User talk:Gtstricky/Archive 1

CSD A7
I noticed that you tagged John Jarrett and The Escorts (Iowa band) for speedy deltion using CSD A7 as a rational. Please note that A7 only applies to groups and people that lack an assertion of notability. The assertion does not have to be so strong that the article meets the various notability guidelines or the verifibility policy. In these cases the Jarrett article asserts that he competed in the Olympics, a clear assertion of notability. The Escorts article aserts that were inducted into the Iowa Rock 'N Roll Music Association's Hall of Fame. Although that is probably a weak asertion, and one that might not hold up at AfD, it is an assertion none the less. A7 was instituted to keep AfD from becoming backlogged with articles that read "Bob is high scholl student. He Rocks." Dsmdgold 04:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

John Jarrett follow-up
You may want to look at WP:BIO which deals with notability issues in the future. One of the guidelines on athletes states that "Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them)". A person who has participated in the Olympic Games meets this criteria.

Please read this article before issuing any CSD's in the future. Thank you. Chris 19:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Prods
Concerning this edit, note that WP:PROD says that "If anyone, including the article's creator, removes Template:Prod from an article for any reason, do not put it back". Discussion is a suggestion, but not a requirement. I'll be taking this to AFD. Best, shoy  (words words) 17:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I missed that. Thanks for the info. Gtstricky 17:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Firearms
Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF 20:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits to Troll Moving Pictures
Hey asshole, nice try with the speedy deletion.--LouisHesse (talk) 03:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Your welcome, and thank you for your constructive input. Gtstricky (talk) 13:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Contact lens
Hi there, at this vandalism-reverting edit of yours, it looks like a large chunk of text got dropped from the end of the article. (I restored it.) This used to be a problem with old versions of Firefox, is this what you're using for a browser? Best regards, &mdash; BillC talk 18:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Looking at it I think my browser (firefox)was closed (by me) before the script was done running. Thanks for the repair. Gtstricky (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

AWB request
Normally AWB access is not given for "users with less than 500 mainspace edits." You can find your mainspace count by looking (be sure to change "namespace=" to main, and then search). You may re-apply with a specific reason at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. SkierRMH (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Report of vandalism in the On the Moon article
Hello there. I recently made an edit to the article on the On the Moon animated series, which you reverted and reported as vandalism. Now, I am not a member of the wikipedia community and I very rarely edit articles, so I might have commited some error of etiquette that I was unaware of. Could you please elaborate on the reason for identifying my edit (which did nothing but add verified information) as vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.101.189.152 (talk) 17:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Pramnian and Lesbian wine
The name got you didn't it? :) No worries though. I was originally going to expand the Pramnian stub but I thought I could make a more "eye catching" DYK with an article about wine from the Island of Lesbos. AgneCheese/Wine 17:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

okay
thank you i will try to remember —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.99.33 (talk) 02:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

edit conflicts, and expand
Heh... three edit conflicts with you on Mountainview High School! BTW, you shouldn't use expand on a stub article - it's only for articles which are bigger than stubs (check the template's documentation), since stub templates do pretty much the same job as part of their function. Grutness...wha?  22:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * And then another one trying to fix my accidental double posting here :) Grutness...wha?  22:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good time ... good times...Gtstricky (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Tor
You reverted ClueBot which was trying to remove vandalism, and marked his edit as vandalism, well both the revision that you restored and the one the bot did contained vandalism ;-) I've restored a quite old one since all the revision before seems to me a mix of vandalism, unreferenced controversial information regarding a living person and unrelated comment by the revision's authors. Anyway, good luck with your vandal fighting, but please put the proper warning template on the pages of the users whose edits you revert.  Snowolf How can I help? 18:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to bother you again, but can you please put the warning templates on the user's whose edit you revert? Thank you and happy hunting,  Snowolf How can I help? 00:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Great job!
Great job reverting vandalism! Just thought I'd stop by and encourage you. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Master of Puppets Care to share?  00:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

