User talk:Gwernol/Archive 10

Snake Liquid
Look, I don't think he's gonna calm down. He's already had two Wikiquette Alerts, with the second stating he's been less civil. We've already warned him plenty of times, yet he keeps being very agressive. I really think someone should block this guy. Maybe a couple hour ban would do the job and get the point across that we are serious about his behavior. --Targetter 04:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

RfC
Hello: There is an RfC on Snake Liquid which you may wish to comment on. --Emufarmers(T/C) 05:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

More vandalism
Another one on my talk page, not long after you de-protected it. I suggest leaving the semi-protection on longer, as the vandal doesn't seem to be bored with this yet. -- LGagnon 19:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't help noticing the above comment as I had an issue with LGagnon a few days ago. Now I'm not the same person who placed the most recent comments on her/his talk page but, clearly, this is evidence that this individual, because of the way s/he communicates with people, is not very well liked. Her/his rudeness should result in at least some sort of disciplinary measure, if only to encourage future civility. Thank You. --207.161.42.109 01:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandal coddling
If there's one thing that Wikipedia has failed at, it's to cut off dead weight. Admins constantly coddle the vandals as if they were contributors worth hanging on to. For instance, User:Touth is clearly behind the sock puppet IP that last vandalized my talk page, yet when I tried to get an admin to deal with it they did nothing. Touth is let off the hook because he denies doing it, yet the IP copies his writing almost word for word. And in addition, someone makes a personal attack against me here on your talk page (see the section above this), and this is also ignored. Honestly, I don't have any faith whatsoever in Wikipedia's admins because of the lack of action that they take to fix problems, and I'm only losing more faith in Wikipedia itself because of this. It is this very reason why Wikipedia is always a figure of ridicule in the press; not because of the vandalism, but because not enough is done to end it. -- LGagnon 05:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

University of Auckland vandal (user "Loserdick")
You seem to be the target of a petty vandal using University of Auckland computers, probably because you've blocked him in the past. But if you think you know who it is, or can link this to prior vandalism, please contribute to Abuse reports. --woggly 07:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Club of Rome
Nonsense is what the Club of Rome did and does... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.237.151.226 (talk • contribs).

get in touch
Hey Gwernol got your message- thanks- contact me via email still new at this Alex Young (freelerxst) - did Paul Weldon page soundink1@aol.com

RC patrolling
Keep up the good ol' RC patrolling, looks like some vandals have taken a shine to you (think of that as a merit).-- Andeh 09:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Need some help
User:Kidbrother has gone through many articles changing every instance of "stadiums" to "stadia". This includes changing categories, moving pages etc. I happen to prefer the plural "stadiums", and I can see no evidence that he sought any consensus to do this. I left him a message about it but he hasn't responded. --Guinnog 09:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sorry to give you so much work to do. What a needless mess. --Guinnog 10:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your trouble. I'm not a fan of these Latin plurals, but would have been up for debating it. The problem is that the debate never happened. --Guinnog 10:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Estadio Azteca
Re this edit. Be reminded that it is considered bad form to rollback edits that are not vandalism. Thank you. -- Run e Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; 10:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I've reverted my own change. Thanks! -- Run e Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; 11:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry don't do blocks
I'm really sorry.,.. I don't do blocks. I have 31 ISPs with many ranges. Thanks though.

YourCousin--86.29.114.239 22:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Chuck Marean
You were supposing that Chuck Marean is a youngster, but according to that he uploaded early on, he is not. I've been following his edits for a couple of months now, and his methodology of making edits and his behavior remain remarkable unchanged during that time. I've grown weary of undoing his edits, and I'm sure that there are others tired of checking up on him. --Avogadro 15:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the prod
I realized as soon as I had done it that it didn't qualify. I'm trying not to do any at all, but I fell into the trap on that one. Mattisse 21:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought users were allowed to post opinion on their talk pages, but your recent editing of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:24.115.28.78 seems to indicate otherwise.

You should be careful, some unruly users would use services designed to hide their IP address and possibly force you to lock your own talk page for engaging in what could be perceived as overstepping your authority.

Thank You
Thanks for temp blocking the ip 24.115.28.78 for his personal attack against me.--1568 22:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems like he’s back --1568 23:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Funny Cide —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.116.71 (talk • contribs).


 * I don't know what to make of this. Is this a horse running in the 2:30 at Kempton park? Should I put down an honest bob on the pony? Gwernol 23:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Douchebaggery.....
Well, fairyboy, you've certainly drawn my ire!

Gwernol is single handedly responsable for the tripling of douchebags on Wikipedia in the last decade. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.17.38.206 (talk • contribs).

