User talk:Gwernol/Archive 22

Thank you for the recognition
I'd like to thank you as a fellow Welshman for your vote of confidence in me and my work in improving Southern Railway articles. However, I already have an account as "Bulleid Pacific," its just that after being rather controversial on the issue of the locomotive numbering lists, I felt I should lie low and improve other articles incognito, though really it means that I sometimes forget to log in. Its a pleasure to work with you. Rydw i'n hoffi iawn rheilfyrdd mewn Prydain! I think thats correct, as I haven't done Welsh since my GCSEs! Anyway, cheers.--172.200.252.212 11:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) (Bulleid Pacific's alter-ego). As you can see, it is me. Hwyl fawr. --Bulleid Pacific 11:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

 * Thanks for voting in my RfA. I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns.  I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor.  Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hay I did not edit anything to day.But my friend did.So do not ban my account for something I did not do.

Hay I did not edit anything to day.But my friend did.So do not ban my account for something I did not do.19:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Dark flame2598Shadow259819:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)19:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA
As you voted Neutral on my last RfA, back in November, on the grounds that I didn't have enough experience (which, in retrospect, you were right about), I decided to ask you for some advice. Do you think I am now ready for a second RfA? I now have over 3700 edits, extensive participation in XfDs and vandal-fighting, and several major article rewrites (including Politics, which is now listed as a GA). You also expressed concerns about the potential POV implications of my username; since then, I have customised my sig to exclude the word "monarchist". (Unfortunately, it is not possible for me to make this an actual username change, as User:Walton is already taken and is not a possible candidate for usurpation.) So would you be prepared to support, if I go to RfA during this month? Wal ton  Vivat Regina!  19:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
I immediately reedited and signed my warning. Perhaps you missed it. As a [newbie] myself it is always nice to have someone like you to help me learn the ropes. Thanks and happy editing! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 02:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank You Very Much
Gwernol, thanks for your prompt catch and reversion on my "tit torture" page. I have no idea what the guy removed, and it's nice to know I don't have to worry about it. That was my first article. I'm quite proud of it. Your prompt, professional response inspires me to want to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks again. Matt Nicholson 02:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA commentary
Please check the context of your bite example. It may have been slightly overreacting, but it wasn't the first. &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 02:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If I may add my .02, I believe Rev added the 4im tag because the user had been warned twice before about adding nonsense articles to Wikipedia. Kntrabssi 05:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding RevRagnarok's RfA
Could you please elaborate on my bad faith assumption, because if it came across that way it was entirely unintentional. My new edit may be considered a rant, and so be it, but these thigns have become quite frustrating to me. However, in my initial nomination I don't see anything that could be construed as an assumption of bad faith, unless there is a misunderstanding. Thanks for your time :) Kntrabssi 05:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Gwernol, regarding the bite example you accused Rev of having, it was noted on the user's talk page that he had been warned twice about creating other nonsense articles. Whether or not he vandalized that certain page once or not is moot, he has vandalized Wikipedia as a whole before.  Secondly, I relisted Rev because the offending material that got him shot down in the other RfA had been removed, therefore I saw no reason not to give him a second shot.  It is true that I believe it was a ridiculous reason to oppose him, however, your assumption that I acted in bad faith is almost assuming bad faith on your part.  Hope this clears things up.  Take care :)  Kntrabssi 23:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

E John Routly
Dan,

Just cross posted the John Routly mini bio from festwiki to main As I aint that good on main wiki can you tittvate article as you see fit Thanks --Keith 09:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

CampsFM
I'm sorry to breach Wikipedia protocol, but since much of Wikipedia seems to be based on observations/opinions that don't necessarily have outside references, I felt that I could add put in my .02.

While I have no problems with my Scientology opinions being deleted, where does it stop?

I'm adding some "Personal Analysis" to the article about "Married... With Children," because it seems relevant to the article, particularly the return of a former executive producer who seemed to turn the show around in its waning years. I have no references for the change in quality, besides the change in executive producers and the observations of myself and my friends and family who were fans of the show.

I apologize in advance if this violates the Neutral POV Policy, but I could point out a number of articles that are not neutral (or factually incorrect) in what they say that have been around a lot longer than any article I've edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Campsfm (talk • contribs)

I'm sorry, but I'll have to ask for you to pardon my ignorance on "signing" a statement.

As far as the Married... With Children stuff went, frankly, I'm a bit annoyed that you deleted my additions out of hand. There wasn't much of an opinion involved, and, the personnel names were taken not from IMDB, but from the videotapes that I recorded back in the day. Ron Leavit, Ellen L. Fogle, Arthur Silver, Katherine Green and Michael G. Moye are names who I see on my television set while watching the show, and Seven is a character that I saw and was referrred to in the original article, without any references whatsoever. How am I supposed to "Cite" a private VHS recording?

If you're one of those people who don't want other people to contribute to Wikipedia, or if you don't want me to contribute to Wikipedia specifically, just let me know and I'll stop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Campsfm (talk • contribs)


 * if you want to sign your name and add a date, just put ~ on the end of your message and your username will automatically get tagged on. Like this --> Alison ☺ 16:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

edit war
Regarding your warning here, please keep in mind that Rockpocket was reverting edits made by a banned user (by self-admission). I'm not familiar with all the relevant policies, but this might change things a bit. ---Sluzzelin talk  02:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed. The comments I am reverting are from the indef blocked and banned user under the policy WP:BAN. I'm therefore removing your "warning" as it is neither appropriate nor relevant. Thanks.  Rockpock  e  t  04:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

ASL
hello, can i ask why you deleted my ASL modification? anyone who knows the game will agree that it is arguably the most detailed wargame ever designed, which the article itself makes clear. --Jewish-wargamer


 * Hi, thanks, got your message. I noticed that nothing else is footnoted in the article, so I assumed that no other additions would need to be footnoted. Most people agree that it is the most complicated and detailed wargame ever designed for commercial use (non-professional wargame) so I would suggest that noting that actually is encyclopedic.  Ill see if I can find a source though. Jewish-wargamer 13:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Arpacktu
hey i dont feel my deletion of the article came with sufficient warning. im just trying to write my first real proper article and u delete it and i got angry. not my fault ur busy ruing peoples articles (every complaint iver ead on this discussion page seems to have an excsue justifying their articles existence and i think i should probably get one aswell). so yeah can i make my article and keep it there long enough for it to be improved? because i dont have too much spare time in one sitting so ur ruing any chance i have at makign this thing. i jsut want to get the word out about this rare cryptid.

exodustheoryExodustheory
 * Why not create the article in your own userspace/sandbox then try to mainspace it only if and when it's good enough? (And when it's got proper cites, etc!!) - Alison ☺ 11:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

hi
hi Gwernol, The Golan heights are part of Syria according to UNO, then, can you explain to me, why do not you include the area into Syrian area?? I am waiting for your answer---83.156.243.238 15:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks
thank you for your quick response. I have invited discussion on the talk page of Syria.I could not find any previous discussion on it. Does Israeli area include the areas occupied in 1967? (they are not recognized as Israeli land by the UNO)I ask this just for information? I also find that disputed area of Kashmir in not included in Pakistan although it is under Pakistani control. Is'nt this discrimination?--83.156.243.238 15:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet account of shadow2598
You don't remember banning shadow2598,well you did.And doing so you stopped me from editing stuff when I did nothing wrong.I'm not mad but I don't think it's fair to ban me when I did nothing wrong. Dark flame2598 02:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Achristl
is vandalising despite warnings. please help. Carlossuarez46 02:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

User talk:86.152.83.236
Thanks for the quick work there. --Guinnog 13:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Such a pleasure to see you back! I'll still only be sporadic here for the next while, though I have had a fun day on it today. Happy editing! --Guinnog 13:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet account of shadow2598
Well you might not have banned me but someone did.Oh ya,I at least have 10 puppets as you call them.And my puppet numbers are still growing.Now I know it's not bad to have sock puppets.So I'll have as many as I want. shadow2598,Dark flame2598,Dark knight2598,flaming sun2598And many more Shadow2598 15:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

User page vandalism
Hi Gwernol. I appreciate your vigilance about vandalism to my user page (though personally I don't mind if anonymous strays pee on it). But will you take a look at the protected box? The wording makes it look like I'm the vandal. Thanks again.--G-Dett 19:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gwernol! (Don't be embarrassed – who cares.)--G-Dett 19:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Links
Exactly! "Tedesco" is not "German", because it is not comprised of the letters G-E-R-M-A-N, per WP:MOS and the edit history of German -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 21:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet more from User:Shadow2598
About 2 weeks ago someone banned me then took the ban off.And now I can do this.But how do you know if it is my sock puppet,I only mentioned a few of them to you.You just can't go banning people on hunches.And the ones I showed you except 1 were about shadows.I will start getting creative on names and stop using 2598 after them. Shadow2598 21:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Public Service has Backfired
Gwernol, when I wrote the Wiki article on "Tit Torture" back on March 3. 2007, I did so because I wanted to do something for the public interest without any recompense. Unfortunately, I am in the process of learning I may have slit my own throat by doing so. You see, my website is a for-profit site with adult themes based on the same topic. When the Wiki article was spidered by Google and added as the #1 link for a particular set of important keyphrases, my site dissapeared for those same phrases. Research since then is indicating it is either the Wiki article itself, or the links to articles in my site from that article, that may have cause my site's demise. In short, I may be paying for my generosity with my livelihood.