And Then There Were None
? --Oxymoron83 17:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * My bad. :) Gtstricky 17:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, I was just wondering. --Oxymoron83 17:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Paul Scholes
That was quite a big-revision time! :) &mdash; Rudget contributions 18:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you can follow it. I got lost. I think it is right now. Gtstricky 18:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Balkans arbitration remedy
In a recently-closed arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose sanctions on any user working on articles concerning the Balkans. Before any such sanctions are imposed, editors are to be put on notice of the decision. This notice is not to be taken as implying any inappropriate behaviour on your part, merely to warn you of the Arbitration Committee's decision. Stifle (talk) 12:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I received notice regarding this arbitration case. However I can not locate any edits I have made to that page. I don't know if the notice was in error or I am missing something. Thanks Gtstricky (talk) 13:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The notice was to inform you that anyone editing in articles related to the Balkans (which you have done) is subject to certain sanctions if they fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, expected standards of behaviour or the normal editorial process. As I mentioned you have not done anything wrong, but the area has been subject to quite a lot of aggressive edit-warring and it is a place to tread with caution. Stifle (talk) 14:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

AWB use
Re edits like this one or this: "Avoid making insignificant or inconsequential edits such as only adding or removing some white space, moving a stub tag, converting some HTML to Unicode, removing underscores from links (unless they are bad links), or something equally trivial. This is because it wastes resources and clogs up watch lists." AutoWikiBrowser. Cheers! -- JHunterJ (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh boy... and I just did about 75 of those. Well there you go. Thanks for the info. Lesson learned. Gtstricky (talk) 03:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Your page
A page you created, Robert Hawkins (Killer), has been moved by an IP, maybe the preceeding editor (see the history). Is this worth a discussion? &mdash; Rudget speak.work 15:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you don't mind but I've tagged the above article to be deleted. As discussed in Talk:Westroads Mall shooting, the killer tag is unsuitable ('shooter' or something would be better) and unnecessary since Robert A. Hawkins does the job fine. Also, the capitalisation of killer is unnecessary. Therefore, the page on a whole as a redirect seems unnecessary to me so I've tagged it. Cheers. Nil Einne (talk) 19:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Not at all... I agree. Gtstricky (talk) 19:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/Macabrismo
Please reconsider your vote for the deletion of this article. See what I wrote. Cbdorsett (talk) 14:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Recent message
I appreciate the message that you recently left on my page. Many people choose sarcasm when dealing with new contributors to wikipedia. I appreciate your lack of jest. Thanks. --Benjendav (talk) 02:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Universal Life Church
Thanks for your help with that. It looks fantastic!! GJ (talk) 00:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Non-admin AfD closures
Thanks for the question. As it says @ WP:DPR, non-admins can close AfDs, but should generally stick to unambiguous keep results. I'll offer a couple of notes, though:

I noticed that you recently closed Articles for deletion/Turicato...
 * The last comment in WP:DPR#NAC is "Non-administrators closing deletion discussions are recommended to disclose their status in the closing decision." When doing a non-admin closure, it's best to make that clear in the closing statement (which you did) as well as the edit summary (which you didn't). It's not a big deal, but it can only help in future situations.
 * Be wary of closing early...even if it looks like an unambiguous close, it may be better to let the AfD play out for the full 5 days. In the above case, though, your call was perfectly fine--it was a bad nom. Early closes can tick some people off, and there have been many AfDs that change direction in the last day or two. I'd resist the temptation to "speedy close" anything unless it's plainly obvious vandalism or the article has already been deleted--speedy closes have been the source of plenty of stupid drama...

