User talk:ForestH2/May 19th, 2006-June 19th, 2006

There really never is a time
''There is really never a time where I can get into a conversation without hearing from you within a day. Is there some reason you keep getting into my conversations? I know conversation's are supposed to be more than two people if wanted or needed or if a user wants to say something, however I think were going over that which has made me decide to take a Wikibreak until next Wednesday and do something else. For instance you say: "It is good practice to leave useful edit summaries". Another admin tells me you should never remove vandalisim warnings plus, Apostrophe has got to control his use of edit summaries as you can see when he was first blocked. Bad use of edit summaries....Furthermore, if I really start thinking about it I might be leaving Wikipedia for good! ForestH2'' You know it seems as though I should quit...ForestH2 ''And....please see my user page for a better follow up. ForestH2''
 * Forest, I'm confused and somewhat saddened by this message. Firstly, I'm not too sure I understand your comments regarding User:Apostrophe. I am correct when I say that it is good practice to leave useful edit summaries, and you are correct in quoting another admin as saying that vandalism warnings should not be removed from talk pages. I'm not quite sure why you brought these points up. From what I can see from the block log Apostrophe never was "first blocked". I think you'll find that whilst his use of edit summaries is not perfect, he does use them some of the time and to be perfectly honest, even if he never used them I don't think that would ever be considered grounds for blocking in its own right and you certainly have no right to make such threats to him. As I pointed out above, if you really want to discuss things which could be considered a blockable offence, your seeming willingness to disrupt Wikipedia to proove a point to Apostrophe by continually reverting his change simply due to his lack of an edit summary is something which is far more likely to merit a block (see WP:POINT).
 * I'm not sure there's much to be gained from discussing this issue further. I'm sorry if you were annoyed by what you seem to consider my interfering in this matter but I would point out, that since both Apostrophe and Chris had posted at Wikiquette alerts and (allbeit wrongly) Requests for mediation and as an admin I felt it absolutely appropriate to intervene. You are mistaken in saying that you cannot "get into a conversation" without hearing from me "within a day". I have only ever intended to give my guidance in places where I have felt you are mistaken.
 * Please don't get so disheartened by all of this and accept the criticism. You have made many valuable contributions to Wikipedia, and I hope that after your break you will come back and continue to do so. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 13:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Your saying it's good practice to leave edit summaries. You are correct. It is not good practice to leave bad edit summaries. Please see Apostrophe's talk page where he had been blocked before for bad usage of edit summaries. This was a while ago. You'd have to go way back in the block log as I am sure you an other admin's block users/IP adresses 1,000 times a day or so. If he removes vandalisim warnings or decides to put some rather bad stuff in edit summaries. He gets warnings. Removing them....well. I was waiting for him to get his act together and actully put in a good edit summary which he rarely does. Chris and Apostrophe, I know posted to the Wikiquette alerts seemingly they did not know about there bad use of edit summaries. It is O.K if you get into my conversations.....However, in the last two major ones, with Touth and Apostrophe I have heard from you in so quite a while. Well I'm going to take a little time off this weekend I think making some edits and return on Monday instead. And why is there a rule called "You can only revert 3 edits once in a day" That seems to be a rule that....I don't know. It's O.K if you intended to give your guidance in the places where you felt I was mistaken. I'm going to come back after Monday while making several edits over the weekend. And I guess it's O.K to interfere with my conversations...and post new conversations so my knowledge of Wikipedia can get better on the talk page. I may just take a day off...I don't know what at the current time. ForestH2
 * Look... it is good practice to leave edit summaries. That said, not doing so is not a blockable offence. I see no evidence in the block log that User:Apostrophe has ever been blocked for not using edit summaries. I agree he should always use edit summaries — I [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Apostrophe&diff=53868254&oldid=53859824 told] him as much. I will not block him, or anyone else for not doing so, however.
 * If you're confused by the 3 revert rule, I suggest you read WP:3RR. It's basically there to prevent edit war-ing. I know we've been in contact over two issues lately, but regarding User:Touth I only wished to point out the innaccuracy in your advice to him that he could become an administrator after 100 edits. I gave such advice in good faith, not to belittle you. To be honest, I'm not really sure where this conversation is going, if you have any specific further comments regarding Apostrophe et al then please feel free to ask them. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 14:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * And it just got tiring have to play a game with Apostrophe's name. Where does a user report a supcious user to be banned? I know it's not where you can request a block. I would assume you know. Do you? Oh and about my name, RadioKirk says he was going to contact the software people and talk to them why my name was coming out like this: ~ForestH2 00:03 19 May 2006 (UTC)ForestH2 
 * You don't have to "play a game". Regarding User:Apostrophe's name, I presume your complaint is that he signs with an apostrophe symbol ' rather than writing his name out in full. To be honest, he's in his rights to do so, and it certainly doesn't make him a "suspicious user to be banned". If you do want to take the matter further, perhaps a good first step would be to post on the Administrators' noticeboard. Alternatively, you could file an RFC but I really think that's taking things too far. I've no idea about your name not correctly displaying, I'm afraid, you could ask about that at the noticeboard too, and see if anyone else knows. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 14:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please see my talk page. We still have a lot of not answered questions needing to be closed. ForestH2
 * I'm not too sure what you're referring to here... I can't see any unanswered questions to be closed. Feel free to highlight any to me, and I'll do my best to answer them. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 14:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

harrypotter template thing what goes at the bottom of the page
Well, as I remember I was a little startled when I saw it appear at the bottom of Snapes page first of all, but then I kinda got used to it. Its kinda too tall and not wide enough so it looks bad next to the current/present/next job holder box, so i do think someone might try a redesign so that these two look ok when placed together. But once you get used to it, it can be a useful way to flick between pages. Would be more useful if it had the principle characters on it as well. Someone did put them on, which i thought was handy, but then someone else took them off again.