I'm still looking into it, but if that turns out to be the case, and it's simply links, I'll just remove those. If it's the article itself, however, can it be removed, if not, would you gig me for changing it significantly? Honestly, I'd rather not be airing my laundry here, but it's the only way I could contact you. Thanks. Matt Nicholson 00:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE LEAVE THE STEPHEN COLBERT PAGE THAT WAY FOR THE NIGHT. IT IS ALL FOR FUN AND FOR THE SHOW> IT IS NOT VANDALISM OR WITH ANY ILL-WILL. IT IS STRICTLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE COLBERT REPORT TV SHOW AND WILL BE CHANGED AS SOON AS THE PAGE IS USED FOR COMEDIC PURPOSES FOR THE SHOW. PLEASE! tela42499

Follow-up on Public Service...
Gwernol, thanks for the very quick reply. I tend to have problems with the concept that this article is the cause of my problems, but I have a couple of search engine experts looking closely at it. I would have thought the "nofollow" command would be important, but it's being looked at. The problems also coincide with a major Google algorithm change, which was all our first thoughts, but we've been unable to find anything there.

I'm hoping the Wiki thing is just a scare. I'm proud of the article and would much rather not even consider doing anything with it. However, just to make sure I understand -- even though I wrote it, I lost control over it once I published it -- at least any additional control as writer as opposed to any other approved editor? This whole fiasco has me tearing my hair out. Matt Nicholson 00:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry that the caps was on. I hate caps and usually don't use them. I usually have the caps lock key disabled, but I just installed Vista and that hasn't been fixed yet, so I did not mean to appear to be shouting. I work for the show and was making these changes for a reason. I was going to change them back as soon as we were through. I am very aware of the seriousness of the Wiki. I am a staff member of expressobeans.com and have been using the Wiki for some time. I do not appreciate the tone that was taken in your second message. I had changed the article the second time before I realized that you had messaged me in the first place. I realize that you probably deal with some frustrating prople on the site, but maybe you should change your tone so it doesn't appear that you are shouting. I am sorry that I upset you so much. but I am not some internet hacking idiot that wants to make your job any more frustrating than it is, and I'm sorry that I did. I don't know if you know this, but Stephen Colbert often tells his audience to change the Wiki for his personal entertainment all the time, which I am sure is a huge headache for you, too. The internet in a community, just like the real world, and we should treat each other as such. tela42499

username
hi - just came across this username which I thought you should know about. cheers! Tvoz | talk 05:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I just indefblocked it for WP:U and vandalism only - Alison ☺ 05:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA
I also blanked Requests for adminship/Jim Douglas as well after you removed User:Jim Douglas from RfA.  Amos Han  Talk 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry!
I left for a sec to get something to eat and my sister started doing random vandalization. Doody 09 05:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Well done
But i've been vigilant too. Cheers, RCS 07:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for your help with user Brf00. He's apparently got an axe to grind about the subject of flag-burning. He also seems to lack a sense of humour. The "you gone" line is taken from a baseball announcer who's in the habit of saying "He gone!" when an opposing batter strikes out. Wahkeenah 13:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fatima Whitbread
Sorry, I know I should've made a reference regarding the information I added (which is completely true, if you thought otherwise), but how on Earth is it 'controversial biographical information concerning living persons'? That's baffling!

81.110.77.105

Natl1's RFA Question
I have answered your question on my RFA. Feel free to ask any follow-up question.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 17:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I warned him
. RCS 17:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Gwernol
For your RFAr statement. – Steel 18:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

white
hello gwernol. i looked over the edit that i made, and i am perplexed. i have no idea how i would have inadvertently vandalized 'white.' i have nothing against white. in fact, i am white. my toothbrush is white, and so is my guinea pig. thanks for catching it and letting me know. :-] the_undertow talk  19:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * cool. we're all good and i'll blame it on windows vista. i blame everything on windows vista. the_undertow talk  00:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

"Inappropriate warnings"
I had always been told not to delete warnings on my talk page, regardless. Since then, I have always let them stand even if they were not appropriate, unless they were vulgar or insulting. If I was wrong to restore that warning, I apologize. Rhindle The Red 00:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * And I'm apologizing again for putting the previous on the wrong page. I must be tired... Rhindle The Red 01:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
For the talk page reverts. Peace, --  The  Hyb  rid  03:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

University/School sites
Gwernol, I have a question. I am well aware that many anon IP sites are educational establishments, and have not failed to read the yellow template box notifying me of this fact. But, when chasing down vandals from these sites, it has become apparent to me that these sites do not produce any sensible edits. None. Not any. Nichts. Niemals. Rien. Therefore, given that a block does not prevent any editor from coming to us in read-only mode, why the hesitation about vigorous blocking? Am I missing something?--Anthony.bradbury 12:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

User:69.74.82.146 and schoolblock
I've asked repeatedly for 69.74.82.146 to be permanently schoolblocked, but although the template is on the user talk page User_talk:69.74.82.146, students are still successfully making anonymous edits.

Please, make the schoolblock actually work, and leave it on. (This is on your talk page, since you were the last admin to "renew" the schoolblock.) Thanks, 69.74.82.146 20:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Another sock
First, thanks for the help in dealing with the disruptive editing from. In case you didn't see it, he appears to have tried the same tactics with. I've blocked that account, reverted the changes and added the templates. Slambo (Speak) 20:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Deal Or No DealEdit
Sorry :( my mistake, i didn't realise you reverted it, i thought that you were vandalising it! Sorry Thenthornthing 11:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Formerly/formally
You're quite right - I haven't got my brain in gear today ;-) – Tivedshambo (talk) 11:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
At the page Jennifer Lynn there have been several changes which I think are vandalism by a particular user. There was a AfD put in by 86.2.99.78 and the page was redirected by user Alomiakoda. I am a representative for the actress and have reason to belive that Alomiakoda uses the IP address 86.2.99.78 and that the username relates to a person who has a personal vendetta against the actress. I was wondering if there was any action that could be taken to prevent this in future and to warn the user of their misconduct. 82.34.254.89 13:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I.P x 2 = possible vandal?
Hello, i have heard that you can track down I.P adresses and i just wondered if User:soopahoops77 and User:Relentless1234567 share thre same I.P adress. Is it 'legal' on wikipedia to have 2 accounts? Sorry, thankyou, kind regards, Zesty Prospect 15:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Matrix17 editing anonymously
Hi. Remember ? He's back editing from his IP address, anonymously -. Is there a page like AIV or SUSPSOCK where this can be reported, or is it enough to contact an admin, like I'm doing now? --Strangnet (t, c) 16:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Gwernol, I didn't see your reply on Strangnet's talk, and went ahead and blocked for a week. Matrix17 appeared to be the only one on that IP at least as far back as the 31st March, so I don't think there'll be too much collateral damage. Feel free to alter the block if necessary. – Steel 17:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

hello
hi, id like to be like u. how do u catch so many people.

Fairbourne Railway Article
Hi there Gwernol

Thanks for sorting out my formatting on the Fairbourne Railway page - I still can't get rid of the commercial operations bit though! - I will try and add some more events into the preservation history - such as the extension to the new barmouth Ferry station in 1976 and hopefully it won't mess the table up again!