In the end, transparency is best, and the result should be plainly obvious to anyone with a working cerebrum. Keep up the good work, and don't forget to subst welcome templates! &mdash; Scientizzle 21:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Economiccrimesunit
Just wondering, why did you remove the RFCN on this username? I also see you didn't make any kind of comment on WP:ANI either. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 00:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Enjoy the tasty goodness of whatever it is your having for desert. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy of Joseph Schreiber
Hey, I just wanted to let you know that I removed your speedy template from the article. You listed it under db-bio, however, this listing only applies to real people, and the article in question is about a fictional video game character. If you have any questions, feel free to let me know! Happy editing and happy holidays! Icestorm815 (talk) 17:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks - you too.  Gtstricky Talk or C 18:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Coalfields_Regeneration_Trust
Thanks for notability tagging. Still you have to consider here a process of creation. Idem for the cat. Please see article page talk. -- DLL .. T 20:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * ok Gtstricky Talk or C 21:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion: Infinite Jest (album)
Just to let you know that your speedy delete request is no longer valid; I have edited the article so as it no longer meets CSD:A1. WEBURIEDOURSECRETS INTHEGARDEN  21:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
For that (awfy quick!) spot, have this:

I, WEBURIEDOURSECRETS  INTHEGARDEN , hereby present this recent changes barnstar to Gtstricky, for spending way too much time patrolling.

Enjoy it! WEBURIEDOURSECRETS INTHEGARDEN  21:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Mark as patrolled
It's funny...I would like to, but it seems like half the time the "mark as patrolled" link doesn't show up. I thought at first it was because I wasn't always getting at the articles through Special:Newpages, but even when I do that, sometimes I don't get the link. Do you know why this would be or how I would go about fixing it? SaveThePoint (talk) 01:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm on Firefox under Windows XP. I wonder if it's an interaction with WP:Twinkle...that's the only thing I can think of. SaveThePoint (talk) 01:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * To butt in; if you're using Firefox, you can just middle-click the Patrolled link while the CSD script is running. That way it marks it patrolled in a new window and speedies, too. At least, that works for me. Cheers, Master of Puppets Care to share?  02:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Joyce Meyer / Paula White / T. D. Jakes
I wanted to involve a third party in a possible edit war over a few articles. The articles are Paula White, Joyce Meyer, and T. D. Jakes, which was recently deleted and had to be started over for copyright violation. User Cats77 repeatedly inserts criticism about education. They use sources that do not confirm the criticism. An Administrator came by one article and reverted my revert due to a source being cited for the criticism, but I don’t think they checked the source! For Joyce Meyers he uses Joyce Meyer’s own website which, of course, doesn’t reference any criticism of herself.

According to wiki policy, “controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately”. I posted a note on Cats77 discussion page but they didn’t respond. They just keep re-inserting their edit.

Would you double check this to confirm I am not in the wrong in how I am interpreting wiki policy? Thank you. Bwalker5435 (talk) 00:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

M-1 Carbine Revert War
The M1 carbine article is currently on lock down. An administrator has requested some discussion from memeber of the Firearms Wikiproject. Can you take a look? Sf46 (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Help me number 3
Are there any administrators out there who can handle this issue? There is a proposed or suggested merger of two articles that has been lingering on for three months (since October 2007) ... See Valediction. Can some administrator out there officially come in and close the discussion and end the proposed merger? Please advise. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC))


 * Place a request on WP:ANI  Gtstricky Talk or C 22:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I will do that.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC))

A thank you
Thank you for taking time to post all those helpful links --DeargDoom1991 (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Presidential nomination process (US)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Presidential nomination process (US), and it appears to include a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Rick Strawn
The article was notable because he runs one of the largest teen escort companies in the US and due to the strange circumstances surrounding his personal life. --RucasHost (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a huge article on him -- which received an award -- at Legal Affairs. I cited it when I started the Wikipedia article. There are also many smaller articles on the Internet, didn't any of you do any research before you deleted my article? --RucasHost (talk) 14:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