So in answer to your question, not quite sure whether you think this would be good or bad, but yes, I rather do think it a good idea to have an arranged-to-be-as-small-as-possible version of this box on all the HP pages. Sandpiper 23:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there should really be two versions of the same thing, i think one should be used universally. I did notice a bit of disagreement from some other(s) as to having a more comprehensive template. I'm not really looking for a fight about it. As I said, I do think it would be nice if these tail end templates were all the same width. I don't know how this affects people editing with different wodth screens. Mine is 1150x850, but I presume we must assume some people have an 800x600 screen? Or not? No reason not to try mocking up something and see what people think. My difficulty, is how to reorganise it to make better use of the width, if it is made wider and not so high. On my screen the present table of books and films wastes a lot of space either side. Sandpiper 12:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you take this report to WP:ANI since it isn't simple vandalism. JoshuaZ 02:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking up for me
That anon has been a pain in my side for a few days now, because he put a bunch of, well, crap on some Asian celebrity's page and I reverted it via VandalProof. He, for some reason, thinks I am the king of Wiki (a title I'd actually enjoy having!) and is taking all of his wikirants out on me. --Zpb52 04:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Game
''Feeling Chatty? Yeah. Many people sign there name differently but going up to edit history. Seeing there's no Feeling Chatty clicking on the verisons to actully see wrote that message? That's a game. And it's a complete waste of my time. ForestH2''
 * Erm, actually he has an apostrophe symbol ' which links to his user page, "feeling chatty" is a link to his talk page. I don't consider that a game, it might not be ideal but I'm not inclined to pursue the matter. On a more positive note, I see you've fixed your signature which is good. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

''And please explain to 194.80.32.11 that you can have a wikibreak sign up there and still be editing. He keeps vandalizing my page by taking it off. ForestH2''
 * Have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:194.80.32.11&diff=54728713&oldid=54112201 left a message], and I see he's been blocked by another admin. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

User Page
''Is it O.K to have: "User's that I like, Users I don't like, Users I admire" etc....on your user page? I would think it would hurt ones of feeling if they showed up on the page and saw there name on the don't like list? ForestH2 (discuss''
 * Erm, plenty of people have "users I like/admire" etc, and I don't see any problems with that. I would agree with you however, that a "list of users I don't like" would not be a good thing to include. On a user's own user page I'm not sure about the extent to which it would break our rules, however. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Strange RfA behavior
ForestH2, I've noticed that you have been voting "support" (with no additional comments) on every single RfA that's gone up recently and sometimes you've been voting more than once for the same candidate. This is kind of strange, can you tell me what's going on? — GT 10:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * My suspicion, which your last response supports, was that you are indiscriminately voting support every time a new RfA pops up without regard to who is actually being nominated. Please don't do this. RfA's are a careful process where users who have researched and who have interacted with the nominee weigh in on his suitability for adminship. Assuming that anyone who shows up on the page should be made an admin is dangerous as there is no screening process for nominating users (and consequently some very UNsupportable candidates show up from time to time). In short you should only vote if you have enough knowledge of the candidate to have a good basis for your support/oppose vote. And when that is the case, you should not have problems with voting multiple times as you should remember how you voted for the candidate when you view his RfA. — GT 20:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, if that's the case then forgive my suspicion but I caught a stretch of edits that looked odd I guess. Like I said if you carefully consider your votes before doing them, you probably shouldn't have a problem with accidentally voting twice a lot. — GT 20:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

HBP Differences
Yup, sorry, I was just coming over to thank you for the suggestion but I got sidetracked… :-) --Fbv65 e del (discuss 22:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I haven't really put much effort into User:Fbv65edel/HBP Differences yet, so anything there definitely isn't perfect. Thanks for alerting me though -- I'll get around to changing it eventually. You can too, of course. A bit too tired right now… --Fbv65 e del (discuss 02:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

"Title" versus "tilde"
Just wanted to say thanks for helping in some recent issues with some editors. To avoid confusion, though, I wanted to make sure you take care with spelling, since t-i-t-l-e when you mean t-i-l-d-e can be confusing. Thanks again!  Radio Kirk   talk to me  00:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Loren Coleman
I think you have misunderstood me. I was complaining about the editor Loren Coleman not because he wrote about himself in irrelevant articles like Harry Potter, but because it seemed like he was using a serious encyclopedia to try to to promote himself, his websites and books. Have you looked at his contributions?

Consider his contributions to the Bigfoot-article:

"In 1999, Loren Coleman and Patrick Huyghe wrote their ground-breaking book, "The Field Guide to Bigfoot, Yeti, and Other Mystery Primates Worldwide" (republished in an updated edition in 2006 as "The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates"), which proposed a classification system based on the scientific model. Several eyewitness accounts from zoologists, anthropologists, wildlife biologists, law enforcement officers, and other credible citizens were assembled for the first time to create a solid foundation of testmonies across the spectrum for the cryptozoological reality of these hominoids.

2000s Loren Coleman's book, "Bigfoot! The True Story of Apes in America" summarized decades of the study of these cryptids, and pushed it forward by asking questions about the biological nature of the animals, their sexuality, their aggressive behavior, and focussed on the zoology versus whether or not they existed. This established a new way of scientifically examining the topic, versus debating it. Reported sightings of three giant human-like creatures in the Endau Rompin National Park in late 2005 led to the formation of an official Bigfoot-tracking team, appointed by the state's Chief Minister, Abdul Ghani Othman in January of 2006. "Bigfoot" fever struck Johor after three fishermen reported seeing the creatures and took a photograph of a footprint, which was printed in Malaysian newspapers. The Singapore Paranormal Investigators have also joined in the search. [25]"

Doesn´t this look like obvious self-promotion and self-advertisement to you? And I don´t think it´s suitable to say that your own books are "ground-breaking" on Wikipedia. It´s bad taste and an unbiased statement.

