pages :)  Daniel  00:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yayy!! Delete the mainpage and block Ji ... oh, wait! :) - A l is o n  ☺ 01:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey Daniel!
Hey Dan! haven't talked to you in a while! How have you been? I have been following the great progress of the Mariners on your great page (which has also progressed greatly with its featured article status!). Congratualtions with your achievement! Are you working on anything interesting in terms of Football at the moment? Hope to hear from you soon and hope your knee gets better! Drizzt  Ja  mo  23:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much :) It's very good to see the Mariners doing well - Nik and Sash are on fire, and Kwas isn't doing too badly either. With regards to my current editing, I'm writing User:Daniel/Sandbox/1999 Sydney hailstorm - if you have any pictures, it'd be much appreciated :) Cheers, and good to see you again,  Daniel  00:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
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. R Delivery Bot 03:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

pretend bot?
Since you are a member of BAG, I have a question for you. I came across the user whose edit summaries seem to claim that he/she is a bot. However, this username doesn't include "bot", nor is there any other information besides edit summaries. I think this is someone either pretending to be a bot, or someone who saw an interwiki bot's edit summaries and tried to copy it (I don't think this user is really a bot). How do you deal with such a situation? Lisatwo 13:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * See my comment on User talk:Vancho laifa. Interwiki links are done via pywikipedia, and this most certainly wasn't pywiki-based. I'll be happy to unblock if/when clarification/approval comes through, but until then, it's better to play it safe - something just doesn't seem right, unfortunately.  Daniel  01:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Bad deletion
I believe you made a mistake in deleting Danby (appliance company). The deletion justification is that it did not meet notability requirements, but a quick google search would've confirmed that it does. Please review it. Edrigu 04:17, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:CSD reads "The article did not assert notability". The article asserted absolutely none of this claimed "notability", in that the only thing that could be considered an assertipon was "major Canadian household appliance company", which is a fantastic example of a weasel word. So, I've reviewed it, and I uphold my original deletion on the above basis. The article  asserted  (key word) no notability. If you wish to contest this further, go to deletion review.  Daniel  05:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

To my friend in red and white
This message is entirely implied. --Michael Billington (talk) 07:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You could have stayed away from your computer long enough to forget your Wikipedia password...*grumbles*...  Daniel  07:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * And for those of you who don't understand what Michael is talking about and hence don't understand the context of my reply: my comment was sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek humour.  Daniel  08:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Have pity and lose Collingwood... please? --DarkFalls talk 07:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Given they're playing Geelong, that's not such a huge demand :)  Daniel  07:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Mark's going to kill that Collingwood supporter... ever since West Coast lost :) --DarkFalls talk 07:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Re. VP
Hey there,

I'm having some internet issues. Could you restore access to the user Levine2112 for VandalProof (don't mark the edit minor :P). (By the way, that involves just removing the ': under abuse review' from the end of his name). Cheers, A le_Jrb talk  14:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC) - VP Dev
 * Done, see this. Cheers,  Daniel  04:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Problem
Hi Daniel. I wonder if you can help me with a little problem I've been having. Another editor, TheRingess, has been following me around ever since I started writing articles, which has been for six months. I've done five articles and she has turned up at five out of five, the minute I finished writing them.

Now, I've been advised that it's normal for this to happen sometimes, if an editor has done a "problem edit" and the others think they have to keep an eye on him. That's ok, I have no problem with that, but it's been going on for six months and I think it's time for it to stop. I know the ropes now and I don't think anyone has to keep an eye on me anymore. It's got to the point where I'm looking over my shoulder all the time. If I want to write a new article, I have to ask myself how TR will react to it, because I know she'll turn up five minutes later. In one case, she turned up immediately and listed the article for deletion immediately, without bothering to discuss the problems with me, so it's not just an academic matter.

A couple of days ago I left her a good faith message, asking her to stop it, but she just deleted the message without replying. I'm getting nowhere with her. I just want someone to get her off my back. I don't need to be supervised anymore. She won't listen to me; maybe she'll listen to you.