A penny for your thoughts?
Since you're in WikiProject Spam and you've participated in RfA discussions, I thought I might ask you how WikiProject Spam might view the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship. Thanks, Doczilla (talk) 06:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: User: Swbc
Sure, no problem. I deleted it because it was in fact promotional. CSD is not for articles only, it is a General criteria. Hope this helps. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, WP:UP, which says "Advertising or promotion of a business or non-Wikipedia-related organization (such as purely commercial sites or referral links)". That userpage even included a link to the organization that it was promoting. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Users are certainly encouraged to move things to their userspace if there is a problem with COI or OR. This userpage, however, was not.  It was simply a promotional statement with a link to a website.  The user did create an article about the same organization, South Woods Baptist Church, but that was deleted also after the user blanked the page. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Zecco Entry
Nice formatting. Thank you. Would love to flesh out the profile on all the social networking sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabinspeiser (talk • contribs) 22:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Go for it
If Aeron can live with your edit of bitless bridle, I certainly can. Go ahead and do the move. With your name so we know it's an NPOV edit. Montanabw (talk) 00:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching request
You have previously expressed an interest in undergoing the Admin coaching program. We're currently engaged in a program reset to help things move more smoothly in the future. If you are still interested in the program, please go to Admin coaching/Requests for Coaching and re-list yourself under Current requests, deleting your entry from Older requests. Also, double-check to make sure coaching is right for you at theCoachee checklist; WP:Adoption or WP:Editor review may be more appropriate depending on your situation and aspirations. We should get back to you within a day or so, once a coaching relationship has been identified. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 07:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

LCS content
Why are you removing all my changes around LCS content. I work at Microsoft supporting the product and I am looking to document the subject matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.102 (talk) 18:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you work there you may have a conflict of interest. This information is already covered on Microsoft Office Communications Server. If you think the 2005 version is notable in itself lets discuss it on the talk page and get a consensus. Please take no offense.  Gtstricky Talk or C 18:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching match
Hello, I am pleased to announce that you have been paired with User:Malinaccier as an admin coachee. You now have two important tasks to complete:
 * 1. Introduce yourself to Malinaccier and explain to them why you want to be an admin.
 * 2. Once they has confirmed the relationship to you, edit Admin coaching/Requests for Coaching to move your name to Admin coaching/Status to record the match.

Given the limited coaching resources of the Admin Coaching project, if you plan to take a Wikibreak of more than 30 days, please notify your coach or myself so that we will know not to tag you as retired and give your spot to another user. Remember that adminship is not a big deal and that it may take multiple RfAs before one becomes a sysop, even for a highly qualified, coached, editor. Also, remember that while admin coaching will help you prepare for the mop, there is no guarantee that completing this program will ensure passage of an RfA.

Congratulations again, and happy editing.  MBisanz  talk 20:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi! I have looked through your contributions, and have decided that I would be glad to become your admin coach.  Check out your new coaching page to begin!  Malinaccier (talk) 14:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I noticed this section when I was here on the Ryan Allen question. Let me make a suggestion FWIW. Spend time on New page patrol. It's a good way to hone your skills as to what should be speedied, or prodded, tagged for notability, etc., to do some cleanup, add stubs, add categories, and so on. A side effect is to build your mainspace edit count. Sbowers3 (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

removing warning box
Gtstricky? You said you'd address my problem from the help desk here? Or on my talk page? I can't find you either place. cheers, Elaine --Beakymouse (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry I was still typing it. It is on your talk page.  Gtstricky Talk or C 16:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

re: Ryan Allen
I did not notice that the author was the wife of Allen, and I don't think it matters. WP:COI is not a prohibition; it is a strong caution to avoid POV, to take extra care to be sure that the article is encyclopedic. It is not at all obvious from the article content that there was a COI. I think the author successfully avoided the problems of COI, did maintain NPOV, and did produce an encyclopedic article.

I've done my share of speedy noms, prods, and a couple of AFDs. I would Keep this one. My threshold for deletion used to be "can we delete this - i.e. can deletion be justified"; now it is "should we - does the article cry out for deletion". When an article is borderline about being deletable, I tend to decide on the writing style. If it looks encyclopedic then I'll keep it; if it needs major cleanup, I'll decide it's not worth bothering.