Or this contribution to the Orang Mawas-article:

"During 2005–2006, cryptozoologist Loren Coleman has been lecturing, appearing on television and radio talk shows, and writing extensively about the Malaysian Bigfoot or Mawas sightings and situation, which has dominated South Asian, American, and other media stories since December 2005. Coleman's weblog at Cryptomundo.com 1 has daily updates on the news being issued from Johor due to his contacts with many local researchers and newspeople in Malaysia. In May 2006, for example, Coleman announced through his blog that Dr. Chow has seen three of 11 photographs taken of the Mawas by a Malaysian, and a book will be forthcoming from Chow and others publishng these photographs. Coleman also obtained an exclusive interview with Harold Stephens who had conducted 1970s expeditions in Johor in pursuit of the then named Orang Dalam. Stephens gathered eyewitness accounts and found large footprints comparable with those being reported for the Johor Mawas in 2005–2006, but his pursuit of the creatures had largely been forgotten. Coleman included a short update on the Johor events in his new book, The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates with Patrick Huyghe (NY: Anomalist Books, 2006, ISBN 1-933665-12-2)."

While including good information too, it is also filled with what seems to me at least to be shameless self-promotion. Does he REALLY need to say he "obtained an exclusive interview"?

You warned me because I deleted his edits on "his" article. But remember again, this is an unbiased, objective encyclopedia. Loren Colemans article here is an encyclopedic entry, not a personal page of Loren Coleman. If he try to add stuff that looks obviously uncritically self-promoting like "He is one of the world's leading cryptozoologists, some critics and media commentators say "the" leading. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.", I think I have the full right to delete it. While that statement may be accurate, I think it need to have verifications and looks like Coleman wants to promote himself.

I think it´s dangerous if people start to edit articles about themselves. It seems like good taste and common sense to avoid it, since it´s obviously somewhat difficult to write unbiased and objective about yourself.

Best regards. --Danielos2 08:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The Whole Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode) thing
''If you would like to make a comment or two in my conversations that is fine. But not if it you don't have a relevant comment-well that's where I was concerned. As far as I know we still need to clear up this thing about the Treehouse (Drake and Josh) episode, wether we are nominating it for deletion, keeping it etc. ForestH2''
 * I have never intentionally made an irrelevant comment to you, as far as I'm concerned (unless you'd like to higlight any examples...?). Regarding Treehouse, I have listed it for AfD at Articles for deletion/Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode), and we shall see how the discussion goes. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup!

 * Sure, no prob. :) -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / !?  22:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Spongebob
I think you should list it at Requests for Page Protection first, as it's only one day and these guys may quit after today. However, if it continues tomorrow or the day after, I will likely consider protecting it again. Remind me. :) Thanks! -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / !?  23:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Swimboy814
Please read and follow the procedures in WP:VANDAL. His latest vandalism episode was enough to rate getting him blocked. Also, there are templates you can use to make placing warnings on user talk pages easier. Finally, please sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). Jay Maynard 00:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * That's "tildes"...and yes, I saw the discussion with a developer after I posted that. Hope he finds it soon.
 * As for vandalism warnings, you can save copy and pasting by simply entering . That also makes it less likely that things will go wrong. Finally, the user had already been warned enough times; the inciden of vandalism you warned him about was sufficient to get him blocked (as has now happened). The details are on WP:VANDAL. Jay Maynard 00:36, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

EWS23's RfA
Hello ForestH2! Thank you for your support of my request for adminship. I look forward to continuing to work with you on Harry Potter pages. If you ever see something that I could be doing better, feel free to leave me a message. E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 02:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

More...

 * What about on an article? ForestH2
 * Not quite sure what you mean. An article in the main namespace (ie an encyclopedia article) is of course no place for comments about other users, nor is an article's talk page. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 08:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Further- Apostrophe was blocked so far back I'm not sure that you went all the way back in the block log. Forest
 * Ah, I do apologise. Wasn't actually that long ago, not sure why I didn't see it before — perhaps I mistyped the name. Here was the block:
 * 23:44, 8 April 2006 Stifle blocked "Apostrophe (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Personal attacks in edit summaries)
 * I'm not too sure how this is relevant now, however... making attacks on other users in edit summaries is different from not leaving edit summaries altogether. As far as I was aware, he hadn't caused any more trouble... └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 08:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
What have i vandalized? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike kelly09 (talk • contribs)

Re:Volleyballgirl2012
This account has been created for the purposes of vandalism only and making disruptive edits. Therefore it has been indefinitely blocked, like thousands of others. -- Jay  (Reply)  22:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

CorbinSimpson's Request for Adminship
Thanks for voting in my request for administrator rights, even though it failed (13/30/4). Sadly, work has forced me to respond to you all using a substituted message rather than a personalized response. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that administrators, to me, should be chosen and approved by the community, and I will continue working to become a better editor and Wikipedian. No matter what the alignment of your vote was, I will take your comments seriously and use them to improve myself. If you wish to discuss your comments personally with me, I would be more than glad to talk about things since the RfA is now over; just leave your concern on my talk page and we will sort things out. Thanks again for voting, and happy editing! -  Corbin  Be excellent

Volleyballgirl
Looking at List of banned users, admins seem inconsistent on to blank banner user pages. It may seem like most of the are blanked, but keep in mind that most vandals don't make actual user pages. As Regardless, as Vbgirl isn't deserving of respect and I can't blame you for admin precedent, I'll just concede. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 04:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * At risk of you thinking I'm intruding again I wanted to thank you for having [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Volleyballgirl2012&diff=55009963&oldid=54983103 maintained the blocked notice] on that user page. You are correct: it is generally considered approproiate for the user page of an indefinitely blocked user to be replaced with the template. I've now protected the page from further edits since different users seem to keep removing it. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 09:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

hey you shouldn've blocked her page VB that is she is my friend I know that she is new I told her what not to do and can you give her a second chance I'm sure she won't mess up again

