User talk:Gwernol/Archive 18

Gwernol, I just (10:20 a.m. EST) reverted the following vandalism, and since you had placed a warning on Funkydunky9's user page I thought I'd bring it to your attention. [by the way, is this sort of message helpful?] 15:16, 16 December 2006 Agradman (Talk | contribs) (Undo revision 94548740 by Funkydunky9 (talk))

User:Izanbardprince
Hello again Gwernol. User Izanbardprince is once again vandalizing the "Homosexuality" article. I just thought I'd bring this to your attention. Imgi12 09:38 13 December 2006 -

Once again you are being very condescending to me. Please tell me how I vandalized JzG's and your user page because I honestly don't think I did. If I did, then I guess you get the satisfaction of rubbing it in my face since you like being condescending to me, and if I didn't, I would like justification. Responses like: "You are perfectly well aware of how you vandalized both my talk page and JzG's page" really don't help find a solution here. I would really appreciate if you would show me proof that I vandalized. Thank you, and try using your manners next time. Sportsguru9999 02:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Once again you are false. I looked in the history of each talk page. All I put is I love you marry me, because i really love you guys. You guys do so much and i used to admire you. I still admire JzG but not you. You are now very condescending and rude. I guess when you are really excited to be an admin you become this way. So I did not call JzG a dildo, i do not know where you got THAT from, but if saying i love you is a big problem, i dont know what isnt a problem. Sportsguru9999 02:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Once again, wrong. The edit summary simply says dil. Where I am from this is a slang word. It is almost like putting "sick" or "awesome" or "Whatever" or something. Don't assume things. I wouldn't call someone a dildo. I did not come close to saying that. Also, please stop being rude to me. My edits saying "i love you" are from the heart and i mean it, i HAD respect for you. If it is a huge problem for your pompous self then i am sorry. I would really like it if you spoke to me as your equal or at least like a human. Thank You Sportsguru9999 03:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Stop being rude to me please. Sportsguru9999 03:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

They did come from the heart, until you started being rude and accusing me of false vandalism. Dil is not short for dildo, i know what the word means and it means whatever where i am from. You obviously don't get out much. Secondly, i agreed with the user sticking up for himself against your rude, pompous, over-zealous behavior. I like when the little guys stick up for themsleves. His edit was bad, but u are cruel and condescending, and you deserve it. Please stop your hypocrtitical behavior before i get angry Sportsguru9999 03:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

User:HoldMeHarry
Can you double check? Looks like you left him a message he was blocked, but doesn't look like he actually is. Fan-1967 21:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Rack railway
External references to immages from de:Zahnradbahn. They should stay there until you, I or anyone else figures out how to copy them from the German text to the English text so that they show up properly. I have tried but so far without success.

Cheers, Peter Horn 00:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you could post the following to the Wiki commons
or tell me how, better yet, how do I get these into the English language article?
 * Pictures from the German Wikipedia:
 * Riggenbach system
 * Strub system
 * Abt system (3 bars)
 * Locher system
 * Rack railroad switch
 * Rack railroad switch (duplicate) of the Wengernalpbahn in the Lauterbrunnen station.

Peter Horn 21:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking forward to seeing them
Thanks for trying whenever you can.

Peter Horn 04:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Salem Witch Trials
Firstly, I appologize if this is in the wrong section. Secondly, I fail to see how this statement, "the symptoms documented that many of the accusors exibited are very similar to those of female hysteria, an occurence closely related to the post-traumatic stress of rape," is unencyclopedic. Please explain.

(((If you really want to hear it and not be in denial, read this: I am a university student and have recently discovered your website regarding the Salem Witch Trials. As far as probable causes, please look into the possibility that Reverend Parris (or another prominent member of the community) had sex with the girls, causing them to be so very traumatized (see "female hysteria" of the Victorian era or "Rape Trauma Syndrome"). I know is a difficult concept to accept, which is likely why it has been ignored for so long.

Please do not hastily discount this possibility. If the convulsions and hysteria were due to a disease or some such cause, it would not adequately explain why the young girls were primarily the ones so very traumatized (rather than young boys, adult men and women, babies, or the elderly).

