User talk:Dylan620/Archives/2009/March

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #24
Jason Rees (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Cookie!


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

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

 - down  load  |  sign!  02:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
–Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: RfA
I thank you for your time, and respect your opinion, but whilst I concur that that comment was unnecessary and not particularly constructive (although wouldn't have at the time), I don't see it as being the core of whether or not I should be able to serve the community as an administrator. For the record, the comment was intended to lighten the mood, and close the conversation on a better note than the tones which it had been continuing in. Since the whole point of the conversation beforehand had been that Biblo's attempt at humour had gone pear-shaped, I guess I should have known better than to use humour to try and bring a smile to Pedro's face. I do, however, resent that it was interpreted as being contumelious - my intentions were certainly not veering towards that direction. RfA is all about whether the community feels I am ready, and I trust the community not to think of me as an unsuitable candidate simply for making a well-intentioned comment that rubbed the wrong way. Thanks again, &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 12:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Evidence
Would you like me to provide you with some of the diffs concerning EMG's incivility and personal attacks?—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  22:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Incivility/Personal attacks
As a note, just to make sure things are crystal clear, it states on WP:NPA that: accustations which do not cite evidence, such as in the form of diffs, can be considered personal attacks.

Time and time again I told this editor to back up his claims, and either he reverted me without a response, or refused to.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  23:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * What a complete and utter joke! Not once but twice this admin has broken policy/(bottom of page)Disapointing how you can persistently abuse your powers and not even have the slightest bit of guilt in doing so. Almost seems as if you enjoy it. Disapointing. I would be ashamed but I guess we are completely different people. El Machete Guerrero


 * No it does not, let me inform you to read WP:SOCK as you obviously are clueless. El Machete - Calling another editor clueless - Incivility/personal attack.


 * Calling an administrator's reasons for doing something rediculous, not to mention asserting that a long-standing admin either didn't know policy, or chose not to follow it


 * Telling me(dae) that I was breaking policy without citing any concrete evidence


 * Lying about what he did in the above diff


 * Again lying about what he did in the diff above this one, along with lying how I am breaking policy(as can quite clearly be seen, he did say I was in the above diff(sorry if I'm being redundant))


 * Complete unfounded claim that I am acting in/have blind rage


 * Claiming that I am wikistalking, without any diff/evidence to support his claims - Wikistalking is following around another editor's edits and reverting them, inserting one's self into conflicts the editor is having, etc. There was no evidence supplied to support this.


 * Claiming personal attack when I was just citing the evidence supplied by the CU


 * Claiming attacks from others without evidence


 * Claiming incivilty without evidence


 * Again claiming incivilty of others without evidence


 * Telling me I'm in denial, still with no evidence


 * Again making claims without evidence


 * Claiming that I(Dae) am knowlingly breaking policy


 * Suggesting admins use their powers based on self-interest(check the bottom of the diff


 * Yet again, claims of wikistalking and harassment without citing evidence


 * The user refusing to back up any of his claims


 * Calling another admin's edits nonsense

Misleading edit summaries

 * Rm Harassment This edit was actually not reverting harassment, but was removing a message placed by an admin, along with a sockpuppeteer template placed by an admin.


 * removing attack template - In actuality, this template was not an attack template, and was the same one an admin had previously added after CU found the user to be using multiple accounts, to what appeared to be avoid scruiteny.

Claimed evidence/others

 * In this diff, the editor claims to have evidence backing up his arguments. The diff he presents is in fact me adding a confirmed sock template.