kh1 fiend 00:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

--Sexysenoir 01:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Treehouse
''ForestH2, I have removed the Considering for Deletion sign, as I have expanded the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForestH2 (talk • contribs) ''
 * And I have restored it, per our policy. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose the deletion of an article, you may comment at the respective page instead. Thank you.  └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 09:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Forest, whilst you are encouraged to improve articles which are listed for deletion, the AfD template must remain on such articles until the discussion is closed (typically a week after it began). That is our policy, regardless of how big an improvement has been made to the article, or what opinions have been expressed. You may choose to take part in the discussion by editing Articles for deletion/Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode). I wonder how you would feel about merging all the articles on Drake and Josh episodes — perhaps creating individual articles for each season rather than each episode. I suggest this because there's never going to be enough content for an article on any individual episode to be particularly long, and also because a user is unlikely to type in the name of a particular episode (and is thus left to keep clicking links from the list of episodes page). Merging the articles would enable the titles of future episdoes to be included with minimal info (which would not be acceptable on an individual article, as was the problem here). It is also the recommendation of Centralized discussion/Television episodes. What are your thoughts on this? I think it would improve the quality of our articles on Drake and Josh, enabling us to have some really good articles covering each season in-depth (including an overview of it's episodes plot lines) without a load of spread-out small articles (which will probably always be stubs). └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 20:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * PS — the only two people to have contributed to the AfD so far have voted in support of this idea... └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 20:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Response.
I'm so sorry that I haven't been able to send you message back. As You asked me about New user, Yes, I like to send them welcome message especially new user. Anyways, Thanks you for your message. Much appreciated. Ahh, In my discussion page, I will make archived approximately 100 messages. Anyways, Cheers~!!. Daniel5127, 00:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Helena Bonham Carter
Forest, I moved Helena Bonham-Carter back to Helena Bonham Carter. Bonham is not her middle name, but her last name is not hyphenated. There's no other way to explain than the fact that that's her name, and it doesn't have a hyphen. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 01:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Tone's RfA thanks
Dear — Thank you for your support on my recent RfA. It succeeded with a final tally of 46/2/3 so now I am an administrator. I'll be taking things slowly at first and getting used to the new tools, but please let me know if there's any anything I can help you with in the future. And please correct me, if you spot I make a mistake. Thank you again. --Ton e  23:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC))

Thanks
Thanks for watching out for my page. --Nlu (talk) 01:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Richardson/Skeeter
I see. The HPFZ source claims that she says Rita Skeeter won't appear, but Hpana says that she's not sure. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 02:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we have to report that she's not sure. HPFZ even mentions it's not confirmed by WB, and that's what she got across here (HPANA source). So I am going to move her back to tentative/possible (whatever it's called) until WB says something. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 02:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

All right, let me know what you think of how it looks like now on both the differences article and the main film article. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 02:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you entirely understand what Miranda has stated. She has said, "so I’m not convinced they’re gonna ask me back." This is her final statement on the matter, from her latest interview on the topic. So, suppose that the producers do ask her back. That would mean that she would fill the role of Rita Skeeter, and thus would (presumably) have lines. So I think the final note should read: Richardson has stated that she won't return, but also, in a later interview, that she doesn't know if her role will be cut or if she will be asked to return. How's that? --Fbv65 e del (discuss 03:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the HPFZ one was later -- it says there that was from the GOF world premiere (London, Nov. 6), and the other one, in the newspaper online, is dated the 13th of November. Anyway, you say it looks good, we agree, so I'm making the changes. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 02:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I'll move it. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 04:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Wolf Pictures
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. I found a couple of pictures for the Great Plains Wolf with a Google search. The links are and. Thanks for your help. Wild Wolf 02:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello!
Hello! Could you please sign your name with four tildes (like this: ~ ) so that the date/time also appears? Because on User:Daniel5127's page you only used three, and I just wanted to let you know. Bye! --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 04:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, OK! Hope it gets fixed soon! Also, you could try using (3 tildes, then 5), as that also puts name and date. See ya! --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 18:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Darn. Oh well. It seems to work for me though. --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 18:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I think I confused you! You should use a total of eight tildes sptit into two groups: a group of three, then a group of five. Hope this clears things up :(. --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 20:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

An RFA thank you!
Thank you for supporting my recently successful nomination. If you ever need my assistance, and you think that I'd be able to help, please feel free to leave me a message! Jude (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey
Super hero admin came and removed my thing again. Looks like I have to talk like a childrens' book writer in order to get my message across, so much for "uncensored speech" in wikipedia or something. Anyways, feel free, by my exclusive permission, to remove anything that you find offensive in my comment on Marudubshinki's talk page. That's right. But I mean, keep thed edit 1 and edit 2 like keep the points and stuff I made to him, jsut remove "horrible admin" "fuck" etc. words, I'd appreciate that really much if you think it is better like that :)

EDIT: Well, it seems that it was too hard. Maybe a rewrite would be good... --194.251.240.114 18:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: No news?
Sorry, the developer I asked left the message on his talk page, rather than mine, and I missed it. His only suggestion was one I already made, but I'll repeat his verbatim: "Tell the user to erase the contents of the nickname box, uncheck the raw signature option, save the preferences, and start over."  Radio Kirk   talk to me  22:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I have not cluttered the OOTP page
Forest, I don't understand but, I think you're getting mixed up, cluttered means there is to much on a page, however what I did was the opposite – I made the page easier on a reader's eye – it was alright as it was before – the scenes that you changed around (those confirmed due to casting announcements) should be kept the way I intended, after all it is just pure speculatation that the grounds of the 'evidence' have been added on. David Heyman confirmed Lockhart's presence in the script first draft, although I agree it's not confirmed – it's therefore ironic for you to leav in the forementioned scenes confirmed due to casting! Mental... Foxearth (logged out due to computer errors)