The Puritan society was quite reactionary. Girls were expected to be virgins (particularly at the age of 9 or 11). Virgins who are raped are known to be highly traumatized. The girls had no one to tell that they were raped in the highly conservative culture (how could they say that they had sex at age 9? that they were raped? that it was their father/uncle who did it? that it was the Reverend who did it? that it was statutory rape? that it was incest?). It is very common for rape victims, in their psychologically traumatized state, to try to protect the perpetrator, as irrational as that may seem to a non-rape victim. After Betty Parris moved to live with her relatives (and likely away from whatever was traumatizing her), her afflictions seemed to have subsided. The Reverend, from my readings, displays many key signs for potential rapists (selfishness to the point of divine-right, hostile/threatening disposition,excessive anger, obsession, et cetera). He certainly tried to convince his parishioners that there was Satan and witchcraft in their midst, trying to dissuade people from the church, him, and God. From my readings, he appears to have tried to manipulate the town into believing the traumatized reactions were a result of witchcraft. He likely told them that it would be a sin if they resisted. He beat his slave, Tituba, in order to force a confession. Sick people are rarely sick in just one aspect of their lives. Sane girls do not go crazy for no apparent reason. Something seriously traumatic must happen for an otherwise mentally healthy individual to feel hysterical.

In this era, rape victims can get the psychological help they need to get through the trauma. Healthy recovery is brought about by discussing the issue with others. If one is not able to discuss their trauma (as is very likely in the case of the Salem girls), their post traumatic stress/ rape trauma symptoms will not disappear. The girls were likely in heavy denial (as is common in rape cases) and were also likely to try to irrationally protect the perpetrator. Children can be easily manipulated. Additionally, children cannot bear children, meaning that there is less of a risk of a pregnancy scandalizing the town. If it was indeed the reverend, it is clear that he is sick, and grotesquely so. But, that doesn't mean it wasn't rape. There are many sick people, he just happened to have more power than most. Even if it was not the Reverend who raped, the girls reactions are very similar to the convulsions felt by rape survivors; it is so very likely that the girls were raped by someone in their community (if not multiple people, or the same person on multiple occasions).

If the girls ever admitted they were just playing at their hysteria, they were likely in denial. Female hysteria and Rape Trauma Syndrome are very real and very common occurrences and have been documented throughout history.

Please look into this and respond right away, as it is a very likely, and perhaps the most probable, cause for the hysteria.

Sincerely, )))) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yesmaammm (talk • contribs).


 * Again, I appologize if this is in the wrong section. I fail to see how this statement, "the documented symptoms many of the accusors exibited are very similar to those of female hysteria, an occurence closely related to the post-traumatic stress of rape" promotes an orginal theory or is in other senses "nonencyclopedic." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yesmaammm (talk • contribs).

Cites
What's the best way to do that then?

$$Insert formula here$$$$Insert formula here$$

Am I a Borat vandal?
I'll stand by your judgement that my last edit to the Borat page was vandalism. However, as an article I'd suggest one discussing what his fans thought was his finest moment was of high interest to Wikipedia. I guess it's pretty subjective but I'd suggest it's of more interest than "Borat in Paris" or "naked pics of women in Borat's new book". But all in all, I think Wikipedia is great - and you're obviously a lot more experienced than me - so I like you. I am big like can of Pepsi. BoratOnline 06:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

RFA
Thanks for the encouragement! In all honsety, I was not planning ont rying for a couple of months. However, 2 other wikipedias that I have very activley helped with stuff wanted to nomiante me and I was not going to say no! Thanks again for the encouragement it is MUCH appreciated! Keep up the great work yourself. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think this RFA was good for me, I see a few areas where I need to improve and I am ALWAYS for improving myself. Thanks again for the encouragement.  Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

You are a typical example of what holds wikipedia back from realizing its real potential
I am not the first to question/disagree with your reversion of edits others make, and it's obvious that I shall neither be the last. It's unfortunate you are deluded into believing yourself to be an authority on everything such that you evidently think your viewpoint must trump that of many others. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.214.132 (talk • contribs).

From EncinoMan2
Thank you for your understanding, it will not happen again.TheEncinoMan2 03:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)TheEncinoMan2

Thank you for your efforts.
I was about to make a change to some insolent fool's edit to Frederick Douglass's wiki page. The user added "HES A NI**ER" to the page under the SEE ALSO section. You would think any intelligent person (white, like me, or otherwise) would easily recognize what a great man Douglass was (black, or otherwise). Clearly this "editor" is as unintelligent as the thing he/she wrote - "'HES' a ...". How about the proper use of an apostrophe as in "He's a great man". As a new user to wikipedia (in fact I registered just so I could revert the ugly edit), I was amazed to see the edit removed before I even had a chance to. Wikipedia... amazing!