Cheers

Willsmith3 13:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Toa Mario
I have no idea what this is about, but this guy, you know him as "Toa Mario," asked me on another site (Ask the name of the site if ya don't believe me, but I see no need to name it) to give you this message.
 * "This message is froM Toa Mario. I can assure you i made no sockpuppets. my proof? Check this IPs.Anybody can do the same edits as someone and use their same edit summaries. That is way unfair. Check the IPs, thenr econsider the block and give me an apology" ElectricTurahk 19:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

@Message on my page: Why thank you. I don't exactly like him myself. :P I've had run ins with him, even blocked him semi-personally on another wiki site. But, heh, I tried, so he can't keep botherin' me now. ElectricTurahk 19:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Schoolblock
Hi, our attention to User talk:205.119.61.26 coincided, and I was in the process of applying a weeks block just as you added a final warning – if you feel the block is unjustified, feel free to unblock. These schools! .. dave souza, talk 19:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Rail gauges in List of Rail Gauges
Hi, if you look at the earlier versions or the article you'd see that parts of some fractions would tend to drop to the second line as though the "imperial" column was not wide enough and the "comments" column appears to be too wide. This happened only in List of Rail Gauges and on my monitor it appears to be happening again, in all other lists the "imperial" column appears to be wider (why?)

On the list above the problem reappears and the "imparial" column appears to be too narrow. At keast that is how it appears on my monitor. All other lists in this article appear to be A1 OK, the "imperial" column is wider and the "comments" column is narrower (why?). Peter Horn 21:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Make that "Notes" instead of "comments". The "Country" column also appears to be wider than it appears in the other tables (why?). Peter Horn 01:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

User page protected
Hi! I've fullprotected your user page for a couple of weeks due to the persisting vandalism. I hope you don't mind... &mdash;Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 21:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

User 86.3.250.240 (repeated vandalism)
Hi. Came straight here this time having just looked at the talk/contrib pages for. 'He' was 7-day blocked by yourself a week ago, and is now back causing havoc in the various 'Thomas' pages, for which he was blocked in the first place. I haven't reverted anything yet, as I know you have tools to tackle this task more quickly than I could. Your assistance would be appreciated. Thanks

(BTW -- maybe time for another talk page archive?? :o) )

EdJogg 22:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you -- EdJogg 23:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Tell
Tell him to stop he has no authorization to do it to my page tell him to request a checkuser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KURDBIJISTAN (talk • contribs)


 * Can you urgently block him? He is trolling and is on a vandal spree.. He definitely is a sockpuppet of a banned user. Baristarim 01:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * See this and the deceptive edit summaries .. Baristarim 01:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ode to the helpful admin

 * I spend a lot of time patrolling Recent Changes,
 * Looking for destruction that's been wrought on our pages,
 * There are more silly people than I could possibly handle,
 * So thank you blocking this annoying vandal. --Dweller 12:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dweller/Odes"


 * Alas! My fears were growing worse,
 * That none would reply to my ode in verse,
 * All admins work in prose infernal...
 * But I should have trusted in you, Gwernol.

Thanks! - Dweller 13:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Rivers-Manning trade
I did not delete content (other than the Chargers box at the bottom which I think is clear evidence that the prior edits before mine *were* biased. If you feel that I shouldn't have CORRECTED information after having put a POV tag, fine. But my edits were not vandalism and while it may have been within your rights as an admin to revert my changes, they were reverted to a far more biased version than the one that I left. I have a feeling that your own biases are perhaps playing into this. 129.98.125.142 15:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 129.98.125.142

Couldn't this be with his reverting antics again? --RCS 17:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
Gwernol, I'm sorry I did was u call vandalism. I didn't know. it's my first time on this and i wasn't completely sure of the rules. I'm very glad u corrected me and I hope u aren't mad. i promise i will try to never do wikipedia vandalism again. Sorry. BTW, ur really good at tracking this vandalism stuff, good job! 22:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Blakmist 22:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Alex (Blakmist)

WP:RFA
I'm in the process of answering your question now. Bushcarrot ( Talk·Guestbook ) 02:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Got another DickLukens puppet
User:DLMaster - already tagged for your convenience. Hersfold (talk/work) 14:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping on the Zendik Farm page
I appreciate your skilled re draftings and thanks god for a neutral pov. i learned a lot about how to organize and clean up an article, the reference layout, etc. Thanks again... Jyre 16:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Olz 06 RfA
Oh sorry I didn't realise that was kinda needed for RfA. Maybe I'll try in 6 months time. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by olz06 (talk • contribs)

RfA questions
I've answered the questions you left on my RfA. Wal ton  Vivat Regina!  13:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support. In terms of my general support for RfA candidates, I take your point that they need to have enough experience to know what to do with the admin tools, and I would certainly never support an RfA candidate with a two-digit editcount, for example. (In such a case, I would most likely not vote, knowing that the RfA would be snowed under with opposes anyway.) So I don't disagree with you. Wal  ton  Vivat Regina!  16:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * On reflection, I take your point about that as well. I wasn't hugely impressed with that candidate's policy knowledge, hence why I wrote "Adminship is no big deal" rather than "This is a good candidate". However, my decision to support anyway was based more on the fact that it was Smcafirst's second RfA, and he had improved exponentially since the last one. His nomination statement also indicated that he'd made a huge amount of effort on Wikipedia in the last couple of months. So I thought he deserved the benefit of the doubt, especially given his substantial editcount. I do understand that adminship isn't a trophy to be awarded for exceptional effort, but I also think that users' feelings should be taken into account, as well as the amount of effort they make preparing for an RfA. I admit that the above isn't a viewpoint firmly grounded in policy, and I know many users wouldn't agree with it (hence why I never, ever intend to run for bureaucratship, as no one would ever trust me to close an RfA). Wal  ton  Vivat Regina!  16:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

He's so insane
is edit-warring me to keep WRONG INFORMATIONs in an article :. This is just crazy !!!! RCS 18:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * thanks that really is nice that you call me insane...my self-esteem is alot higher now... id just like people to stop harassing me today....... the reversion started due to Tulkolahten saying i added something about the Czech language... but I didn't say 'anything about the Czech language .... :| i would like to know WHY am I being personally attacked for something i haven't said? Second, I'm not doing anything wrong at Okres or Kraj but and  keep on attacking me personally and reverting... calling me a vandal...but they are the ones removing information.... and at Alsace where i made the History table, people keep reverting my work... and saying it is VANDALISM?

More personal attack: * ""What you deserve is a clone of yourself pestering you as you pester us people from Alsace. RCS 18:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)""


 * ""it is Argentoratum, you bloody fool, now stop putting wrong infos in the article !""

-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 19:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * "== He's so insane =="
 * "UserR9tgokunks is edit-warring me to keep WRONG INFORMATIONs in an article : . This is just crazy !!!! RCS 18:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)"

Advice
Thank you for the suggestions on my RfA, even though I don't think the application will go through, I respect your especially kind contribution to discussion and I will be seeking the proposed Editorial review and increasing my stance on all corners on the English Wikipedia. Brylcreem2 21:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

alrite old chum?
why did you delete the other pictures from the other articles? I think they were appropiate and did not show any bias or anything un-wikipedia-like. So why?

estate
i keep adding valid info and you keep deleting it. I removed the webpage link like you said to follow your directions, but you keep removing it.

removed my images
I own the images you deleted. They are copuwrite, but by ME so I have the right to use them however I want!

If i remove the subscription part and just put info about it and a photo of it is that ok?
If i remove the subscription part and just put info about it and a photo of it is that ok?

Query
About your edit to my talk page with the comment "Remove legal threat from banned user" : Uh, what legal threat? -- Ben &ensp; TALK/HIST 22:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

User_talk:Davesmith33
Just wanted to give you a heads up that he's been blanking his talk page of the warnings. You might want to give him another time-out. fethers 16:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think he gets it. fethers 18:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure he's grateful that you finally protected his talk page. He seems to have been wanting this to be done for a while. TimVickers 18:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know that less than 24 hours into the return from his block, Davesmith is making exactly the same edits and resuming the same edit wars. ...adam... ( talk &bull;  contributions ) 12:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool - for some reason he's still on my watch list and I couldn't help but notice. Thought you may have wanted a heads up - but good to know that he's been clocked. Cheers, ...adam...  ( talk &bull;  contributions ) 12:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Better watch out...
HE'S TYPING LIKE THIS. HE'S GONNA START BITING HIS MOUSE ANY MINUTE NOW. HalfShadow 18:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I need your help
Dear gwernol: You have previously helped me with RODOLFO VALENTIN article, but you also have been upset with me about my editing’s, but(“what about the others editing’s on my articles?).. But, since you fixed the article several other people came and deleted most of the file, always with the same “excuse” ADVERTISEMENT. I need your help to prevent people from delete chunks of the file that are “no convenience for them”. What I mean with that is because Rodolfo Valentin is a famous hairdresser in New York City and most of the other hairdressers are jealous of his career. I am sure the deletions are mostly coming from these competitors, because in the article are named very important people that are his clientele that most of the other hairdressers would like to have. Also, you have added back “hair infusion” part that previously other administrator linked together in his article (it was in a separate article before). The Hair Infusion is a trademarked hair extensions technique created by Rodolfo Valentin from which ALSO the other Salons are jealous since they cannot do it, and it also has been removed completely from the same person that removed everything else using the name: WALKER42. I understand that it can be edited, but please help me to keep the file integrity! Thank you!