Look this is bloody ridiculous, I agree to disagree here, in the past characters in the book have been changed around for the movie versions, and storylines/scenes altered – you have based this 'confirmed' scenario on pure assumption. Therefore it is logical that these scenes should be placed under the heading: 'semi-confirmed' due to no official word from Warner Bros. or anyone involved closley in the film's production. I never vandilized anything (which is rich coming from a former vandal), I just believe you are over emphasizing the characters in the Differences between book and movie versions of OOTP article (which is incorrectly titled – I believe it should be titled more appropriately, so to keep away from false attraction to the page), if Wikipedia is supposed to be a democratic website – then I believe that you should take my views into account, I have worked hard on the OOTP page (I added the Trivia, Confirmed Locations, Scenes, New Cast, and Cast Order sections) and 'm skeptical as top whether this website lives up to it's reputation, Foxearth (logged out due to computer errors)

Forest, I've been following the exchange between you and Foxearth, and I think this is something which can be resolved easily. I think "Semi-Confirmed" is the answer, with a note saying that the scenes are assumed to be included due to the casting of the character; after all, you never know if Grubbly-Plank will just show up to have tea with Hagrid and discuss those good ol' magical creatures. Let's just step down from this -- there are some arguments which are much more vehement and we don't need to make this one that type. It's not vandalism, nobody's been vandalizing anything. It seems more like caution, which is always acceptable We need to act in a civil manner and appreciate other's edits and concerns. I'd say that we drop this now after an acceptance from each party, okay? I'll post this on Foxearth's talk page as well, and change the section. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 02:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome messages
You may want to look at the welcome message you left on User talk:DisneyFan; it seems to be missing some closing bits. I'm trying to add a message to that page but it winds up inside the welcome table. tregoweth 21:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool. Tables are a pain, aren't they? :) tregoweth 01:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Evilphoenix
It was Evilphoenix, due to be back on May 1. Dunno what happened to him -- though he may have gotten quite angered at the change in citations on the J. K. Rowling page that he got fed up with Wikipedia. Do hope he comes back though. Liked the guy. --Fbv65 e del (discuss 18:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Seeking Editor Review Commentary (If You Like)
Hi. In conjunction with my RfA (that you voted on), I have created an editor review, to give people a chance to comment as to ways in which I can branch out or alter my contributions to Wikipedia. An RfA seems to solely focus on how one's temperment and contributions relate to how they might handle administrative powers (and the consensus on that seems to be that I'm not quite ready); the editor review opens things up a little more to a larger focus, and I'd love to hear community feedback in the sense of that larger focus, too. If you feel you've already expressed yourself sufficiently when casting your vote, then by all means don't worry about it, but if any thoughts come to mind or if you'd like to expound upon any suggestions or commentary, it would be appreciated. In any case, I appreciated you taking the time to express your opinion on my RfA, and I thank you for that. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 19:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: User:Jim Sunev
Spotted it, thanks. Also, another reminder, if I may: tildes, not titles. :)  Radio Kirk   talk to me  01:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Working on it, thanks, and, I've left you a message above about the developer I contacted and the reply.  Radio Kirk  <tt> talk to me </tt> 02:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * No, the developer I had contacted and the reply to my query that I posted to your user talk page [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ForestH2&diff=55483688&oldid=55467729 here]. <tt> Radio Kirk </tt> <tt> talk to me </tt> 02:09, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, watch your user talk page history, or you may miss messages when more than one person writes you. :) <tt> Radio Kirk </tt> <tt> talk to me </tt> 02:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

How Do I apply these Templates?
I've searched but I really don't get how to do this. I'm new to Wiki and need help doing stuff like this (Jim Sunev 02:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC))

Thank You Forest
(Jim Sunev 02:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC))

Historyfan40
The indefblockeduser you left on the user page had a different user's block log link on it. Please use just. Thanks for helping to fight vandalism, Kusma (討論) 23:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode)
By reverting the redirect of Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode) to List of Drake & Josh episodes, you are going against the decision at Articles for deletion/Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode). Unless you can source the information on that page so that it does not seem like speculation, I'll have to enforce the AfD (ie. redirect to List of Drake & Josh episodes), and block the page. See also Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Ezeu 23:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

edit summarys
When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this: The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. thanks Benon 23:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Ahh it was just a minor niggle, you removed sevral comments from your talk page which can be problematic if not explained in an edit summary (some pepole dont assume good faith and assume your trying to hide something) and by clearly showing what youve done in an edit summary helps pepole find those comments easily, by the way have you considered archiving?, thanks Benon 23:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC) scratch that see you do archive whoops, sorry Benon 23:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, your recent edits to my talk page were confusing, and I'm also confused at why you reblanked the content that Caldorwards blanked from your talk page, as well. The allegations made against Caldorwards are serious and I'm very curious as to why you chose to blank them from your talk page. Your response would be appreciated. Kelly Martin (talk) 01:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

New User Help Please
Hi, I added a link in Old-time radio to Dramapod a site that has a lot to do with the Old-time radio drama community, and Pepso changed it to a page that doesn't exist??? I wondered why, had I done something wrong, or has he changed it in error? Daveb74 15:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Warning!
''Please do not remove any good infromation from any pages such as you did to the List of Drake and Josh episodes Good info is what is needed for a Wikipedia article. If you keep deleting good info from Wikipedia articles you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia without farther notice. ForestH2''
 * how dare you revert my edits, which I made in good faith, and with a clear edit summary and presume to mark this reversion as a "minor edit", and tell me I have "removed good information" and "may be blocked". You have every right to disagree with an edit I make, but I suggest you take a good look at Blocking policy and Vandalism and familiarise yourselves with our policy before threatening block action. For your information, it is Wikipedia policy, per Manual of Style (dates and numbers) that "if a date includes both a month and a day, then the date should normally be linked in order to allow readers' date preferences to work, displaying the reader's chosen format. The day and the month should be linked together, and the year should be linked separately if present." I pointed this out in my edit summary, in case you were unaware. Furthermore, the short date format you have reverted to (as I also pointed out in the summary) is plain confusing: "9/12/04" would be interpreted by a British reader (such as myself) as 9th December, wheras an American would read it as 12th September.
 * I can assure you I did not "remove good information", I ensured the dates were in the correct format, and understandable to all, and made this clear in the edit summary. In fact, User:Rich Farmbrough had previously made this change, I merely reverted to his version after you proceeded to undo it.
 * I note that you have made subsequent changes to the article, after reverting, and it will thus not be quick to revert to the correct date formats without losing your changes. I have therefore left the article unchanged, since I am busy and do not have the time to sort it out. I suggest you reconsider your views, and make the changes however.
 * └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 08:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, your removed references. I expect you take time in to thinking about that. I'm sure you already removed the graphics I statred working on. ForestH2