Troll stuff
I read the troll comments you just removed. Different strokes, I guess. That little rant was worth framing. Cheers, Rklawton 19:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

User:81.97.107.117 spamming again
Hi Gwernol. Yesterday you gave this user: 81.97.107.117 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • block user • [ block log ]) a final warning for spamming. S/he's back at it. Since you're on line I thought it might be quickest to come straight to you. Thanks --Siobhan Hansa 22:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Back at it 22 December and 30 December. --A. B. (talk) 03:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Man, I didn't do shit
It was an experiment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.172.28.136 (talk • contribs).

I used the fucking sandbox, and some little shit "bot" reverted it.

Man, answer me when I'm talking to you.

Yo, where you at?

Allmanbro59
He's still spamming - check his contributions. Can you block him please? Thanks. LuciferMorgan 00:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Spam notices
Hi Gwernol,

I will certainly try to be more diligent about leaving messages on user's talk pages when I revert spam. I usually do it when the user has actually created an account, but when it's an anonymous IP address, I tend to go through their recent contributions and revert the recent batch.

thanks.

Justin 01:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

User:216.165.150.136
Sorry, I thought it was a test1 remark and it was only 5 minutes before my remark, so I assumed good faith and thought he hasn't seen the comment yet. Looking back at it, yes I should of given a stronger warning. --Simonkoldyk 02:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I need help because an user clobbered my archive page
Help. A user was attempting to clone my archive page (see this page). However, they did a move instead of copying the source. Now my history for that page is lost and all I have there is a redirect. Can you fix this problem for me? I can revert his changes, but until the redirect page is deleted, I can't move the archive page back.

His version of the page is at User talk:Ludvikus/Archive 1. I started a relevant conversation at User talk:Ludvikus. -Will Pittenger 03:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I expected to have to tag the redirect page with db-empty.  I had no idea you would respond that quickly. Will (Talk - contribs) 03:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Ludvikus Thanks You, Pt. User:Gwernol
'' Comment moved from your user page. -- Gogo Dodo 06:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC) ''

Thank you very much for cleaning up my mess (& so fast)! You are a Good Cop:

'' Removed inclusion of RC Patrol userbox. ''


 * Best wishes, and Seasons Greetings!!! --Ludvikus 06:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Um
I am Interrobamf. See Talk:Madame Medusa. 129.89.191.226 16:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Tour Eiffel
A moment please! I was editing the article to cite the reference! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stymphal (talk • contribs).

Anti-vandal Barnstar
Hey, thanks for the award! I've seen your work all over the place in Wikipedia so it's nice to be recognised by someone who is clearly an integral part of the project! I hope I can continue to fight the good fight! Cheers! Budgiekiller 17:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Wiki-ov
I indefinitely blocked this user; if you feel I was being harsh, I won't be in the least offended if you want to unblock or reduce the block. --Guinnog 19:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I just had a gut feeling... --Guinnog 19:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Jonjdodd
This user has added silly pictures to The Beatles and Mark David Chapman. Will you keep an eye on him please? Cheers, Vera, Chuck &amp; Dave 22:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much. Best wishes, Vera, Chuck &amp; Dave 06:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

PEAR
Hi. I noticed you had some interactions with this editor.

FYI, I was looking for instances of mytreo.net spam, so I was looking at Treo-related articles. I found some was added by User:The Mad Bomber. Then I noticed a similar editing pattern:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=JSJ_Antivirus&action=history
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=JSJ_Software&action=history

I'm not sure either is spamming mytreo.net links, but I knew both had been problematic, so I thought I'd let you know.

See also Requests for checkuser/Case/The Mad Bomber. --A. B. 23:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Real link / spam link
Hi. I don't really understand the different between adding real link with spam link.

What is the "definition" of spam links? I see links to articles (stated by "article by first-name last-name", however when I put a link to my article (where the content is new and USEFUL and I also put the content in here) with similar method, I'm said to be spamming. If government website or any authority website, I could understand, however, the links are just articles to ordinary websites. And, it's been there for a long time even though the page has been changed several times. What's the different with my links?

I've also found lots of links to individual(non governmental) websites, and most of them have been there for a long time although the page is changed for several times. I've also found a page that consist links to websites around 50 of them. From the "wikipedia is not", I think the page should be erased altogether, however, it's not.