Question about your rollback of my changes
Hi, you recently rolled back my changes to the payday loan article. I think I understand why, but want to see if you can advise me on whether/how to reference the particular change (I have read the external links guide, but still have a question).

I believe that the offending link was to a page on "cashloanbyphone.com". I was trying to provide a source for information that has long been in the article, and by showing where it came from, indicate that it is provided as an argument in the controversy section of the article - and is by no means unassailable truth. I see that the link violates policy, but the information begs a reference, and it is appropriate to the section to include biased arguments by the industry in question, especially given that this information appears on more than one lenders' site, as I noted explicitly in the text. Please advise.

Note: I also see that this statement I added should have been referenced and could have been phrased better: "In fact, the payday loan industry's best customers are the people who do not have the ability to pay back their loans." It is supported by a statistic in section 2 of the article, with reference. I will reference that and phrase it better when I re-add it.

Thanks a bunch. Still learning. No spam intended. Pladuk 00:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

From Justice all the way
Gwernol you keep acussing me and treating me of several things. As you noted in my page:

Sofia's Hair 4 Health Please don't add unsourced assertions to Wikipedia articles. You simply cannot just make the claim that Valentino was the first person to make prosthetic hair without also providing an independent source that readers can use to verify this information. Even if this fact is true and you can source it, what relevance does it have to the Sofia's Hair 4 Health article? Gwernol 20:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Final warning: Spam on Hair prosthesis This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Hair prosthesis, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from any site that uses the MediaWiki spam blacklist, which includes all of Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Gwernol 21:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Justice_all_the_way"

What I added was to show the required external sources for make the statement verifiable. So now I am really confused: if I do it, it is bad, If I don't, then it is removed because I didn't. In the meantime, people is almost playing like a crazy with my article "Rodolfo Valentin". They have removed a lot of verifiable information. They have removed a picture of Rodolfo with Mrs.Catsimatidis and Ms.Milos ( a picture that I took myself with my camera). previously they also removed another picture of Rodolfo with the princess yasmin aga Khan (rita hayword doughter), also a picture that I took myself!. They removed a big portion of the article showing the names of the people related to Rodolfo, important people that also has an article in wikipedia done by others. the "hair infusion" part, the latest invention of rodolfo, was also completely removed by WALKER42 (twice already by him, it feels like he has something against my article). Previously the "hair infusion" was an article in its own, then BIKEABLE linked together in Rodolfo Valentin article, NOW it is completely removed from the article. That Rodolfo Valentin is the inventor of the Hair infusion technique is also easily verifiable by visiting the Us trademark website, and search in the trademarks "THE HAIR INFUSION", to see that it shows trademarked by RODOLFO VALENTIN. BUT! if I do that, somebody else, later will came and remove it saying that it is "advertisement". You also are becoming very rude with me and I think it is not fair. sincerely, justice all the way

GWERNOL I NEED YOUR HELP
I understand your note in my page. but I also need you answered my other comments noted above.I am noting them here again: A big pieces of Rodolfo Valentin article has been removed without reason. That piece was showing the names of important people related to Rodolfo that also are having an article in WP.( it has been done twice by WALKER42). There also was a picture of Mrs.Catsimatidis and Ms.Milos ( a picture that I took myself with my camera). previously they also removed another picture of Rodolfo with the princess yasmin aga Khan (rita hayword doughter), also a picture that I took myself. Next: the hair infusion, an invention of Rodolfo Valentin was having an article in its own. BIKEABLE linked it together to Rodolfo Valentin article. The hair infusion, Rodolfo's invention is very easy verifiable by visiting the US TRADEMARK OFFICE. click on Trademarks, then search trademarks and then typing THE HAIR INFUSION in the search box. It will show that it is RODOLFO VALENTIN trademark. For which reason, the hair infusion part of the article has been completely removed?- I really don't feel to touch any article anymore, can you please help me to re-establish the Hair infusion part, the picture removed and the chunk of the file containing the people related to Rodolfo?- Thank you justice all the way jorge maria perez 23:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Allerton
Howdy. I noticed you have been rving vandalism on the high school page. Said vandal has struck again and am  unsure of how to put it back to your last version. Just thought I'd let you know. Whiskey in the Jar 15:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:CSD
Hi, Gwernol;

When I took this job on nobody told me that I could work 4 hours on this page and not reduce the backlog AT ALL!! OK, I will carry on working. But we have something over 800 active admins; Assuming 3/4 are asleep or at work, where are the other 199???

Just kidding really, but felt the need to kick and scream a bit.--Anthony.bradbury 17:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh hey, I hear ya there! I spent three hours in there myself yesterday. As someone remarked on WP:AN yesterday; "All crap, no glory" :) - Alison ☺ 18:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * When you start ad CSd, is when that yellow box pops up every 5 minutes with unsigned comments asking why did you delete my article. (but im sure all of you already know that, lol). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, I'd like to ask a question about our old friend Eoganan. He keeps cropping up form time to time, but is more of a pest than anything else. If I suspect that this user also has another account that they don't use for this sort of editing, how can I check this? Is there a way of checking a User account's IP address to see if it is similar to an anonymous IP address? There is a user I suspect of doing this, but I don't want to throw accusations arround. Thanks for any help. Alun 18:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There's a page about improper use of multiple accounts, known on wikipedia as Sock puppetry. Read through that, then decide whether to add the user to the list of suspected sock puppets. --Pladuk 19:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Alun 05:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Jodie Foster
I noticed that you must have had this article listed as you have been a long time reverter of certain information. :) I wondered if I could ask you to pass by the talk page and offer an opinion on a source? Linkee above is directly there Thanks --Spartaz Humbug! 19:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Spartaz Humbug! 21:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

hi
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rosie_O%27Donnell&diff=123944542&oldid=123942588   and a couple more Tvoz | talk 23:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

B1029
I blanked B1029's page for a good reason. He has a sock puppet. B1029 and BLhalo are accounts from the same person.--L141414 00:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Rick-K Anti Vandalism Barnstar
No problem:) You deserve it. Thank yourself for it:)--James, La gloria è a dio 03:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheers!
Thanks for the revert, just as I was blocking the chap for being a vandal-only account, too! (aeropagitica) 17:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

speedy tag on Pierre Joliot
Could you please look at Pierre Joliot, which is tagged for speedy deletion? The original author tagged it inappropriately as db-author, which I removed, and then as db-notability? I don't want to remove a speedy tag from this article again. --Eastmain 22:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the recognition
Oops, put this at the top by mistake. I'd like to thank you as a fellow Welshman for your vote of confidence in me and my work in improving Southern Railway articles. However, I already have an account as "Bulleid Pacific," its just that after being rather controversial on the issue of the locomotive numbering lists, I felt I should lie low and improve other articles incognito, though really it means that I sometimes forget to log in. Its a pleasure to work with you. Rydw i'n hoffi iawn rheilfyrdd mewn Prydain! I think thats correct, as I haven't done Welsh since my GCSEs! Anyway, cheers.--172.200.252.212 11:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) (Bulleid Pacific's alter-ego). As you can see, it is me. Hwyl fawr. --Bulleid Pacific 11:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Micropenis
With all due respect, I do not appreciate your demeanour in your note about micropenis on my talk page. I accidentally reverted to the wrong version as the result of a sequence likely similar to the following:  I did not realize that the last revision had changed, and therefore contained vandalism, and '' neither did you. '' You made two separate reverts, also not noticing that the edit contained vandalism.  I kindly request that you be less quick on the trigger and assume good faith about other established users. Freedomlinux 01:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Freedomlinux compares ShadowBot to 172.200.184.80 
 * 2) Freedomlinux determines that 172.200.184.80 has constructed vandalism. 
 * 3) Freedomlinux becomes distracted. 
 * 4) Gwernol reverts to ShadowBot. 
 * 5) Freedomlinux reverts to previous version (which is now 172.200.184.80 instead of ShadowBot. 