 * But is there some reason your remove references, new work I've done on Season 4? No there is none. And I expect that you take those edits into count. Now, Jason Piper is confirmed to lend his voice-more of that later. You have already done enough there. Now I have gotten the graphics to be how they should be, you should leave them alone. I spent tireless work on trying to make references for sentences etc. and you erase them. You sort of/sort of did not make them out of good faith, and I have every right to revert your edits. ForestH2


 * I honestly have no idea what you mean by that reply. Take edits into account for what? And what graphics? From what I can see from the page history there have never been any graphics on the page. I can assure you I changed the date formats, and I did so entirely out of good faith, and per our policy, as I said above. When I have them time, which I don't currently, I shall revert the dates to the correct format (so that they are formatted per our policy, take user's date preferences into account, and can be understood by users who don't assume US-date formats). That's assuming you don't see sense and change them first. I have always tried to assume good faith when conversing with you, but must confess that I am getting somewhat annoyed by your attitude here — the dates should be formatted differently, end of story. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 14:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.
Thanks for many many explanations of making new discussion's page. You have been helping me a lot. Daniel5127, 01:53, 2 June, 2006 (UTC)

Further Help
Thank you for looking into why the first link I made was changed for no reason. Unfortunately the link is to the first page I have created which has now been marked for deletion. The page Dramapod has been listed for deletion on grounds of notability. I have read the guidelines on Notability (web) and since revised the page and I think it does actually meet the guidelines, point 3, 'The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster' and have provided an example. I would be interested in your opinion. Daveb74 18:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
, thank you for participating in my RfA. Unfortunately, a great number of oppose voters felt that I lacked experience, and a consensus was not reached (the final tally was 30/28/10). Perhaps I will try again in another few months when I have a few more edits under my belt. If I do, I hope I can count on your support. Thanks again!

Cool3 talk 20:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC) (UTC)

Touth
ok i am unblocked now and i am terribly sorry for yelling at you. please forgive me i will NOT do it again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Touth (talk • contribs)

Untitled Drake Bell and Josh Peck Project
Hello, sorry for the late reply. As for the new movie featuring Drake Bell and Josh Peck, the only information released was a little bit about the plot and characters. This is one of the many articles covering it online (It's from yahoo.com, which has been very reliable in the past, and states that the information was put out in a press release from Nickelodeon Movies). I'm not sure if you know, but anyone can submit information to IMDb.com, and while it is moderated, in my experience they do not do much fact checking. According to the article, the characters Drake Bell and Josh Peck are playing in the movie are similar to their characters on Drake & Josh, but not exact. The article implies that they are not brothers, and refers to the character Josh is playing as 'rich'. If the film was about the characters from Drake & Josh, I think the article would have mentioned it, because they do acknowledge the show, and that is a pretty big detail to leave out. I'm assuming a fan that misunderstood the information submitted it to IMDb, and they accepted it. - Nights Not End 00:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Touth
thanks for the info dude! Touth 01:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

your always welcome best regaurds Touth 01:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Treehouse
Replied on my talk page -- Hirudo 03:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde at venus 06:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Jason Piper
This edit war is getting completely ridiculous. Regarding [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jason_Piper&diff=56575369&oldid=56571851 this] reversion of yours, I'd like to respond to your edit summary ''-is there some reason why we don't on the other HP articles have references. Saying Bane will be played by Piper. And plus your removing info which is not O.K!''
 * 1) Yes, there is some reason. Nobody's yet added them. All articles should contain verifiable information and cite sources where appropriate. The template unreferenced exists to be added to articles which don't yet cite there sources.
 * 2) We already do say that Piper will be playing Bane. Please read the article as it stands before reverting. It clearly says that Bane has been cast (no doubt, and this statement is backed up by a reference) to play the part of Bane. Unless you dispute any part of that statement, why remove it. And if you do dispute it, then read the cited source.
 * 3) What information am I removing? The article already says that he will voice the part of Bane. I see no reason to duplicate that statement. In my opinion you are the one removing information — you're removing the article's only reference. In my opinion, for an article on an actor who doesn't even appear to be listed in the IMDb (a pretty large DB), at least a reference is wholly appropriate.

Please read the article as it currently stands, and think about the need to change the content. If you do, then please see that there is no need to revert in full, no need to remove the reference, and no need to duplicate information that's already there. Of course, expansion of the article is always appreciated. An ongoing series of reversions will not help anybody however. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 21:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * IMDB is a bad website that doesn't cite sources. Do not follow there cast. Follow cast such as on Harry Potter Fan Zone, Muggle Net and Leaky Cauldron. I haven't looked at the article but I will now --ForestH2