From "Wikipedia is" I found that I'm encourage to put my link at resource section if the content is put on the page and it really is useful. But, when I do that, my links got deleted. Is this deletion from Admin or from my competitors? I don't understand the logic here. Could you explain it to me? Mr zhang 08:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page (I count 5 times!) Much appreciated. Regards, Accurizer 11:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

From User:Papageorgio
What do you mean, the stuff i posted was all factual. Find me proof that that stuff isn't true and you can take it down.Papageorgio 14:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Down's kid
I don't think he's really using that drill. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.135.97.73 (talk • contribs).

Lol
Hello my fellow editer and my good friend whom I wish no disrespect to. I wish to enquire why you deleted my section on the term 'lol'. I feel maybe it could have been tidied up a little and written more formally but I didn't think it should have been deleted as it contained valid and important infromation about the term. I wish to hear your response, please do not assume I am accusing you as I am not, perhaps you did it by mistake. You will always remain a friend. Captaindansplashback 18:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

user:Kronecker
Hello Gwernol,

this user keeps changing my user page. He changed my english skill level, from three to two, three times. I don`t think he is going to stop. Could you please issue a warning?--Tresckow 03:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Brokerblogger request
I just wanted to let you know I posted a response to your post with a request on "my talk" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brokerblogger Thanks. Brokerblogger 14:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

IP address 130.159.248.1
Hi, I noticed that you recently banned this IP address due to vandalism. I thought I should point out that this IP address is for the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow and is used by around 30,000 students (including myself). It's inevitable when so many people have access to the internet from the same IP address that there will be the odd user guilty of vandalism but I feel it's a little counter-productive to ban the IP address when it's used by tens of thousands of people. I wouldn't dispute that the person who was guilty of vandalism deserved to be banned, but I just thought I should point out for future reference that this isn't a single user and in my opinion, the address should only be banned under extreme circumstances. Jason —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.159.248.1 (talk) 19:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Health Wiki Research
A colleague and I are conducting a study on health wikis. We are looking at how wikis co-construct health information and create communities. We noticed that you are a frequent contributor to Wikipedia on health topics.

Please consider taking our survey here.

This research will help wikipedia and other wikis understand how health information is co-created and used.

We are from James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. The project was approved by our university research committee and members of the Wikipedia Foundation.

Thanks, Corey 15:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hawthorne Heights
Sorry about the bogus revert on Hawthorne Heights, I didn't see that you'd corrected your not-far-enough revert already. AVB caught it and got it right, though. Sorry about that. —Krellis 22:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I removed "Sir" from Ken Morrison's name
I reverted your edit from "Sir Ken Morrison" back to "Ken Morrison". Ken Morrison is a Commander of the British Empire which doesn't permit the title of "Sir". Please see Order of the British Empire for more information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.109.186.127 (talk) 02:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Steam Engine
I think you wanted to revert Steam Engine one revision further back didn't you? CiaranG 19:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, you just did, I'll shut up. Cheers. CiaranG 19:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

User 24.150.16.83
He vandalized hat again. I reverted it, but he needs to be blocked. Thanks. Shy1520 19:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Warning users
thank you for your help, i was not aware of this! will endeavour to warn vandals in future. is it worth going back over recent reverts and doing this now? Charlieb63 19:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

User at 71.161.60.9
Can you please block him? So far he has vandalized 13 pages, including to user ones, and shows no signs of stopping. Thanks. Shy1520 20:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Another admin has already blocked him. Best, Gwernol 14:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Rhiw Goch
I am a bit puzzled that you have change the link to Rhiw Goch to a wiki link for an article that does not exist. Do you intend to write such an article? Stewart 21:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

SociallyJewish.com
Hello - I am a little confused as to why you keep removing www.Sociallyjewish.com - which is a website that people should know about. The site has everything you need for a Jewish Function plus a huge events calendar.

How can it be allowed to stay on Wikipedia?

Rgds, EmmaEmmawoolf 11:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Zara Phillips

Hey, I just didnt think my input to her page was vandalism...I linked the correct peopel and it was completely on topic and within rules.

Just wondering why it was deleted?

Thanks

hey
this band sucks iv bet uv never heard of them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BackDestrad (talk • contribs) 01:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

A DB-Blank Article
Hello Gwernol I left this message on another admin talk page but it seems they just left, this db blank article has been up for awhile. The content mentions only that it is "the band." Could you take a look at it please? Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 01:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Kwanzaa
Gwernol, you obviously know more about how to operate the Wikipedia system than 99% of it's users, and I am sure you use that knowledge responsibly. So perhaps you can provide me with specific guidance on what I should have done to ensure readers looking up Kwanzaa get to learn about the Marxist themes of some of the 7 principles quoted in it. I read the listing for Kwanzaa carefully and found no reference to the Marxism, socialism or communism, call it what you will, embedded into the the following principles, taken from the reference I quoted:

Ujima (Collective Work and Responsibility) To build and maintain our community together and make our brother's and sister's problems our problems and to solve them together

Ujamaa (Cooperative Economics) To build and maintain our own stores, shops and other businesses and to profit from them together.