My RfA


Hello, thank you for supporting my RfA! I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0. Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen. Vivat Regina!

myCFO RfA?
I don't understand why this simple neutral voice article describing a substantial referenced corporation keeps getting wholesale deleted -- with no discussion or talk. This Wikipedia is article entry is describing in a neutral voice describing 'myCFO' as a substantial operating corporation. myCFO, in operations since 1999, now also operating underthe name Harris myCFO. myCFO is discussed in detail in a verifiable external link to a credible authenticated reference source article in the Wall Street Journal, a reliable reference source publication with objective substance and well established edited reference fact checking credibility. I understand it does not start with a capital letter, but this is how this corporation is named since 1999.

Here is the article:

The company myCFO is tax accounting and financial services firm started in 1999 to help wealthy Silicon Valley individuals manage their fortunes. Most of myCFO's assets and operations were sold to Harris Bank in late 2002 and now operates as Harris myCFO providing the same services. myCFO was the subject of a March 2007 Wall Street Journal Investigative Report

Ref: March 6th 2007 Wall Street Journal Investigative Report [] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vwt (talk • contribs) 09:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks!
Thanks for fixing the vandalism to my talk pageVgranucci 00:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I can watch my own user page.
I would like you to stop watching my user page, thank you. some people got ahold of my password, but that has been taken care of. Gijake 02:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Strange edit history
This is confusing me. I was alerted when the editor changed Betacommand's hatred of Internet Explorer to love. How would you classify this editor's contributions?! The Rambling Man 12:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Davesmith33 and the Top Gear article
A user you have previously blocked for disruptive editing has almost immediately returned to continue with similar behaviour at the same article. He's repeatedly ignored warnings and is apparently editing contentiously as retaliation where consensus isn't favouring him. If you could take a look I (and I'm sure the other editors involved) would be grateful. Thank you. QmunkE 19:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I can second that request, he's doing the same at other related pages too. Sadly it seems he's not used his week's cooling-off period to reflect and learn. :-( DrFrench 20:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Reverts
Yes, I know John Reaves pointed it out to me yesterday. Yesterday, I did a lot of Vadalisim reverts and warns and regrettably, I made a few mistakes.I apologize for the mix-up's; my ability to completely discern vandalism, especially on Userpages, needs improvement. I will slow down my editing, and strive for better vandal fighting. Regards, Dfrg.msc 00:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

about Antlantic Records vandal thingy, decline for unblock
yeah stupid, I wanted to see if it looked exactly as it did on the music video, and i accidentally saved

Children of Bodom is not an unknown band. They are huge in Europe and have an underground yet relatively large, loyal, following in the U.S. They are very well known, especially in the metal community. Their cover songs also have a cult-like following and I think that if you're going to keep in some Midtown side project, Cobra Starship (a band that IS obscure and pretty much unknown, even to pop-punk fans), then I don't think that my update about Children of Bodom covering this song should have been deleted. This was mentioned in many metal publications and even Gwen and No Doubt fan sites.

Bracesarebeautiful 20:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Children of Bodom
Children of Bodom is not an unknown band. They are huge in Europe and have an underground yet relatively large, loyal, following in the U.S. They are very well known, especially in the metal community. Their cover songs also have a cult-like following and I think that if you're going to keep in some Midtown side project, Cobra Starship (a band that IS obscure and pretty much unknown, even to pop-punk fans), then I don't think that my update about Children of Bodom covering this song should have been deleted. This was mentioned in many metal publications and even Gwen and No Doubt fan sites.

Bracesarebeautiful 20:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Protection
I have extended the full protection of your user-page, as its expiry appeared to be a signal for every idiot in Christendom to descend on you. Obviously, you have the ability to unprotect if you wish. I know you have in the past said that allowing the vandals in allows you to identify them, but the problem is that the supply appears inexhaustible!--Anthony.bradbury 23:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
For fixing vandalism to my user page. Look on the bright side, at least I don't have one of these "This user page has been vandalised x times" to update! --Guinnog 01:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Al Sharpton
Thank you for your patient guidance on this matter Gwernol. Although it was a subject that i felt strongly about, i shall do my best to find a more appropriate venue for my thoughts.

Sincerely Gottagift 01:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Dell Axim
Thanks for cleaning up a lot of the Axim article. I've been around Wikipedia a long time, but mostly as an occasional editor so I wasn't sure how to get some of those statements edited in a fashion that didn't really step on anyone's toes. Anyhow, nice to see someone looking out for the little articles. - SHARD 03:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

APACOlypse27
Given User:APACOlypse27's comments such as "Alright, if you came here to tell me off for doing someting stupid or naughty, you can suck a dick" and "oh yeah, and i'll vandalize as much as i please, thank you, shitheads" after multiple warnings and a shorter block, I went ahead and reblocked as indefinitie. I doubt we'll be missing valuable contributions from the user. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 03:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way
– Steel 10:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry.
Sorry about that. I just couldn't think of any other way to get those people, who I thought would be most likely to be interested, informed that I'd made the proposal. Do you know how I can without breaking any policies/guidelines? microchip08 14:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

micropenis
hello...I saw that you removed a micropenis external link. I was the one I had added it a long time ago and I was wondering why it got removed.I have been following that article for many months and for a period the article even had a penis picture which got removed because it was doubtful whether or not the penis on that picture was a micropenis.As a result I don't think that the link is innapropriate.I was thinking of reinserting it but I would like to ask your opinion first.. Pikpatsu 00:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your reply ! that was quick :P Except for the personal website I can't see any other reason it should not pass WP:EL .As for proof that the penises shown are micropenises or not I think that the pictures speak for themselves ... :) See ya around !

Depressing
How an administrator like yourself could participate in such biased reverting of users really makes me sad. I'd like to kindly ask you to go back to George W. Bush and actually read what I added. You will soon see that none of it was "POV" and all of it is facts. I'm guessing you perceive my edits as "POV" because of the negative words "scandal", "controversy", or "manipulation", but these are all presently known facts to many Americans. Thanks, -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 01:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

about the block of 67.83.28.41
you cannot block this user. he did engage in an edit war, but it is the same thing as someone vandalizing a page, him editing it, them vandalizing it, him editing it again ect. Is there a problem with deleting something on a page which should not be there? This is ludacrus. That section on the Alec Baldwin page infringes on his personal rights. This user was only deleting it for the good. He only persisted on editing it because it is so ridiculous.--Toccsevobal 01:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not care if he was told to stop editing, he was editing nonsense. So that means if somebody puts the word on a page and someone edits it, theoretically someone can block the person who edited the word  because some other idiot told them not to. Molto ridiculoso, Wikipedia motlo cattivo. --Toccsevobal 01:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Jat people page
Dear Gwernol. Thanks for your help in reveting the recent changes on the Jat people page. Do you have any ideas about how to resolve the disputes regarding this page (and other pages relating to the Jats)? It seems to me that they have been taken over by fanatics who are doggedly pushing a strongly biased and elitist picture of Jats - but I hate having to be in constant arguments with them - it is most unpleasant and such a waste of time! Cheers, John Hill 03:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

External commercial link
User "Endroit" has reverted twice the link I've deleted to the commercial website of Frédéric Fekkai. Please take a look to it.

Ralicia 15:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)ralicia

Problem with an AfD I listed...
Hello, Gwernol. I am sure that you are quite busy, but if you have a moment, can you take a look at the AfD I listed [], and tell me what I did wrong. I have listed articles on AfD many times, without error, so I am not sure what went wrong this time. I suppose I just got in too big a hurry, and left something out. At this point, I know not how to fix it. As always, I appreciate your time. ---Charles 17:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the error. This might be a lesson to myself not to attempt editing Wikipedia whilst plagued with an ear infection---I have been "off" all morning, mistyping, forgetting things, and just feeling slow. Perhaps a shot of whiskey and a nap are in order. At any rate, thanks for the fix, and the endorsement of the delete. Cheers! ---Charles 18:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

CalamariMike
I do not recall if I thanked you earlier for your revert on my user page. I apprecieate it. Unfortunately, he's done it again, and now should be blocked. What a waste of time and energy. Thanks again. ---Charles 23:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Hi. I've added citations to the Jat article and tried to clean it up abit. But i think the problem is User:Mein hoon don. As a memeber of wikipedia's Counter-Vandalism Unit in my professional opinion looking at his edit history its seem to be adding negative commentry to the article.

In the Ancient Kingdoms section he has added commentry ''It must be noted that the ancestry of the above kings has never been proven to be Jat. The articles on each of these kings in the Wikipedia itself highlight how little is actually known about their origins''.

Now under wikipedia rule any user can remove uncited comments. If this comment remains uncited anyone can remove it.

Any way in my professional opinion looking at his edit history User:Mein hoon don is becoming a serious problem.