 * Is there some reason we have references on Jason Piper when we DON'T on Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, George Harris, Apple Brook, Alec Hopkins, Nick Shim, Tony Maudsley, Emma Watson etc? ForestH2
 * Daniel Radcliffe is a very well known actor, for one thing. You can't argue the same thing for Jason Piper. Also, the other characters you higlight have already been in a film. The film itself is verifiable — the castlist of a film can act as a reference, and indirectly does in these cases. The same is not true for Jason Piper – he's an actor in an up coming film. It's not yet been released. I could create an article on myself, and claim I'm going to be in that film. We can't yet view the cast list, the films not made. We need some way of verifying the contents of the article (see Verifiability). This is an encyclopedia, it's important we get information right, and ensure that it can be verified. Adding sources is a good way to do this. I'd agree that the source isn't great (although the BBC is well respected) but I couldn't find anything official from Warner Brothers confirming the casting. Finally, several of those articles you mention are stubs in need of expansion. Part of the expansion process may well be to add suitable references and external links. Several already do have external links (the IMDB may not be perfect, and may not contain anything, but it's one reference which we can cite, and is just one step towards enabling verifiability). └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 21:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * And- is there some reason that your not counting the vandalisim on your page anymore? ForestH2
 * Yes — I'm very busy in real life currently, and not editing much. When I am on Wikipedia, I've concentrated on recent changes to articles on my watchlist. I'm aware that the Vandalism counter was messed up after my user page renovaation (and thanks for having pointed that out to me) and that it's been vandalised since. When I get a chance I will update things, but I've not really got time to do things like that right now └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 21:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Arbitration
For requests for Arbitration, see WP:ARB. I hope this helps. Best wishes, Buck  ets  ofg ✐ 22:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Time.
Please, Don't forget to put time when you leave somebody message. I'm here to explain to you the way of putting your ID, and Time. Time is based on (UTC), as you know. Just use ~~~~. It will be automatically putted in your message. In the future, you have to use ~~~~. Ok? &#39;&#39;&#39;*Daniel*&#39;&#39;&#39; 23:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Signature
If you don't mind, I'd like to make a comment. I think it would be good to add a talk and a contribs in your signature. :) As for the time, try adding  after your name in the Nickname section in Preferences, and be sure to check the Raw Signature box. I'm not sure if that will work for the time problem, but you might want to try using   after you do that...  G . H  e  00:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yup. It's good :), though I think you might've forgotten to end the italics? Or did you mean to continue it throughout your signature? G . H  e  17:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * For'' est H2 (discuss 01:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)




 * Is it everything after "For" suppose to be italiced, because I noticed that you don't have an end italics mark? G . H  e  18:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Another  at where you want the italics to stop.  G . H  e  18:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow... that's bizarre. Never seen that happen... Can you show me the intended code that you used in your signature? I might be able to check to see if there are any problems. G . H  e  18:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah. You said that the program added an extra  after it.  G . H  e  18:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I was thinking more of MediaWiki that's screwing up... It does do that sometimes in minor ways, I believe. G . H  e  18:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Try using the following AS IS and sign with  instead of  :

For est H2 (discuss


 * And if THAT doesn't work:

For est H2 (discuss


 * And if THAT doesn't work, then I'm clueless... G . H  e  18:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

My Thanks
I wanted to drop a brief note on your talk page (one admittedly not written to you only, but nevertheless truly meant) to thank you for your vote in my Request for Adminship, which concluded this evening. Even though it was unsuccessful, it did make clear to me some areas in which I can improve my contributions to Wikipedia, both in terms of the areas in which I can participate and the manner in which I can participate. I do plan on, at some point in the future (although, I think, not the near future), attempting the process again, and I hope you will consider participating in that voting process as well. If you wish in the future to offer any constructive criticism to me, or if I may assist you with anything, I hope you will not hesitate to contact me. Thanks again. — WCityMike (T  &dArr; plz reply <U>HERE</U> (why?) &dArr;  04:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject
You again? ... I have the user box and a number of my edits are on Harry Potter pages, but I did not know I had to enlist somewhere. --Chris 15:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

My Userboxes
Nah, I don't think I need people to see my userboxes. I'd rather them see the other stuff... But then, if they still care, they can look! Thanks for caring, though, and dropping me a comment! Emily (Funtrivia Freak) 19:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Signature
Sorry to bug you again. Please sign your talk page edits with four tildes so it produces a timestamp. Thank you. — GT 01:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't understand. No matter what formatting issues you might be having, four tildes should always produce a timestamp at the end. Three tildes just does your "raw signature" as given in your preferences, and the fourth appends a timestamp to that. Can you please count to make sure that you are signing with FOUR, and not THREE tildes? — GT 15:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * rory096 replied on my talk page asking you what was in the "nickname" box in your user preferences. I too would be interested in seeing that. Please keep in mind that it is ESSENTIAL for your signature to include a timestamp to keep discussions readable (and conversely, while nice, not essential to have links to your talk and contributions pages), so if that means temporarily unchecking the "raw signature" box while you sort out these other issues you may want to consider that. — GT 02:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you demonstrate your " ~ " for rory and I? — GT 03:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I suggest that until you sort out your signature problems, you revert to the plain default signature style. In other words, blank out the "Nickname:" box, and uncheck the "raw signature" box. This will give you the standard default signature that everyone has when they first start. Three tildes will stamp with just your user name; four tildes will stamp with your user name and the UTC date and time; and five tildes will stamp with just the date and time (no username). Try them out on your sandbox page.


 * If these are still not working, it MUST be because you're still set to "raw signature", or you are typing your tildes incorrectly. You should use the the tilde key, which is the shift value of the grave accent or "open single quote" key, to the left of the numeral 1 on an American Windows PC keyboard. If you have a different keyboard it may be elsewhere. Don't insert a tilde code from the insert list below the save page button on an edit page.
 * Signatures are tricky; it took me a while to figure it out myself (not that mine is anything special). My signature currently reads
 * \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \
 * in the Nickname field on my Preferences page, and I have the raw signature box checked. See WP:SIG for more information. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 16:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Response
I have only removed data which was not appropriate for this site or which was not accurate. Thank You.

OoP Sources
Forest, I accidentally posted this on User:GT's talk page, but it was meant for you:

That is an abundance of information! However, the link is to a forum, which is not acceptable for Wiki's citation standards. (As you can also see, the spelling and grammar is a bit off as well.) Still, since the post mentions TLC's interview with David Heyman on the Red Carpet, we can use that. If you can dig up that video somewhere, and be able to watch it, then we can cite it. Good sleuthing.