Nia (Purpose) To make our collective vocation the building and developing of our community in order to restore our people to their traditional greatness.

To balance any description of Kwanzaa, readers need to be reminded of where these themes lead, and the left-leaning political sympathies of its founder, Karenga. Readers can then draw their own conclusion about the implications. My remarks about the leftward leaning of Kwanzaa's principles and its founder are neither in dispute nor well described in the Wikipedia entry. But it is a germane fact. Please teach me to make this specific edit in a way you find acceptable, leaving both our political views to one side.

UPDATE:

OK, I had another go, moving the edits down to "Controversy", where they belong. I included Tony Snow's famous statement about Kwanzaa, and cited an article representative of the conservative movement's reservations about Kwanzaa. In both cases, I used no "weasle words" (as you called them) and did no "original research" simply sticking to dry descriptions of the articles. I'm no "vandal" just a newcomer wanting to ensure this topic has all the facts a student of the topic would need to understand the issue.

Gwernol hater
Thought you might want to take a look at this. Hehe. =)  Nish kid 64  22:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Tim Murray Image
I thought I tagged it as a screenshot taken from a tv show. I readded it and am pretty sure it is now listed as such. If not I'd appreciate it if you fixed it for me.

Ok how come the Clay Aiken page has an image from a tv show that isn't about the show? Hoponpop69 00:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Tombyt55
You gotta admit, tho, that's a pretty funny picture. Anchoress 02:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

December 2006
How dare you I have evry right to complain about groups of people who feel the are supierior to others and ruin what could be a fun site —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conor moroney (talk • contribs)

user:12.183.28.115
We both added the same to this guy's user page at the same time for the same page (Eiffel Tower)... I removed one of them — Superbfc 19:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Revised vandalism warning system
Hi Gwernol, as a vandal-fighter I thought you might be interested in seeing this discussion. Regards, Accurizer 22:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh it's me Fivie, bobthedestroyer and all those other people. I just wanted to say I quit you meanie! wooh that felt good. If only I could express my anger. But what the heck ever. See you never bye! :P

I Quit! See you never Bad Bye! :P

Dustin hokama & Dustin Hokama
Greetings! You deleted Dustin hokama as non-notable. The same user created Dustin Hokama, apparently on the same subject. It's equal parts patent nonsense & a nonnotable subject. Just thought I'd let you know. I tagged it for speedy deletion. --Ssbohio 01:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

350Z discussion
Hi,

Again I am told that my addition to the 350Z page is not allowed.

Do admins actually take the time to read the addition or research it?

The page I linked to is a 350Z forum in the UK. This site does not charge users for access, it is 100% totally free and dedicated to providing information and help to thousands of people interested in the 350Z. We do not charge money, nor do we ask for any. Indeed it costs me well in excess of £100 ($200) per year to provide this site to people for free.

It contains answers to hundreds of questions asked by owners and potential owners. It has been promoted twice by two leading UK car magazines as a resource for owners to read.

Can you please explain why this is considered advertising?

You seem quite happy to link to sites of the manufacturers - ansd last time I looked, Nissan made several hundred million dollars profit. So why is a free resource site considered advertising?

Just to add - there are links on the 350z page to companies such as Autocar and Evo. Both of these companies make money, so why are their links allowed? This is also advertising is it not? Indeed the article linked to on EVO is the very same one that was published in the printed magazine, the one tht informs readers of our site!

As you find it acceptable to link to companies making millions of dollars in profit, just as long as they have a review of the car, then will it be OK if I link to every single one of the hundreds of reviews on 350z-uk.com? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.50.178.217 (talk • contribs).