I will try and help you the best I can but time is short that I can spend on Wikipedia. Thanks--James smith2 02:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * But what he fails to mention Gwernol, is that he himself is lifting almost word for word work from another internet site, which in itself is criticised for it's misleading and biased articles. This must be in breach of some copyright, wiki policy? My edit history is sadly taken up with trying to clarify and neutralise the work of some biased users. Even another user, John ill has been victim to some criticism by these users, even when he has (amazingly) gone back and checked the references they give and found that the references do not in any way shape or form correspond to what they are being used for as a citation. Im sorry of I am a little blunt on that page, but the kinda stuff coming through on this article is biased, copyright breach, in some cases, pure fiction passed as common consensus.


 * If anything, can you please help with this article Jat people? I will agree to help you in any decision you make, whether it's for me, or against me, thats a promise. Either way, Im sick of the way things are going here and this is my last post and edit here at wiki. I dont see things improving, and a group of distorters are running rife here. Thanks for your help in the article Gwernol.--Mein hoon don 13:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Martinultima
I did not know an adminship canadate had to state why he/she wanted the tools. I assumed that Martinultima was goint participate in some backlog.--U.S.A. cubed 03:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC) But I did ask the canadate the clarify if he/she was going to participate in the WP:AIV. I'm sorry I did not think of that. I think reverting vandalism is important, but I suppose not alone a sufficient reason to need the tools.--U.S.A. cubed 03:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you again.
I really appreciate your message to MOOOOOPS in regard to his hysterical message on my talk page. I had decided not to make any further comment, as I am certain it would only further inflame him. Do you feel that I said anything inappropriate? I tried to stay cool. His claims of innocence ring very hollow, though, and his behaviour is annoying. I find it funny that he thinks that I have some sort of rank or power, when it is the furthest thing from the truth. Let him "report" me---I dare say, nothing will come of it. At any rate, I thank you for your vigilance. Do you see any reason I should not simply remove his message(s) from my talk page? ---Charles 04:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
For removing my warning! --Guinnog 05:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Complaint against Charles.
I will be forwarding a complaint to Wikipedia against Charles. He is a rude, disrespectful jerk that I think shouldnt be on Wikipedia. First, he threatens me by saying '' Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. No less than two times---and possibly a third, if you used a sockpuppet---you removed speedy delete tags from the article Buy Me. As you were warned once already, this is a violation of Wikipedia's guidelines. Please refrain from such activity in the future. Thank you. ---Charles 15:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)''. I than sent him a message to him simply saying ''First off, I never removed any notices from Wikipedia. Second off, I was never warned about anything. I would appreciate it if you could please make sure your talking about the right person because I do not know about anything you said.''. I want to point out that this is my 2nd day on Wikipedia and I am not familiar with alot of stuff on the website. I also wasnt aware that I was removing any speedy delete notices. Than after I sent him that message, I get one saying ''Take a look at the edit history for the Buy Me article that you created, and you will very clearly see that you, and no one else repeatedly removed speedy delete tags and/or blanked the page in order to achieve the same ends. Do not leave messages on my talk page pleading innocence or ignorance on this matter. The record indicates otherwise. ---Charles 03:04, 29 April 2007''. That was a very rude message he sent me. After I recieved that message, I sent him the following message '' Yes Charles. First off, there is no need for your rude, disrespectful comments towards me. The following are EXACT words that you left on my message list. This is my second day with Wikipedia and I did not know that I was removing any sort of notice from Wikipedia. As far as my account, I have had nothing but aggravation, disrespectful comments, and threats towards me since I started, so if you have a problem with me, than delete my account. I WILL be filing a complaint against you with Wikipedia for threats since you threatened to delete my account. I will be requesting Wikipedia either demote you in there ranks or delete you fully. You dont deserve to have the power and authority you have now and I hope you lose it. I have everything you sent to me saved on my computer and will send Wikipedia a copy of your messages to me. You are a stuck up jerk who has nothing better to do than make threats and intimidate people who are new on this site.'' I will admit that calling him a stuck up jerk was rude, however he certanly deserved it. I hope that you can assist me in the complaint against him and hope to hear from you ASAP. Thank You very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MOOOOOPS (talk • contribs)

Modifying Discussion Pages
Why is it that you are allowed to revert the comments I leave on your discussion page, but I'm not allowed to do the same with mine? This seems like power-hungry administrator behavior to me. -Norvig —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.207.127.254 (talk • contribs)
 * For starters, it's not your talk page. It's used by a number of people at your university. Secondly, removing warning messages is kinda naughty, y'know? - A l is o n  ☺ 17:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Puffle
I saw your edit to the Puffle article, and while I don't disagree with it, I was thinking it might be a better idea to take the article to WP:DRV. While I missed the opportunity to comment on the AfD nomination at Articles for deletion/Puffle, I don't think the "Keep" result was warranted. In fact, I just don't see any way the article can ever comply with WP:NOR and WP:V.

Anyway, just a suggestion. Have a good one! -- Satori Son 13:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA
Can you close Requests for adminship/Djln on the grounds on no concensus? 86.12.249.63 17:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Why dont you mind your own business. This doesnt concern you and you shouldnt be involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.34.44 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks for explaining that, it just seemed odd the request was floating about in cyberspace 86.12.249.63 19:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA
I have withdrawn your response. Block whenever; I don't want to be an admin if the sole criterion against is some silly image.

Protection
Gwernol, I have fully protected your page, as you know. An editor, User:Funpika, who is not a vandal but also not an admin, claims to be able to edit your protected page, which I have just re-confirmed is protected for admins only. Which of us is deluded?--Anthony.bradbury 23:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, the "edit this page" tab appears for me as well (and I am also not an admin), so it does appear to be semi-protected for some reason. Very odd. -- Satori Son 23:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Martinultima
FYI, he is fairly politely requesting an unblock. --Steve (Stephen)talk 00:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

"End run"
In this edit you claimed that I am "using RfA to try to end-run round a policy [I] don't like". I find this statement confusing. What policy is it that you don't think I like, and how am I trying to use my right to express my opinion as I see fit in Request for Adminship oages to circumvent this policy? I look forward to your reply. Kelly Martin (talk) 21:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

"Tony Blair"
Recently redirected to Tammy Branson. I've been away from wikipedia for so long I can't remember what to do to get this particular type of vandalism reverted. Can't remember My old password either, hence the apparently new account Barliner 12:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Dates and streaks
I see you have also gotten pulled into the revert battle with User talk:Ron liebman and his apparent IP address sockpuppets. If he would actually provide a reference instead of vague generalities and snippy comments, we'd be getting somewhere. But his behavior basically amounts to vandalism, which is why we're treating it that way until an admin can block them (again). Thanks for your help. d:) Wahkeenah 22:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That user and his growing list of sockpuppet ID's and IP addresses seem fairly active today. Nothing seems to be getting through to that guy. He gets blocked for a day, he waits a day, then starts again. Wahkeenah 18:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Please explain myCFO
What content did I delete from MyCFO that was wrong? And I can remove lenghty rants from my talk page if I like, according to WP:USER. 24.90.11.62 02:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

User 24.90.11.62 (and others) appear to be removing any/all references to the company myCFO and systematically deleting myCFO references and links from each of myCFO's Board Member's Personal Wikipedia Biographies, a SPA for Personal Biography "enhancements" and exclusively for former myCFO Board Members. This user is also engaged in repeated deletion and/or vandalizing of accurate information about the business myCFO. User vandalism examples: 1) re-changes "is" to "was" and 2) re-added a "Defunct" link for myCFO.

myCFO is an active healthy business providing the same financial services continuously since being founded in 1999. myCFO "is", and is not "defunct", and former board members did serve on myCFO’s Board of Directors, which should not be deleted or obscured from their Wikipedia Personal Biographies. 63.139.48.116 06:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * MyCFO, as a singular independent company, no longer exists - it now operates as "Harris myCFO" - thus, "was" is appropriate. And I've deleted POV-pushing links to the WSJ report from the biographies of the various myCFO boardmembers because that information is provided in the linked-to MyCFO article, and appears to merely have been inserted in all those articles by a single purpose account looking to attach that negative information to those people (see WP:BLP). To my knowledge, I didn't remove any reference that they were myCFO board members, just the external link to the WSJ article. 24.90.11.62 14:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the userpage vandalism
Thanks for reverting out the vandalism from User:DrJoeOhrt. That user, along with User:SnakeRunsCBWest, has been an interesting, though infrequent, vandal. I've been called many things, but never what those two accused me of. Ah well. Anyway, just wanted to pass along the thanks! Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 05:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for quoting the rule that says I can do it
Editing others' comments (except on your own user talk page). Finally, proof that I'm allowed to edit my own talk page.