Sorry to take up so much of your time with this lengthy message.

Sardaka 09:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Firstly, my apologies for the delay in responding - I've been a tad busy in real life, unfortunately.
 * I do notice that this user has no intention whatsoever of discussing the issues at hand. Naturally, this limits any possible dispute resolution attempts. I haven't had a chance to investigate this fully, due to my busy timetable at the moment, but my preliminary look at the situation seems to be that your concerns may be fully justified. Reading WP:HA, which you paraphrase above, it is permissable to follow users around if they're editing disruptively, which quite clearly isn't the case (if it was, the other user must be engaged in dialogue about your 'disruption', but from the previously-linked edit that obviously isn't occuring).
 * As this user obviously isn't going to respond to good faith discussion, I strongly suggest you file a user conduct request for comment, to solicit further input from others with the hope of having the dispute resolved and the behaviour stopped through a consensus of editors. Given you have tried and failed to resolve the dispute (the removed messages) and two users believe that there is an unresolvable problem that exists (you, and more-than-likely myself from what I saw in my preliminary look-about), the requirements for an RfC to proceed are met.
 * If you do go down this road, clearly set out all evidence of the stalking so that others can investigate and offer an opinion or endorsement on the current situation, and hopefully reach a consensus. If you do file an RfC, please feel free to leave me a note so that I can look over the evidence and possibly endorse the need for the RfC, per this comment. Cheers,  Daniel  07:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I for one, as someone who has been peripherally involved in this matter, will not endorse such an RFC. I also doubt you would, were you fully aware of the situation, Daniel. Sardaka has been complaining about the TheRingess's conduct since May 10 and has continued to do so on numerous occasions. That's also exactly the reason why TheRingess has stopped responding to Sardaka's messages. This matter should have ended in May, but Sardaka rather ignores the judgement of about a dozen experienced editors. Obviously, Sardaka has now forum shopped his way to your talk page (after thrice at ANI, once at the village pump, once at Medcab, once at Surfdude001's talk page, a few times on Addhoc's talk page, a whole lot of discussion with me, etc. etc.). I don't know how many more times Sardaka (whom I think is a fine contributor beside this matter) needs to hear TheRingess was not out of line (way back in March and April) in their "dispute", but apparently it's still not enough. Anyway, feel free to investigate this very trivial matter and reach your own conclusions.--Atlan (talk) 17:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * "(way back in March and April)" — are you saying that all elements of "stalking" stopped back then, but Sardaka continues to pursue it akin to beating a dead horse?  Daniel  23:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, TheRingess is now so weary of this matter, that he avoids any and all contact with Sardaka, which includes editing the same articles. Whatever merit Sardaka's claims had back then, they certainly don't have any right now.--Atlan (talk) 04:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If Sardaka can show evidence that it's still occuring, then I think an RfC is applicable. My preliminary investigation focused around the time period you mentioned, so I was hoping that any presentation of evidence would show that it is still an issue. Sardaka, do you have diffs/links to recent behaviour?  Daniel  04:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Cosmic Nomads deletion
To further support my query regarding the deletion of Cosmic Nomads I give you this information: Cosmic Nomads are listed in Chris Spencer's Who's who of Australian rock n roll. The founding member - Ray Vanderby aged 54 has been playing since he was 12 years of age. He has released 4 new age albums, 3 blues albums and various singles. He has appeared on Countdown Revolution and MTV and now Cosmic Nomads are in the studio recording their 3rd album.

Raymond Henry Vanderby was born in Holland and is now based in Melbourne Australia. Hammond organist, composer, professional musician. He was the youngest semi-professional organist in Australia at age 12. A qualified piano tuner and award winning songwriter, Ray was a sought after side man and has toured and recorded with some of Australia's top stars: Marcia Hines, Doug Parkinson, John English, Steve Wright, Blackfeather,John Paul Young, Band of Light. He is the founding member of Australian progressive rock band Cosmic Nomads.