Madness Combat article. What happened?
I can't quite get the answer why has Madness Combat articlehas been deleted. Does it have any reason why? Professional Gamer 14:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

User: 170.161.69.82
Vandal Special:Contributions/170.161.69.82 is still vandalising articles. 68.250.203.76 21:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Quick question
I've been trying to get the article List of King George V Playing Fields (Greater London) out of Category:London for a while tonight, but it seems to be embedded in a template or hidden in some way. Any chance you can remove this particular category listing? Thanks, RHB 22:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Block
I never pretended to be a admin, well not on purpose anyways, i thought it was the appropriate tag to put on his page and it was obvious vandalism, a big mess really and 100% of people would consider it clear and serious vandalism on the spot, so he had one edit, well any vandal that gets blocked makes a new name or uses a new IP so of course theyll have one edit, i think its wrong to assume with one edit someone should be blocked i was just trying to help.

Chi Psi
All i did was click on every famour brother listed on the fraternity's article and quickyl added the category to it without reading, i assumed all the links were in order, apperantly not, sorry, but itll probably have fixed itslef by now, ill make sure to be mroe careful when adding categories en masse in the future.Qrc2006 01:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

User:SteveBrookstein
Hi Gwernol, I notice you blocked the above user for incivil / attacking edit summaries on 11 Dec. I've just been on the receiving end of another of the users tirades, I've warned him to be very careful in future, although had this latest display been directed towards another user I would have impassionately blocked on the spot. If you want to review this one and take action that's fine by me. Cheers,  Dei zio  talk 16:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Gartner
Since you previously deprodded it, I thought you'd like to know that Gartner is at AfD. NickelShoe (Talk) 04:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Was about to deprod it now myself, so I added a respectable amount of descriptive material and 3 or 4 unimpeachable refs. If you've got any more, please help by adding them. (What's with this vendetta against them?)DGG 05:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Flying Spaghetti Monster page
Gwernol, I apologise for my first infraction, but as for the flying spaghetti monster page - I don't see that I actually did anything wrong; there is actually, in fact, an FSM union in Gorseinon College. Gareva 01:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)Gareva

Eminem Enemies
I put a source right in the topic title. And what needs to be proven anyway? He disses all of them in his own songs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SlimShady6135 (talk • contribs).

Canada Goose
Our friend, [User:Ebnauman]] is back to editing the Ganada Goose article again. I've reverted his edits, but as you can see from his contributions, he's a one-trick editor. Rklawton 03:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The stupid bot
I was trying to revert the bot which incorrectly marked an unsigned, and of course popups chose not to notice a new message had come in to your talk page... That's why if you noticed, I restored the missing comment to your talk page. – Chacor 03:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was in the process of adding the right unsigned tag when I was edit-conflicted, by the other message, then by Chacor, then by your own edits. I only reverted your user page because I lazily assumed it was vandalism, without really reading it. --Guinnog 03:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I assume you are referring to HagermanBot as "The Stupid Bot". I closely monitor its changes for any errors. So that I may evaluate the bot's logic is correct, why should this edit not be treated as an unsigned comment? Thanks!  Hagerman ( talk ) 04:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It was moved from Gwernol's user page. However, the bot attributed the new post to the person who moved it, and not the actual poster. This could cause much confusion, especially if it's an established user doing the move. – Chacor 04:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Understandable, but the specific way the comment was moved geniunely looks like it was posted by the person who moved it (minus the edit summary which is difficult to attribute to that specific comment). I just wanted to ensure the frustration wasn't for another reason as I believe in that instance the bot acted correctly. Thanks,  Hagerman ( talk ) 04:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:UW
Hi,

You have put yourself as interested in helping out atWikiProject on user warnings. We are now at a stage where we are creating the new templates and are wondering if you are still interested? If so please visit the overview page and choose a warning type you wish to work on. There is a base template available here, which you can copy and use to get you started. Have a look through the redirects and see what old templates are affected and incorporate them into the the new system. Anyway, any questions please don't hesitate to give me a shout. Regards Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 08:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

User:SteveBrookstein
(EDIT CONFLICT) I notice you are the administrator who blocked this user a few days ago. A user complained about his edit summeries at the help desk so I took a look at his contributions [here].He seemed to have stopped since you warned him until I took a look at two of his edits to Jan Verhaas. [1][2]In these edits, he adds a few sentances, another editor removes them his recent edits because of no source, and he adds the sentences in again with the edit summary, ''Forgotten how to do the link thingy. You'll work it out, if you even accept this very small and inoffensive nugget of information to survive your destructive ego this time around.'' This seems a little too rude for me considering he has already been blocked for rude edit summaries. I think an administrator should keep an eye on him. Cheers! --Banana04131 04:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey Banana, I was the one who was accused of having the destructive ego, I have armour-plated adminskin so didn't take action, but as I noted to Gwernol I would have blocked him on the spot if it had been directed at another editor.. anyway, SB has been well warned and knows he's being watched.  Dei zio  talk 14:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Banana04131 17:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I was the one who asked about this originally at the help desk, I'm not a regular here so I wasn't sure where to ask. He was blocked on 11 December, but two days later he was also making insulting remarks in his Gregory Peck edit. I like the way he calls people idiots and morons for placing commas in the wrong place, but he can't even even spell the word "commar" correctly.