Persistent vandal
Special:Contributions/216.114.122.9- It seems this user needs longer blocks. -- Fyslee/talk</b> 20:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

User:72.43.26.84 has vandalised again
He has vandalised again, this time to Seneca Nation, changing things "penis sucker", "cock head" etc... Indefinate block time I think. Gherkin30 13:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Lmao u beat me
lmao u beat me to reverting this edit..anyway keep up the good work..=] me + ma sis luv us sum Pretty Ricky!  (wat waz dat?) ''' 01:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Owainbut thanks
i had 3 oposed so i removed it thanks for your advise can you delte it the page is Requests for adminship/Owainbut i have added a delete tag on the page i will continue to do this with new pages.

Be careful with that button ;p
This reversion actually restored a revision with false information... the bad info was added right before the simple vandalism you rolled back :). -- SB_Johnny |talk|books 14:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh sorry, I was unclear. Just before the revisions that you reverted, another user had added bad information too, so since you used rollback, you missed the other vandal edit. Happens to all of us, of course :). I didn't notice it either until someone left me a message on my talk wondering about "Strawberries having originated in Mongolia". I've learned from using rollback on other projects that it's often a good idea to check the rollbacked revision against the last edit by a familiar username, though of course that's harder to do on Wikipedia where there are gazillions of users :P -- SB_Johnny |talk|books 17:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

please help me! i'm a new user!
hi! i just want you to teach me on how to edit articles so i will not be banned on using Wikipedia. Please give me some advices.Clever girl121295 17:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Manchester United Premier League champions 06-07
What was wrong with me adding this? It is true?? It certainly is not vandalism. 80.177.111.164 18:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Premier League 2006/07
Same! Sorry! But I can't see what's wrong with changing one detail. Anyway didn't realise we weren't allowed to change it! As above it's definately NOT vandalism. 86.156.14.56 18:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Premier League
It even says in 'vandalizm' any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. My change was a good-faith effort, and according to this section of Wikipedia, is NOT considered vandalism. My message, however, states that it was! Please clarify this. 86.156.14.56 18:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Premier League
It could have something to do with the fact that when I edited this page it said 'this is an archived page and any changes you make may not be saved' ?? I definitely did not change this page to say Chelsea are the current champions, I added Manchester United into the what is now empty 06/07 box in the table of Premiership winners. 80.177.111.164 20:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Husain
Please check the talk pafge. Paul B 14:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I have heard that the articles on Wikipedia are not accurate and that it is nt a reliable source. Is this true?

sameer14

Liamofnorton 08:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

what is wrong with the word bagoscary?

Bachelor II Groom
Why did you delete the article? I was editing re: Siobhan notes... mediaguy725

Northern Ireland
The Ulster Banner is not the flag of Northern Ireland, the Union Banner is the only official flag, the Ulster Banner was the banner of the Government of Northern Ireland Disbanded in 1972/73.--padraig3uk 13:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't notice the second use of the flag in the article, I believe that WP should present facts not the POV of certain editors that are promoting the use of this flag on articles and templates.--padraig3uk 14:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I have opened a discussion on the article talk page, to me the only use of this flag in the article should be a historical context, but it shouldn't be used to represent Northern ireland today.--padraig3uk 14:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

My post to Jersy Guys is not vandalism. Those are my words, and they are about an historically correct matter, relevant to the subject. It is within the rules for me to post it. --Justified Right 14:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

*****YOU'RE ALL GOING TO HELL*****
Could you please allow account creation for this blocked user? It appears that it was blocked based on an inappropriete username, and you did leave the Usernameblock message on their talk page.(Unless if you feel the name was blantly inappropriete to the point that ACB would be appropriete)--U. S. A. 03:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Sheryl Crow (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 10:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't think it was used for malicious account creation, and I've seen way more offensive usernames than this one, but since you believe it was malicious,(and with the edit to the sandbox) I trust your decision.(I wanted to assuming good faith in the user)--U. S. A. 14:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Block of 129.2.151.136
Thanks for blocking User:129.2.151.136. Someone using this IP has vandalized my talk page. Just to tell you that I was previously User:Han Amos and I had a bureaucrat rename me to User:NHRHS2010. NHRHS2010 Talk  18:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

wikimaniac32
i will provide sources. PLEASE do not ban me, i am just trying to contribute

About Jesus vandalism
I don't see how what I added to the Jesus article was vandalism. I would like a better description of what I did wrong please. Papa Mama 01:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC) Papa Mama


 * The above user's contribution to the Jesus article might have had some merit (1) if it had been sourced, and (2) if it had actually been written in English. Wahkeenah 01:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Narrow gauge railways
I hate to say this after all your hard work, but moving links from narrow gauge to Narrow gauge railway in various articles has merely swapped one redirect for another. The actual destination is Narrow gauge railways (plural). If you like, I'll be willing to change the links, unless there's some reason not to. Alternatively, could Narrow gauge railways be moved to Narrow gauge railway? AT present, there seems to be an almost equal split, with about 100 pages linking to railway and 100 to railways. – Tivedshambo (talk) 06:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

If 3'6'' railways are designated narrow guage- what are the 2' ones in Tasmania designated? SatuSuro 23:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems a very unfortunate 'broad term' to use - why the need for such a broad brush with a potentially discrepant label - surely just identifying the guage by its measurement would be more accurate ? SatuSuro 00:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your reasonable explanation - it seems too loose for working with west coast Tasmanian railways, so I'll think I'll stick with measurements! cheers- and thanks again SatuSuro 00:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

There were a number of double redirects left from the move, but I think I've fixed them. Choess 19:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

That Shanghai Canidrome Topic
Hi, I think that user 60.242.38.174 on the shanghai page is going to avoid any discussion until I put at least the image back. I would like to avoid having the whole building censored. What I am going to do is change the comment up. Please do not ban me, and think it is some kind of revert.

Benjwong 21:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

MWU?
I happened to notice you've been "MWU-assisted edits". What might that be? Is it anything like AWB? I'm always looking for new tools to make Wiki-housekeeping type tasks easier. Cheerio! -Ebyabe 18:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Admin stats
Gwernol, some long time ago, well before I achieved the mop & bucket, I saw a page, similar in format to the "admin tasks" box on your page (and mine) detailing the activity undertaken by all admins, in terms of deleting, blocking and protecting, etc, over I think the preceding 12 months. I do not know where it is, and none of the obvious WP:ADMIN links point to it. Have you ever seen it? And if so, where is it?--Anthony.bradbury 18:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you, but actually no, I wasn't. I used the example on your page as example of appearance, not of content. The table listed all active admins (yes, 800+) with a count by their name of number of deletion, block, etc actions undertaken. It is not critical, obviously. It just annoys me that I know it exists and I can't find it. Ordinary logs in text form I can do. Worry not--Anthony.bradbury 18:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bouncywikilogo, removed per not being a GFDL
You removed Image:Bouncywikilogo.gif from my userpage per not being a GFDL (being copyrighted) ; but on the image page, there is a tag/template saying the following: This image is a derivative of an official Wikimedia project logo and may only be used internally in Wikimedia projects. So, why can´t I use it on my userpage? ♠  Tom   @  s   Bat   00:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * So am I free to remove it from all of the userpages in which it appears? (theres a very long list of userpages at the image´s page)? ♠  Tom   @  s   Bat   01:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