Cosmic Nomads is a 5-piece progressive rock band based in Melbourne,Australia. The band was originally formed in Sydney in 2003 by Hammond organist, singer, award winning composer Ray Vanderby, who in 1991 won the WROC/BMG Australian National Song writing competition out of 2,500 entries.

Please reconsider your decision to have this page deleted and advise what I should do now to have the page reinstated.

Hetha Griff 01:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Deletion review/Log/2007 September 14. The community will decide.  Daniel  04:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Melt the clouds of sin and sadness, drive the dark of doubt away!


has wished you well! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the WikiJoy by sharing the joy someone else, Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Marlith  T / C  04:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
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. R Delivery Bot 20:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Question
I am unlogged user:PIO for technical problem and my question is in connection with article Istrian exodus: what does serve mediation or arbitration? You can discuss with administrator user:Riana who knows dispute for to focus the problem. Regards and best wishes. PIO, 23:20 12 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.92.128 (talk) 23:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You'd be better to discuss anything with Riana, as I can't work out the situation or what you're asking here. Sorry,  Daniel  04:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

learning disabled
Re. : "Retard" is a derogatory term. Asking someone not to use it as a derogatory term is the equivalent of asking someone not to use "knucklehead" as a derogatory term. RedSpruce 00:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The term is used to describe people who have some form of deficiency. By using it to describe vandals etc. in a derogatory way is insulting to those people who are unfortunate enough to suffer from some form of retardation.  Daniel  00:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Message from Thedjatclubrock
I removed : Redirect to Bulbapedia. Er, no, I mean Delete and replaced it with Delete to be more straight forward on the editor's answer. Sorry for any confusion, Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 00:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC).
 * Why, though? It is hardly confusing, especially not to the point of a) editing another users' comments and b) editing an archive.  Daniel  00:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Just did it to be more straight forward. Sorry again, Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 01:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC).
 * Please don't edit other people's comments, as a general rule. I see someone has already reverted your change, so I figure that this is resolved. Thanks,  Daniel  01:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Your request
Thatcher131 01:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Thatcher.  Daniel  04:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Betacommand's Rfa
Hi Daniel, thankyou for your note. I was going to, but my mother caught me to do an errand and...couldn't get my hands on it. Anyways, thanks for your comment! Cheers, --Hirohisat Kiwi 04:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see - I was writing the message as you became active again (I thought you must have forgotten given the gap between 03:56 and 04:22). Cheers,  Daniel  04:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Article you deleted
Hi Daniel. Recently, Xinoehpoel was deleted, per this AfD. The rational behind the AfD seemed to be a lack of WP:RS. However, I noticed that there is a New York Times article on the subject | here (granted, it's in the archive, but since I have uni access, I can quote from it if need be). I was wondering if you would consider undeleting the article so that I can see if I can improve it so that it meets WP:N/WP:V/WP:RS. Thanks much, --B figura (talk) 16:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * PS, from what I can see, the mentions in the article of the subject do not appear to be trivial. Best, --B <font color="Blue">figura (talk) 16:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I can undelete it and move it to a user sandbox of yours, so you can work on improving it to counter the issues raised at the AfD. If you want me to do this, please just note so here and I will as soon as possible. Please note that you cannot move it back into the mainspace unless you either a) consult me (as closer) to ensure that the issues which resulted in its' deletion are fixed, and I will amend my close to the discussion as required, or b) get the approval of the community at WP:DRV. Cheers,  Daniel  04:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

A Small Question....
I was just wondering, I noticed that you do most of the accepting/declining for VandalProof. How often do you go through the list? That's all. Thanks! —Signed by KoЯn  fan71 My TalkSign Here! 00:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Can I but in? I've signed up for VP, and would really like to use it soon. Is it possible for other admins to add me to the approved list? Thanks. Phgao 13:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Kornfan71: When I'm not busy and have access to my main computer (ie. not now, unfortunately).
 * Phgao: No, the software approvals process was written to only acknowledge certain people's additions.
 * Because I don't have access to my copy of VP and am very busy at the moment, can I please suggest that you contact someone who's active at User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof? My hands are tied at the moment. Cheers,  Daniel  04:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)