International Bowl is a future event and creator removed the prod
I looked at the criteria for Speedy but I can't tell. I'm not willing to do afd's anymore. There is also a future New Mexico Bowl that author will probably remove my prod. Mattisse 15:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Cruft Alert
Given your interest in conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, I thought you might be interested in one that was up for review. See Articles for deletion/List of songs deemed inappropriate by Clear Channel following the September 11, 2001 attacks I urge you to carefully examine Wikipedia's policies and rules, and then carefully consider whether you have an opinion on the matter. Your friend. Morton DevonshireYo 

You've got a Thank you card!
  Open your card! Dear Gwernol, thank you so much for your beautiful words, your kidness and your trust in me. My Request for Adminship is finally over, and the support and appreciation that the community has gifted me will stick in my mind as long as I live. I have no way to properly express how grateful I am to you for all you've done for me, and all I can tell you is, I'll try not to disappoint you nor anyone else with my use of the buttons... and if I mess up, make sure to come here and give me a good yell! :) Seriously, tho, if you ever need my help, either for admin-related stuff or in any other way, you'll always be welcome to message me, and I promise I'll try my very best. Dear G, this is the perfect opportunity to finally speak to one another after reading your words for months and months. I am sure that we'll be able to talk often, and trust me, it'd be my pleasure. Both your contributions and, most important your warm way to deal with others made me notice you long, long ago; and being supported by a person I look up to, like you, meant the world to me. I sincerely hope this is but the beginning of a friendship, and such thought fills me with joy. Please take good care, and I hope to talk to you again real soon! :) With a big hug, your friend,  P h a e d r i e l ♥  tell me  

My Edits
Please restore my edits that you undid immediately. Undoing somebody else's work is WP:Vandalism. Further, as an administrator you should have been aware that Wikipedia is not a democracy WP:NOT, thus "consensus" is not required before fixing a problem. However, to satisfy your appetite the "evidence of consensus" is :
 * Number of wikipedians: 1,945,844
 * Number who object to my changes: 2

It's entirely inappropriate that 2 people who feel aggrieved for some resaon, upset the rest of the wikipedia community. It took me a long time to do the work; I don't appreciate your destroying it. So, please restore my work, and please think carefully about the apology that you're going to offer me.

Kidbrother 04:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow! That has to be one of the most childish rants I've read in some time.  Kiddo, if you're looking for a WP:CIVIL block, keep it up! Rklawton 04:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I checked. In the Latin language Wikipedia, his edits would have been quite correct and proper.  Of course, they aren't correct in the English language.  Oddly enough, English does a lot of things to Latin words that are not grammatically correct in Latin.  Funny how little that matters to English language speakers.  If you get tired of reverting this kid's edits, let me know and I'll lend a hand.  Rklawton 04:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I checked in with Google, too. English wins 10:1.  Rklawton 04:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:DICK?
I've been weighing in on a couple of things on ANI recently and suddenly thought people might think I was being a bit of a dick as I am not an admin. Do you think I should: a) Not do it b) Do it, but make it clear I'm not an admin c) Carry on as I am doing I thought I could trust you to give me advice on this without making me feel bad. That chap took a surprisingly long time to come back to us, didn't he?! Thanks again for all your help --Guinnog 19:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sussed it out. Sorry for leaving you such an insecure wee message. --Guinnog 21:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Fetal rights article/ question about edit
I noticed you edited my edit from "is caused by" to "sometimes stems from." I was curious because I haven't heard of any other motivation for opposition to abortion other than concern for fetal rights. "Sometimes" would imply that their are other factors as well. I'm changing it to "usually" so it sounds less weird. Just an odd question.

Thanks. Pax Jfraatz 23:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)jfraatz

Barnstar
Oh no problem, I was looking for some practice on using templates and such, so I gave you a barnstar... hope knowing that doesn't take away from the value of the barnstar. Still well-diserved, though.Dan 16:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for this. Perhaps its time for me to go anonymous. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 20:09, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I believe it is highly damaging for wikipedia for rogue individuals to summarily delete posts that they are not experts in. If you can explain to me how such behavior is not damaging, I am happy to listen.  Thank you. ArteWorks Business Class 21:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

deletion of 'Memetic accounts of religion' edit
Response to ->(Please provide a source for this speculation. Thanks.)

For example, Abdul Rahman faced execution for rejecting Islam in favor of Christianity. Islamic leaders called for Rahman's execution as dictated by Islamic law (Islamic law providing no room or tolerance for multiple beliefs)

See: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0331_060331_muslims.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Rahman_%28convert%29

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1746943&page=1

My submission expands on the previous author’s point of view (who does not cite references or examples, instead uses the word “some” without definition)

"…A tendency exists in memetics to disparage religious memes. However, some speculate that traditional religions act as mental immune systems to suppress new (and potentially harmful) memes. Some compare this process to a scenario where the action of a virus…"

You choose to delete my contribution out of hand even though my point is generally accepted (i.e. There aren’t many Muslim-Christians or Jewish-Buddhists), and you choose to do so without applying the same standards to the existing text.