However, in the meantime, I found the video, so I'm going to go ahead and change the citation. Thanks. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 03:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for supporting me in my recently unsuccessful RfA. I plan on working harder in the coming months so that I have a better chance of becoming an admin in the future. I hope that you will consider supporting me if I have another RfA. Thank you for your support. -- digital_m  e ( t / c ) 15:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
, thank you for participating in my RfA. It passed with an amazingly unopposed 77/0/1. Thanks for the support everybody! If you see me doing anything wrong, want to ask me something, or just want to yell in my general direction, leave me a note on my talk page. I promise to try and knock out Wikipedia's problems wherever I may find them!

Staxringold talkcontribs 20:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey there
Thanks for commenting on my RfA...it was greatly appreciated! --Osbus 21:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Support Given
Thanks, I think I'll be waiting for several months at least!-- digital_m  e ( t / c ) 22:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

IRC on my SIG
Well... you might need a client. Try mIRC or IceChat. When you're done downloading it, come to me and I'll assist you. :D-- 陈 鼎  翔    贡献  Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 02:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

SpongeBob Wikiproject articles

 * I created a page linked off of the SpongeBob Wikiproject main page for all the articles to be listed, Wikiproject SpongeBob SquarePants/Articles. I have not completed the list yet, though.  -AMK152 11:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Help
Is there a reason my IP adress changed from 72.129.123.139 to 72.134.46.91? ForestH2
 * It was probably your ISP (Internet service provider). ILovePlankton 22:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Will I be able to contribute again under 72.129.123.139 or will some else start editing udner it? ForestH2
 * No you probable won't be able too, I don't know if someone else will though. ILovePlankton 22:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I want to know if someone else will be able to though. --ForestH2
 * Why does it matter? ILovePlankton 22:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * In case some one else uses the account-on pages that I used it on well, I think....that I did vandalize pages under an IP so.......if a page is vandalized, and a user who blocked me comes to ask why I vandalize again, I won't have a good reason. Also, couldn't it affect Autoblocks? ForestH2
 * good point. But about the autoblock no you wouldn't be affected by it because your IP is different. ILovePlankton 22:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Would anyone else be able to use 72.129.123.139? ForestH2

{helpme} is for building the encyclopedia, not this sort of query. Yes anyone could be assigned that IP by your ISP – but it doesn't matter. Always edit logged in, never vandalise and everything will be ok. That's all you have to worry about. Please don't use {helpme} for this again.--Commander Keane 22:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you help me here
There is an article called VeggieTales that seriously need's cleaning up bad, can you tell me how to ask an administrator to put a clean up tag on it so it can be cleaned up. Tacoman96

Europe
I'll be in Spain, France, Italy, and the Netherlands. Should be exciting! Thanks for asking. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 00:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it. I expect that the chances of getting enough time and getting wireless internet are low. Maybe in the airport… --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 00:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about HP articles, we can catch up. There are other users who patrol them anyway, even if they don't edit them as often. Have a good time in Wyoming. BTW, it says on your user page "Boise, Wyoming." Don't you mean Idaho…? And I have the banner up because I'll probably forget to put it up before I leave and then it wont't appear at all. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 01:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you can only change your IP address with your ISP, but if it's changed, good. Tricky things, IPs. BTW, I'll say in a very friendly way, if you want a successful RFA, you need to step up your spelling a few notches. Like "grammer" -> "grammar," and "to" -> "too". (Just things I noticed in your last messages to me.) It would be great to see you with a mop, but you need to fix that if you want people to support you. :-) --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 15:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Category
I would wait on doing so until the project gets up and running. Part of the problem was that most of the categories were placed on articles, not talk pages. But the Harry Potter Wikiproject doesn't just add the category; it also adds a template which is relevant on the talk page. Most mirrors don't download the Template and Talk namespaces, so the category wouldn't affect the mirrors at all in this way. My comment on blanking talk pages was I think more toward AMK152; I found at least 5 talk pages that had been blanked, not involving four-letter words. Ral315 (talk) 05:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


 * AMK152 blanked Talk:Ghost Host (SpongeBob SquarePants episode) and Talk:Chimps Ahoy. You blanked Talk:The Lost Mattress, Talk:Whale of a Birthday, Talk:Wishing You Well, and Talk:The New Leaf.  Ral315 (talk) 15:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank You
<div style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: ;">

Nick Shirm
I keep changing Nick Shim's name to Nick Shirm and you commented in the History to cite my source about him being Nick Shirm not Nick Shim. Well I am a source. I go to the same school as Nick Shirm and he is Zacharias Smith. That's why I added he goes to Dame Alice Owen's School because I go there too. I guess I don't have much proof except for my word, but I am telling the truth. By the way, was it you who added he is dating a girl called Alyssa Christianson, because I've never heard of her before.

Pencilcasegirl 18:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Forest, I left a message on Pencilcasegirl's talk page about Verifiability. It's too bad it appears the BBC may be incorrect with his name, but for now, we have to keep it at Shim with no R. See my full message for details. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 04:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Ok, I made a valid mistake by adding to the bottom of the page rather than on top (my mistake) – what else did I do wrong, and why did you close it? -- 9  cds (talk) 23:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks – you beat me to moving it :p-- 9  cds (talk) 23:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "Per 9cds's nomination, voters are strict if the RFA is malformed."
 * That was fairly clear from the responses; however, there is still the issue about the rationale. Folajimi 00:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand stand this
''This is becoming a problem. Is Nick Shim dating anyone? Was Robert Pattinson's cat eaten by Nick Shim? I've found this on Matthew Lewis's site, Nick Shim's and Robert Pattinson which you reverted. Can you tell me if this is true? ForestH2''
 * I think the proper approach is to revert or delete any unsourced gossip and rumours, particularly that which appears to be slanderous or ludicrous, unless there are authoritative news sources (other than from speculation, fan sites, slash fiction, and blog pages). The Burden of Proof is on those who post such nonsense, not on those attempting to clean it up. --T-dot 23:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)