Opera singers don't get the media attention of top athletes or rock musicians, etc. so I'm not too worried about the number of Google hits. Nonetheless searching for "Ryan Allen" and opera, I found more than enough (including a mention in a NY Times review) to verify that he is an opera singer who has appeared around the country. Notability might be borderline but again opera singers don't get as much attention as rock singers. But performing at Carnegie Hall and with the Metropolitan Opera is performing at the highest levels. We automatically accept athletes who play professionally or who play at the highest amateur levels. I'd say that there are relatively few people who can sing opera at the highest levels compared to the thousands of former professional soccer players who have articles.

My bottom line is that this article does not diminish the encyclopedia - it does not trivialize what it means to be sufficiently noteworthy to be included. Thanks for asking. Sbowers3 (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ryan Allen
I hope I did that right. I responded on the talk page at Ryan Allen, and I hope you can read it and reply. p.s. I just realized I forgot to write my four tildes there. Argh! Voiceperson (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Kremzeek!
This user is confusing me. Did you read their talk page? What were they talking about?  D u s t i talk to me 17:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * My best guess is they are a sockpuppet from a banned user. It is hard to tell who. It is a hard page to read.  Gtstricky Talk or C 18:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks like he is a user on another Wiki that was blocked and came here for a while. User:ItsWalky blocked him on the other wiki so he attacked him here.  Gtstricky Talk or C 18:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I see, shouldn't we do something here as well? I mean, he is attacking the user here as well.  D u s t i talk to me 18:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think your warning is good for now. I think the attacked user could make a case if they want to. Do you think more should be done?  Gtstricky Talk or C 19:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you very much for giving your support to my admin application, which recently closed successfully (36/3/1). I hope I can continue to justify the confidence that you have placed in me. If there is any way that I can help out more, please drop me a line. Thanks again. - 52 Pickup   (deal)  22:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Help Me 1
Some editor has been making a TON of foolish (i.e., clearly erroneous) edits ... not sure if they are vandalism or simple ignorance by a brand new user. These incessant edits are annoying and frustrating, not to mention wasting my time. How do we handle stuff like this? Report it to an admin or what? What is the procedure? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC))


 * Try asking the user to explain there edits. If you think it is vandalism revert it. And remember to assume good faith with new users especially. Alexfusco5 19:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I don't want to "get involved" with that person (for various reasons, and regardless of who that person is). How can this be addressed ... how does an Administrator get involved to intervene ... what is the procedure for all this?  Thanks.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC))


 * You can direct an admin directly to the user; however, I'd highly advise clearing the issue up with the user first before bringing out the heavy artillery, so to speak. If you are sure it is blatant vandalism and nothing else, use WP:AIV. Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  22:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no "issue" with the user. In fact, that user does not even know that I exist.  We have never communicated before, whatsoever, either on this matter or any other matter.  At this point, I do not want to "get involved" with this other user ... and just want to point out his/her editing history to "someone in charge" who can intervene.  I have no idea if this is blatant vandalism (in which case, I have neither the energy, time, or inclination to deal with a vandal and incur his subsequent wrath) ... or if this is just a newcomer that has no idea about how to edit / revert / use sandboxes / etc. (in which case, I have neither the energy, time, or inclination to deal with taking a newcomer under my wing to explain these ins and outs).  All that being said -- and repeated -- how do I get an administrator to step in?  I am not asking if I can do so ... I am asking how do I do so?  Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC))

[outdent] Let me get this straight, you see an editor making edits that are probably unconstructive and you're want it to stop. However, you neither want to warn him, nor reveiw his edits, nor ask for someone to block him. You are mearly asking for someone to reveiw his edits and judge whether they are vandalism or not, and act accordingly to it. Am I correct?--Sunny910910 (talk 01:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, not correct at all. My request was quite clear. But -- once again -- spelled out even more clearly: How do I get in contact with an Administrator to intervene in this matter? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC))


 * In that case, WP:AIV seems to be the perfect place to go. But as I see, someone has already mentioned it and you stated that it doesn't work. Can you explain why? I am confused by the situation here.--Sunny910910 (talk 01:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Point-by-point:


 * you see an editor making edits that are probably unconstructive - correct
 * and you want it to stop - correct
 * you do not want to warn him - correct
 * you do not want to review his edits - incorrect ... I have reviewed them and, in fact, that is what prompted this whole "Help Me" request
 * you do not want to ask for someone to block him - incorrect ... I don't know how the whole "blocking someone" procedure works ... I don't know if he even warrants a block ... hence, I cannot request him blocked ... that's not my call
 * you are merely asking for someone to review his edits, and judge whether they are vandalism or not, and act accordingly to it - basically, correct ... I noticed this problem, I don't want to get involved, I want someone else (with authority) (an administrator?) to intervene and to handle this whole headache ...
 * am I correct? - correct to the extent qualified above
 * Bottom Line: I don't know if this kid is playing around and not realizing that he is harming other articles ... or if this kid is intentionally vandalizing articles ... who knows?
 * So ... all this being analyzed and explained ... next step?
 * P.S. I did check out that WP:AIV page the first time around, and it did not seem applicable ... I forget why, and I would need to go back and look again.
 * Thanks.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC))


 * I just checked that WP:AIV page again ... it's not applicable at all. It says (in the first line) something about "it must be a case of clear and obvious vandalism" ... and ... "the complainer (me) must do the following three things first (b) provide sufficient warnings to the user ... etc  etc etc" ... this did not seem in any way applicable to my complaint / request above.  No?   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC))

[outdent] Hmm...As far as I know, there isn't anyplace where you can do this. However, you could ask an administrator directly and get him/her to deal with the user or at the moment I could try to handle it for you and if nessessary, I could got to AIV myself after he has had several warnings. But aside from that I don't think you have any other choices.--Sunny910910 (talk 02:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately there is no place to just do a quick report. Like a "fyi please look at user Billy123". At this point you may tell us his/her user name here and one of us would be happy to do a quick look for you. If you are not comfortable with that you may use the "email this user" function in the toolbox (on the left side of any of our user pages) to provide details of your concern. Cheers  Gtstricky Talk or C 03:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * To - Sunny910910 and Gtstricky ... thanks for your replies. I have no problem telling you the person's name ... which is Actryan.  Take a look in his account.  You will see that he goes into an article and makes a million silly and clearly erroneous edits.  I am surprised at the time/effort he puts into this.  Whether this is childish vandalism ... or a person using established articles as his own sandbox to experiment with ... I don't know.  Unfortunately, however, many / most / all of his foolishness impacts Academy Award type articles ... the very articles that I keep an eye on, edit, work on, monitor, improve, contribute to, etc.  I now wash my hands of this ... and will pass this headache on to you both.  Please deal with this person.  Thank you.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC))

Colin Norris speedy
Hmm. Not sure about that interpretation, but I'll go along with it. Where's the main article for this? If there isn't one then a move is better than a speedy delete. Finally, for a killer to knock of at least four people and not have an article, not sure on that either. While I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, are you going through the category of Category:Spree killers and tagging them as well? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I read speedy instead of prod. Okay, fine...!  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Cool, well you're probably right. But instead of deleting it, I'd opt for expansion followed by (or even preceded by) a page move with Colin Norris redirecting to wherever.  Not sure this incident warrants an article of its own at this point, primarily because I can't think of a decent, succinct title for it!  Any suggestions welcome though.  Good speaking with you.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Improvements in article on Ryan Allen
I hope you can review the changes I made to the article on Ryan Allen today. I added references (including a change of the Carnegie Hall reference. It is now a NYTimes clickable article, no longer directions for a phone call!) and deleted claims for "wide range" and "experienced actor." I remember what you suggested in this latter matter, and I know the solution is not perfect; but I believe it is an improvement. In place of the wide range statement, please see a sentence I added averring versatility. (after "lyric bass"...blah-blah-blah) Is this article in a condition yet where it merits the removal of the notices at the beginning? I am working to see those notices removed, and if I have not yet achieved this objective, I hope you can guide me in the direction of desirable improvement. Thank you. Voiceperson (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help in working with me, and I appreciate the kind words you left yesterday. Voiceperson (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)