Additionally, I provided a Link to an ‘approved’ Wiki article support my point.

Are you reading my post in context, or simply dismissing me because I’m not a frequent contributor? Perhaps religion is a too hot a topic?

The arbitrary deletion of legitimate posts is certainly a disincentive to contribute in the future.

A response would be appreciated. 71.117.5.176 03:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with you that the Abdul Rahman case happened as your sources describe it. The issue is that you are claiming this is due to "memetic innoculation": and I don't see any evidence to support this in the cited sources. The Rahman case happened, but the link to memetics is (as far as I know) your speculation, therefore is not allowed becasue of Wikipedia's policy on original research. Sorry.


 * Your point that this is arbitrary is to some extent true, in this sense: I have the Meme article on my watchlist and so I updates to it. The reason that I picked out your addition is not based on you being a frequent or infrequent contributor, but simply because you made a frecent change to the article. You are right that there are other problematic statements in the article, and I clearly need to go in and clean it out. However just because there are unsourced claims in the article does not give anyone else the right to add further unsourced statements. That only makes the problem worse.


 * Please don't be discouraged, that's not my aim. I'm just trying to help maintain the quality of the encyclopedia by enforcing the policies and guidelines that have been agreed by the Wikipedia community. Please feel free to ask me further questions if this is not clear. Thanks, Gwernol 12:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello.
How do I get to be a person with no life who governs a website made up primarily of users opinions presented as fact ?

Please get back to me A.S.A.P. .. thanks!

Thanks
Thanks for fast action on reverting stupidities on my talk page. --Deenoe 14:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

E-mail
Please check your e-mail. thanks. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 16:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you


Blocking Hairylip
Weren't you a little too hasty in blocking User:Hairylip? Judging by his contributions, all he did between the previous comments/warnings and your block was edit his own userpage, to add a link to a page that doesn't exist. I don't think this constitutes "disruptive edits". Now if he had edited a Wikipedia article, particularly to add information about "Space Trek", then it would have been disruptive, but he didn't. J I P  | Talk 08:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I did not realise the article Alliance of Species did exist, but you deleted it. It didn't show up in the contributions. Please disregard the above. Thanks. J I P  | Talk 08:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Off-wiki harassment matter
You may be interested in my observation here. The user concerned is lucky you didn't impose an indefinite block, which I'm sure would have been widely supported by other admins. Suggest we leave it there for now, but I'd be prepared to impose or support an indefinite block if anything remotely like this happens again.

Cheers! Metamagician3000 10:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Requests_for_adminship/Jtkiefer_3
I, in my short time here, have never seen anything like this. I can't stand it. Posted notes on the B notice board and Essjay's talk for early clouse. Left note with JT asking him to withdraw. Let me know if you can give me further guidance/feedback. Thanks. :) Dlohcierekim 16:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. :) Dlohcierekim 16:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

No Parents Deletion
hey i know i'm new to this and all but the No Parents page was a legitamite entry. Its a really common expression and I was going to write up a page about where it came from etc. You guys have a lot of other Dartmouth pages and if some other students got to contribute to it, it wouldn't be anything different than our page on Dartmouth Pong etc. And I know its just not here, its a lot of other schools. Its not just some random entry, i just didn't have the time/knowledge to post something full right away. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MattyMcD (talk • contribs).

Thanks about Thugaboo
Didn't know that it had to go afd first to be eligible for repost. Thanks for letting me know. Mattisse(talk) 01:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply concerning BigThomasFan
Hello, I suppose I am just very frustrated that people choose to react that way, I'm fairly short tempered. The whole TAF - S10 page is a joke though! Even though anonymous users are now banned from it, people still continue to abuse it, people like BigThomasFan who can only interpret things wrongly. The TTAF pages attract a lot of immature vandals for some reason, maybe they should be blocked from IP users... its just a suggestion. I'm afraid I lost my temper with FelixCheng too, another user who frequently tests people's patience. Foxearth 02:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
I see you reverted my comments that I made on Requests for adminship/Daniel.Bryant. The reasoning behind this is I asked a fellow user (who I mistook for an admin) to close it, but unfortunately he was so quick to do so that I was unable to respond. I expected a slight lag in the actions being done, as that is what happens when you request assistance from users over IRC. I ask that I be allowed to comment in defense of my own character on my own RfA. Please post on my talk page whether you will allow this or not.  Daniel . Bryant  04:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow.. you beat my post to AIV!
Well done blocking the Emma Watson vandal - before I could hit submit I saw the block pop up on IRC! :) - Gl e n 04:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * He did? Wow, also impressive - he hadn't even warned him! Nice work all round it seems - Gl e n 05:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Getlazy
Thank you for your attention to the getlazy editor. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 05:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Current mac project collaboration
The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 13:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I cant believe you...
Why are you so angry? If you don't like the article lets work together as friends to make it one of our best. C'mon, lets do it. xoxo.Courtney Akins 02:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