That is all for now.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  23:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that this edit sparked the original ANi thread that resulted in El Machete Guerrero's 72 hour block for 18RR. Notice that the IP accuses El Machete Guerrero of being an employee of Machete Records, i.e. of having a conflict of interest. If it turns out that this editor does have a COI (and I appreciate that this may never be satisfactorily proven) then it throws into doubt the value of their earlier contributions, which is something to be weighed when considering any unblock request (or indeed a community ban). Not exactly evidence but surely relevant, so I'm posting it here for inclusion. Thanks for volunteering to collect this stuff! Regards,   S HEFFIELD S TEEL TALK 15:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! (Pretty easy to do this when I want to. :)) &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  20:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the day, man. Now I have three to worry about...  bibliomaniac 1  5  00:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Editing habits, redux
Dylan, we need to have a chat. Your contribution history is a little disturbing. You had several editors and admins, including myself, tell you at the beginning of January that you needed to up your mainspace participation. As near as I can tell, you took a break for a large part of January, but then came back, and still made no mainspace contribution. You "retired" in early February, then came back a short while later. You made a large group of mainspace edits over three days in late February, now over a month ago; while these were good, they were little more than automated Twinkling. Since then, you have made a grand total of three edits in the mainspace. Yet now you are not only requesting access to the account creation tool, but creating yet another Wikipedian Day collection? We have enough of those as it is; what makes you think it would be a good idea to make another? With all due respect, I think you should reconsider your activities here; you need to be focusing on building an encyclopedia. Glass  Cobra  15:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * GC, I just don't feel capable of building an encyclopedia. I guess I'm just really not one for building articles; I'd like to help out in other areas. Deep down, I'm more of a WP:GNOME. FWIW, that retirement was meant to be for real, but my addiction to Wikipedia brought me back a lot sooner than originally planned. &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  19:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see you gnoming much of anything right now, except maybe the list of banned users. Right now, you're just posting at the dramaboards and giving arbitrary honors, neither of which we need more of, to be quite frank. Gnoming, as per the definition that you linked, involves working on articles. Glass  Cobra  20:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to return to vandal fighting. &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  20:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Jiggley
Looks like we both warned him about vandalising your userpage at the same time :} Jason Rees (talk) 00:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed it has been a while since we last spoke, by the way, if your looking for an easy cyclone article to write anytime soon. You would be most welcome to help with Hurricane Camile which is being developed in a "Project sandbox" by several members of the project including myself, and Hurricanehink. If you wish to help out pick a section and try and expand it using reliable sources like the Tropical Cyclone Report issued on Camille. Jason Rees (talk) 01:44, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

RE: ACC
It means what it says: You must be approved for access before you can use it. We have rather stringent requirements for users to be accepted, along the lines of 1000+ edits and at the very least about 6 months of experience on Wikipedia, although usually we look for more than 6 months because we don't really need many more people. However, these requirements are not set in stone, and all requests are subject to the personal review of a tool administrator (for the same reason: Because we aren't exactly in need of more help). But, I will review all current requests later this evening when I can get to my home computer, and you will be denied/approved then. In the meantime, you should read the ACC guide to know what to expect if you are approved. Please note that your request is already a little shaky, though, based on GlassCobra's comments here. -- FastLizard4SOCK (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

-- FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 05:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

-- FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 06:18, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Re!
Thanks! Good to know someone appreciates my work. Cheers! Mario 1987  15:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Axmann
Regarding I'm pretty sure you meant someone in that conversation other than me. JoshuaZ (talk) 17:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I mean, I wasn't endorsing the block so I'm confused by your statement that you agree with both Wikidemon and me. JoshuaZ (talk) 18:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah. I understand now. JoshuaZ (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Axmann8...
...says his first name is Dylan. If he was named for Bob Dylan, and is a right-winger, no wonder he's got such a bad attitude. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's the evidence: And if you live in Indiana, you might want to consider either moving or adding a security system. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Massachusetts is like No Man's Land for right wingers. New England in general, with the possible exception of New Hampshire, is becoming Liberal Utopia. But he's in the state that produced Dan Quayle. Oy. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Come to think of it, wasn't the Massachusetts city of Fall River the location of a famous ax murder? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Always glad to be of service, and comfort. 0:) So, do you know the ca.1979 film, Animal House? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Heck, I even know the 60ish song| about it. PhGustaf (talk) 01:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Great! This was in reference to a sleeper account, Chip Douglas, which reminded me of Chip Diller (Kevin Bacon), a pledge to the straight-laced fraternity composed of "Greggie, Douggie, and some of the other Hitler youth." Artur Axmann was the head of the real Hitler Youth. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 02:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: WP:HUG
Sorry, yeah; I was away. It's not really my decision, but sure, why not! – Juliancolton  | Talk 02:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it does kinda look like his... *whistles innocently* – Juliancolton  | Talk 02:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Help!
I'm having trouble with Huggle. I have it downloaded, but when I try to use it, it can't connect to the server. Does anyone have any ideas how I can fix this? &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  17:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Your best bet is to ask at WT:HUG. // roux   17:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As I'm here, may I suggest that if you're using Vista you run as administrator? I had the same problem. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 17:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