 * BTW, isn't his username unnacceptable? Steve Brookstein is a celebrity in the UK. 172.188.153.235 02:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good spot. Think this spells the end for this account.  Dei zio  talk 02:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright
This was very interesting to me, I might not have thought of it myself. Thanks. And sorry for the mixup over your user page the other day (my repair attempt triggering a bot, who'd have thought it!). Best wishes, --Guinnog 04:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism!
Hey, thanks for reverting the recent vandalism on Articles of Confederation. I've noticed a great deal of vandalism on this article, U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. I requested a semi-block on the U.S. Constitution. I was wondering if you thought we should do the same for the other two articles? Veracious Rey 04:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Bluebaramundi
Hello, you recently removed my userpage image saying it "contains copyrighted images ", when it is nothing more than a wikipedia screenshot. THE WHOLE POINT OF WIKIPEDIA BEING THAT IT IS UNDER A GNU LISCENSE TO BE USED FREELY, so I can't see why this is a problem.

Bluebaramundi 04:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You actually still havnt pointed to a policy saying that about userpages. PLus i'm sure wikipedia would hae a problem displaying the wikipedia logo on wikipedia....NOT.


 * Bluebaramundi 22:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I only persist because I am correct. Look at the image's tag: That says it all.


 * Bluebaramundi 02:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I have always understood the policy on use of non-free images, and now know that fair use images can't be used on userpage because you gave me a policy reference, do that first next time. Also of interest, your userpage policy outlines that it is rude to sunstantially edit one's page without thier permission. In the future, ask me nicely on my talk page to remove the image, referencing to relevant policies. Also be aware of Civility, which you have certainly breached in your dealings with me over the past few days.


 * Bluebaramundi 06:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

3RR
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Dreadlocke ☥  23:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome
Thanks for the tip. I'm just copying and pasting, it shouldn't be too hard. Just H 18:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Question?
I'm new here. What is the definition of external links? Can we put links putting to free online resources? And what is a spam? I just put a link to a page and removed by you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.190.210.152 (talk) 04:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

Fair point
Maybe my sense of humour isn't coming across so well: the retard in question is myself. But i'll be careful, dont you worry.

86.135.145.5 15:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Who is the vandal? Characterising someone as vandal is a POV. My POV is that you are the vandal.
I created a straw poll into the money talk page. Let us hear what the others have to say on that subject. Please express your opinion there, instead of vandalising the text or threating me. InMatmonWeTrust 12:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I am a silly person, I thought nobody cared about Wikipedia (contentwise)
Wow, you removed my joke about John Stewart in less than two hours! Ok, that was a learning lesson, I will not mess around a second time and promise to be a good boy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.52.241.86 (talk) 04:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Dübs and Company
The article about Dübs and Company was moved by User:G6jns in August 2006 to Dûbs and Company. I believe this is in error and have said so on the discussion page. I have cited sources to support the 'Dübs' spelling and requested counter-sources. I believe the error is caused by the surname at birth of Henry Dübs which was apparently changed on his emmigration to the UK. I cannot though move the article back to its original page as that now exists as a redirection. As an administrator, please could you assist with this page move. Hutch 13:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

...
ok thanks Funnypop12 22:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Blocked user restarts vandalizing
Hi Gwernol,

I saw that you blocked BashmentBoy. Unfortunately he's now continuing on the same way; see for instance. Since I'm not confident with the exact succession of warnings/initiatives to be started I thought to inform you. Thanks. &mdash; Gennaro Prota &#8226;Talk 02:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Please donot delete my page titled biglicku
I noticed that myspace.com has a wiki page so I don't exactly understand why the page for biglicku was deleted? Biglicku like myspace.com is a social networking site. Also many other websites like cnn, bbc, facebook and so on have wiki pages. So please tell me why some of them are allowed and others are not.