No it wont be deleted. It IS notable, my boyfriends and I watch it all the time... I can guarantee that it will be kept. Thanks,Courtney Akins 02:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Image CopyVio
Thanks for pointing out my error, I just didn't bother to look enough into it. Cheers.  Canadian - Bacon  (contribs) 03:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah ok, don't worry I didn't take it badly or anything. Either way the explanations nailed 2 birds with 1 stone, thanks for the help.  Canadian - Bacon  (contribs) 03:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I wish you would weigh in on Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents /Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Blogism
I don't understand what the outcome of that discussion is, after I asked for help, even though I read it over and over, as I have the Speedy Delete criteria as you instructed me to do when you corrected me before -- and ComputerJoe when he corrected me.

The admin comments on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#New Blogism are most unhelpful. Can you explain what they mean?

Is there a place on Wikipedia to go to for real help? Admins, by and large, seem very unpleasant people. I'm beginning to get most pessimistic about this place. Mattisse(talk) 11:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your reply. I've seen comments like mine on the afd pages many times so I thought that was the way to handle that situation. Thanks for letting me know that it is not. Mattisse(talk) 12:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

My review
Gwernol, thank you so much for the work you have done on this. More than the hours you must have put into it are the kind things that you, as an editor I deeply respect and admire, are still able to say even after having trawled through all my many edits. I know that not all I have done here has been good; I agree with both points you make about my contributions to the WTC7 article talk.

A bit like yourself, I am preoccupied in real life at the moment and will be for a week or so. I'll spend that time thinking about whether and when I wand to go for adminship. I rather think the whether is a foregone conclusion, and the when mainly depends on my being convinced I could do it with a reasonable chance of success, and on being able to put some decent time into the process.

Thanks again; I owe you bigstyle. Let me know if there is ever anything I can do for you. --Guinnog 14:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I do hope you don't mind; I've made a couple of minor typo edits to the review. I think I am almost ready to take the plunge now. --Guinnog 11:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi again. Please check your email. --Guinnog 15:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi
I'm trying to promote WikiLove by saying Hi to everyone I stumble upon.

--PEAR 16:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll keep that in mind. Thanks! (^_^)


 * Maybe I'll make a template with some sort of friendly message.


 * --PEAR 16:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It sometimes really is better to not be an admin (thankfully, I no longer am one). I'll need you to bail me out, Gwernol, it seems I may have assumed bad faith too quickly and made an error in judgment, although PEAR's message was the least expected. I'm about to head to sleep, so perhaps you could help me clear it up (see User talk:Chacor) Chacor 16:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * On second thought, assuming a lot of bad faith but the better-safe-than-sorry route, we may be dealing with a troll. "I'd appreciate it if administrators were more careful about threatening to block non-vandals." Said user's edits can hardly be described as... necessary. Chacor 17:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC

LairList.com
The site is run noncommercially by donations granted through a nonprofit foundation in the Netherlands. If you would prefer to replace "nonprofit" with the word "non-commercial." DutchSeduction 19:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

URL is also verified. Thanks for checking. DutchSeduction 19:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank You
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page--1568 22:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Miscellany for deletion
A portal created recently by - the Orkney Portal - has been nominated for deletion. If you wish to take part in the discussion please contribute at: Thanks. --Mais oui! 08:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Miscellany for deletion

What are you talking aboot?
Seriously...please stop dragging out WP:OWN for no apparent reason. Hey, look, there's a dead horse over there! Why don't you go beat it?

S oa  P  14:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

my image
my user page image wasn't a personal attack. -0111

uh....no it wasn't personal attack on who? -0111

it is quite obvious that you are jealous of my image and that is the only reason you deleted it.Please keep your obvious immature jealousy to yourself.Thank you not 0111 18:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

User Pages
Do you know what to do when a user uses their user page, as a personal website, weblog ...etc? --1568 21:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer! I spotted two user pages User:Chiyocide it’s somewhat strange.*Maybe vandalized* (but contributions seem ok) And User:Sidewalksolipsis who seems only interested in using the page as a list for a trip to Chicago--1568 00:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Question
"This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you may be blocked for disruption."

How can that be my last warning if you havent given me any other warnings before??

So I get one warning. And wikipedia was supposed to be the "open source". AS it turns out its just a place where power hungry teens go to feel good. Oh and block this IP but it wont stop me. I will just change my IP so your tactics are more or less useless.