ACC Requests
You've recently marked requests 25977 and 25985 as 'Too Similar.' However according to the current guidelines if the account is older then one year, and have not made an edit in over a year, they can be created by a user with the accountcreator flag. This is why the tool automaticaly seperates them into 'Open requests' and 'Flagged user required.' Not having the accountcreator right, you should limit yourself to the Open requests, and leave the rest to those who can handle them. I've reinstated you for the time being, please be more careful in the future. Q T C 22:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey Dylan
Welcome to ACC! I checked my recent accounts and SQLbot has done its job fine - so the bot is up. There is about a ten minute lag between creating the account and the bot posting the welcome template (maybe to give you time to change your mind?). When the bot is busy it could be a little longer. I checked out some of your accounts and I think you are just going too fast for the bot! You've been tagging those pages within a few minutes of creation. Just wait 10-15 minutes and SQLbot should do it's job. You've made a great start on ACC in the last few days. Remember, if you get any tricky decisions, don't be shy of asking for help. Or you can release a request, let someone else handle it and watch what they do - that's how everyone learns :) There's also an IRC channel for the ACC team at :irc://freenode/wikipedia-en-accounts This is a great place to get quick help and advice on dealing with requests. Let me know if you have any more questions. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

More help, please
This time around, I'd prefer if a trusted ACC user would help me here. I'm currently trying to deal with a request at WP:ACC. The IP address has made 10 previous applications, yet the e-mail address changes each time. And it's an AOL IP. Should I continue to try to handle the request myself, or should I defer to admins? &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  20:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll find someone who can help, and send 'em over.  Chzz  ►  20:49, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and drop the IP; I can take care of it. In addition, consider using the IRC channel if you want to work with the Account Creation; it is much more efficient to talk to you that way. 20:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NuclearWarfare (talk • contribs)


 * You're too late; got to it first. :P &rarr; Dyl  @  n  620  20:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a note in the site notice of ACC explaining what to do for AOL IPs. (Specifically: "Note:AOL proxies are neither the true requesting IP nor the IP that shows up when they edit Wikipedia. There is currently no way for the toolserver to determine the correct IP.") Basically you should create it, which Backslash did. Prodego  talk  21:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Mitchazenia's Day
Thanks. I like the idea, and it was thoughtful. Thanks again. Mitchazenia : Chat   3 years and counting... 21:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/AlexiusHoratius
I noted this, and I am curious -- under what grounds should they be treated any differently from any other concern? He clearly has reasoning for his views, as demonstrated at WT:RFA, and his reasoning is just as valid as any else, even if I disagree with it (which I do). I don't see how your comment is constructive, there is no reason to act like his comments are any less valid than, say, "we need more administrators". &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 21:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * He's explained his position pretty well at WT:RFA. I still don't see how simply disagreeing with a candidate is a reason to think that their opinion is somehow invalid, though. &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 22:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Why are you just picking on Dylan? There are plenty of other users at plenty of other RfA's who have the same opinions/make the same comments as Dylan. Are you leaving them the same message?  iMatthew //  talk  //  22:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I am offended. My comment was not 'picking on' anyone, I was trying to understand Dylan's grounds for his statement. Assume good faith. &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 22:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you or didn't you leave this message for others with the same opinion?  iMatthew //  talk  //  22:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You already know the answer to that, but I fail to see how it is relevant. &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 22:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I got my answer.  iMatthew //  talk  //  22:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * For the record, I like Dylan, I think he does some good work and puts in good effort. I have no reason to pick on him, and nor would I want to. &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 22:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Dylan, if you feel I was picking on you, I assure you I wasn't, but if it came off as such I apologise. &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 22:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't feel like I was getting picked on. And even if I did, I would accept your apology. :) (Although, it did feel strange with that dispute between you and Matt; that is, comments after every few minutes when they're not directed at me.) &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  22:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wish that hadn't come about. That was more than likely merely fallout from something else which occurred between he and I, should be sorted now. :) &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 22:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)