Vivek( msubozeman2004 at yahoo dot com) Msubozeman2004 22:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC) = msubozeman2004

Apologies about that
In regards to your message, I kinda forgot the policy on 'personal attacks', but I doubt anyone would get offended by being called a tool. Still, ppl shouldn't go around deleting infoboxes without good reason... anyway apologies and I'll keep a lid on it from now on.SilverNightFire 13:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Club of New York
Come see: Wikipedia Club of New York. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 14:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

failed RFA
Hey, a month or so ago, i failed an RFA. You told me that I could ask you for some feedback a little ways down the road. It has been a month or so and I have tried expanding my horizons. I was wondering if you could give me some pointers on areas I still need to improve and any over all recomendations on how to become a better wikipedian. If it is too much to ask, than I understand, however it would be much appreciated if it is possible. Thanks -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * So, when I read "on vacation skiing", I kinda got this image of somebody, skiing down a hill, with a laptop editing wikipedia at the same time. (new question for the WP:HOLIC test?) Anyways, thank you for the very very prompt reply. Enjoy your vacation, and take your time with a review! It will be much much appreciated. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

My photo terms and conditions
See response to your comments on my talk page. – Tivedshambo (talk) 18:29, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Help with an afd
Hi Gwernol, as an afd-expert you can probably help. There was a mis-formed for Rachel Marsden, the third, which I tried to fix.But I can't seem to make it work right. The subpage is Articles_for_deletion/Rachel_Marsden_%28third_nomination%29  Buck  ets  ofg  21:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Lucid dream weasel words?
I don't follow you on your recent edit, I've reverted it. The article is GA and is well sourced, yet you say we need a source that Lucid Dreams are a well established scientific fact? LilDice 00:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've removed the weasely paragraph (my bad, I didn't realize you were talking about that paragraph). However I don't see how you could cite the fact that LD's are well established scientifically. Would you cite a specific published journal article? LilDice 00:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Abortion
I fail to see anything unfactual or commentary about my addition to the article - "Noone wants to get an abortion. No one is "in favor of abortion", however it is the womans right to choose what happens to her body, and getting an abortion is a lot like getting an F in birth control, and where abortion is well tolerated it is commonly used as a method of birth control." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.125.109.5 (talk • contribs).

John Lennon Link
Why is the link that i added reviewed as being "spam" ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Break05 (talk • contribs). `
 * It is a link to a photograph that may have copyright issues. Wikipedia can only use (or be linked to) media that is either in the public domain or a free use license (and if it is either then the image should be added to WikiCommons) and displayed in the article. Please remember to sign your comments by typing four tildes (~) at the end of your message.
 * Gwernol, please excuse the hijacking...LessHeard vanU 20:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

RfC on Iran and Terrorism and/or WMD
I'm not sure you're interested but you did edit on this topic. I've started an RfC on this topic. Please add your comments on the Iran Discussion page under Statements by editors previously involved in dispute. Simesa 01:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Jubilee Locos
Point taken. I have deleted the entries. Peter I. Vardy 12:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Your removal of my Centiare comments
Just so that you and I can keep an eye on the discussion, I hope that you will take note of whatever transpires at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam. I think you have been (perhaps inadvertently) unfair in your stalking/removal of my helpful suggestions to Users who have been deprecated by the Wikipedia community, all while Wikia.com is FREQUENTLY honored with a "take your project to Wikia.com" recommendation. Why is what I was doing ANY different? --JossBuckle Swami 14:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

You need to stay out of personal communications between users.
You need to stay out of personal communications between users. You need stop sending non-sense warnings because you didn't read the post correctly. There is nothing wrong with asking for help from people that worked on similar projects or the same project. Asking for help is not a personal attack. --71Demon 20:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Again you need to say out of personal communications between users. You must read and comprehend what has been written. Also see First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Using terms such as WikiNazi and not directing them to anybody (the comprehending part) is not a personal attack.  You must direct them at someone for them to be a personal attack.  I suggest you go re-read the private conversations (that you were not part of) and see if they were directed at anyone in particular.  Also seeking out conversations you are not part of and falsifing warnings, when no complaint existed is wrong.  And is not becoming of what Wiki stands for.  --71Demon 21:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Definition of Personal ADJECTIVE Of or relating to a particular person, private,  "Like their personal lives, women's history is fragmented, interrupted" (Elizabeth Janeway).   It was a term used to discribe a generic 3rd person.  It was in a conversation a private conversation with another user.  That adjective would have to have been used to discribe that user, and it was not. Go back and read the conversation you were never part of again, and try to comprehend. --71Demon 21:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)