And to remove all of the banners, the ones with the copyrighted Wikiepdia logo, of Banners and buttons/archive from userpages? ♠  Tom   @  s   Bat   02:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well? ♠  Tom   @  s   Bat   01:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please respond... ♠  Tom   @  s   Bat   01:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Why do you ignore me? Please respond... ♠  Tom   @  s   Bat   10:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

you deleted two images that were not in violation of anything
Firstly, you deleted the wanderlust image, which is a picture I TOOK. DON'T DELTE PHOTOGRAPHS AS THEY'RE ALLOWED. secondly, you deleted the 'no cd cover available' image. This is a wikipeda image, and should not have been deleted. Do you admit that in those two instances you were wrong? --Paaerduag 10:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Biting newbies
I saw your revert on Kayla (I had just tried to do it myself); thanks! I also went to User talk:Coolchick19190 to leave a uw-test1 message, and saw that you had left both a uw-vandalism2 and a uw-vandalism3 message, even though all three edits came before the first warning -- I know the given name articles are subject to all kinds of "test edits" and it gets monotonous patrolling them, but also be careful of biting the newbies. I'm going to leave a welcome message; please consider replacing your warnings with uw-test1 or just the uw-vandalism2. Thanks! -- JHunterJ 11:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Awww, but that was so kind of him to say! :) Wildthing61476 14:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Help needed with SEO article
I've nominated search engine optimization for featured article status. Could you possibly look at the references on the article and then leave your comments at Featured article candidates/Search engine optimization as to whether you think the blogs and forums cited as references qualify as reliable sources. In order to achieve featured article status we need community consensus that the references are reliable. If you know any other Wikipedians who have expertise in this area, we welcome their comments. Thank you! Jehochman ☎ / ✔ 17:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou
Theres two Thankyous in a row. Discursive is a really posh word for me, pardom my ignorance but I dont know what it means, please feel free to tell me the meaning. No my comments previously weren't civilised but they were amusing (to me anyway) and they did carry a point, being vulgar or non-discursive/undiscursive (is that a word...?) doesnt make a comment pointless although being civilised and eloquent does help. Anyway to be frank with you, I was a bit bored when made the orginal edit to Mediterranean dunno why and decided to carry on with being a nuisance because I was a little upset on its removal and the sterness of your warning, but I suppose you cant expect the police to warm you from stealing someones wallet again by treating you like your mum would and say "please darling dont do it again" so that argument is slightly flawed. Thanks for responding and ultimately taking the right decision, forgive me for my vulgarity my lack of respect for any form of authority (Stalin would have had me shot in a heartbeat) and the fact that I wrote on 'your' page and not your talk page (didn't know the difference). You shant experience any more discourtesies from me and I wont vandalise stuff anymore.

revert my edit...
but keep in 68.196.234.35's edit on Image talk:Gilberto Silva in North London.jpg? what happened there lol?

Please accept my apology. I am quite willing to accept the fact that censorship may not have been your principle motive in deleteing the link in question. With that said I would like to point out that the Main Article does not have an "edit this page" option.

It is therefor my intention to do what you first suggested and disscuss it on the articles talk page. I will however refrain from reinserting and or inserting links into talk AIDS. Randy Bugger 09:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I did not vandalize
I did not vandalize on Oprah Winfrey. Someone likely hacked my account, unfortunatly.

Please do not insult!!!
I have been involved in that page for some time. You have not. I do not need to be welcomed. DO NOT condescend. And DO NOT tell me i should play in the sandbox. I added my comment to the "discussion" page (which should be an open forum - though nobody uses it, except for those who control it). I have made many contributions to wikipedia. I would like an apology. I really would. --Grinning Idiot 17:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd still like that apology
But can I get three cheers for democracy, wikipedia style? Hip... anyone?--Grinning Idiot 17:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

You say "not a democracy" - that's Ok as long as people discuss. Which they don't. They protect and revert. I have tried discussion. But you think less of me not because of my faults but becuase you have no interest in listening. It is admins like you that destroy wikipedias reputation as a source of information. --Grinning Idiot 17:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

A lesson in diplomacy
If you think your style of admin is effective, why don't you look at my history of edits and the way I have argued and discussed. Your sanctimonious attitude will not achieve anything. Even if I am grumpy it should be your job (as an admin) to stay civil. Do you want to carry on like a pork chop or do you want to be an admin? Have a think.--Grinning Idiot 15:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

User page
Thanks for the revert. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Lol
Lol ( H ) 02:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Did you accept your unblock reason then? :-) Ref (chew) (do) 21:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

User:GOD HATE FAGS AND SO DO I
Hi. I see from this edit that you intended to block User:GOD HATE FAGS AND SO DO I (for good reason), but this log doesn't show a block. Am I missing something? Thanks! — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 14:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You're looking in the wrong place. You want the block log. TTN 14:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I see now, I was looking for a log of the user getting itself blocked, rather than a log of blocks of a user's user page, silly me! Thanks for pointing that out, TTN!    — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 15:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Controversy on Peter Lamborn Wilson article
If and when you have a moment, can you take a look at this [] ongoing discussion, and give me your comment? Near the end of this rather long, convoluted, and poorly-formatted exchange, an anonymous user has made comments that I believe are very close to crossing over into assuming bad faith. He is accusing me of censorship when all I am trying to do is maintain verifiability in the article. I lost my temper earlier, so I've decided not to comment again, as it will probably only make the matter worse. An objective opinion on the larger matter of verifiability, libellous accusations, and standards pertaining to biographies of living persons is very much needed. I thank you, as always, for your time and efforts. ---Cathal 16:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on Puppy
Is it time for Semi-protect for Puppy? The vandalism has been steady for a while now, though today was a larger burst than normal. Lsi john 20:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Although there has been some vandalism to Puppy, it isn't quite to the level today where I'd feel comfortable semi-protecting the article. However I will keep an eye on it, and if the attacks continue or increase I will protect it. Best, Gwernol 21:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks. I sort of adopted it and have been reverting the vandalism. I was actually thinking about suggesting an adopt a page program! :-} Peace. Lsi john 21:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Naming articlas
ive read that names should be common names rather then correct names. i was wonderinng h=why this was. im not 100% sure but im pretty sure actual encylopedias do that. but any way i was just wondering

User:216.186.52.116
This school user has wholly ignored your request and warning. Doubtless if you are on-line you will sort it, but in case you are not I will go back and attend to it, if necessary, later tonight.--Anthony.bradbury 20:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * User:Yamla protected the userpage, and I increased the block to 3 days.--Anthony.bradbury 21:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I recieved a message from you stating that my images were not mine, in fact they are mine and i took them and lent the rights to the school. Please reinstate the pictures that are rightfully mine.... Knobbie10 18:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC) May 25 2007

Lumberjack
Can u let the lumberjack page be how it is. Just for a few days. Please i only need it to be like it for 1 week. I dont want to fail 9th grade. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammerman585 (talk • contribs)


 * Just ... wow! BJAODN candidate? - A l is o n  ☺ 23:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

User: Pikminlover/User: The Hooded One
Hello, and good afternoon, or morning

I have reason to believe that User: The Hooded One is a sockpuppet of user: Pikminlover. Why? because basically their userpages are the same. For example user: Pikminlover has on his Userpage: Picture of the day, Wikipedia signpost, Stress level, This is a wikipedia user page template, and useful tools for admins, also he says that he wants to be an admin, oh yeah he has the penguin cable. For User: The Hooded One's userpage he has: the penguin cabal, stress level, wikipedia signpost, useful tools for admins, the this is a wikipedia userpage template, and he says that he wants to be an admin. Also User: The Hooded One has already shown much expierence with wikipedia. So, it seems very weird that user: The Hooded One and User: pikminlover have simalarities.

Thank you,

- ₪Patelco☻- $$$$ 01:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The interesting twist? Requests for checkuser/Case/Pikminlover: seems Patelco has more than one reason to believe they're sockpuppets. -  auburn pilot  talk  03:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Advice...
Could you give me some advice? You see, approximately two months ago, I put in an RFA, viewable here. It was unsuccessful. Now, I've gained much more experience, and I was thinking or putting in a second RFA. Do you think I should? If you could, please leave your answer on my talk page. Thanks! -Billy227, review my account!! talk contribs sndbx usbx 20:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)Advi

mysupermarket links
I don't understand why you removed the links I put to www.mysupermarket.co.uk I believe that this website is clearly related to the supermarkets as it is simply a vehicle to shop through those supermarkets. It is not an attempt to pull business away from those supermarkets, but rather, a tool to help the shopper do so more smartly. Jonnysteel 11:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Taking Back Sunday
I thank you for your interest in my Taking Back Sunday edits. If you take the time to check the talk page for that article, you'll see my rationale for the changes and why they fit within Wikipedia's editing guidelines. I trust that you can understand that the mere say so of a Rolling Stone journalist does not place a band in a particular genre. Faktczecher 15:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

With further investigation, the Rolling Stone cite in question lists TBS as "emo" twice and does not mention the word "alternative." As such, I was correcting a mis-cited "fact." Perhaps we should both have checked the veracity of the source. Faktczecher 16:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Though, after consideration, I must say you acted rather poorly in this situation. You ignored a cite for my edit after I directed you to the talk page where I had placed it and, instead, you preferred to chide me, a relatively new user, for an error in citation. You chose to make a knee-jerk reversion without checking the fact under contention. You actually restored incorrectly cited material, and multiple times, too. Further, you blindly conflated one journalist's opinion with, as you put it on my talk page, a "summar[y] of reputable published opinion." As the Wikipedia page on genre says, "in all art forms, genres are vague categories with no fixed boundaries"; as such, any argument about genre must rely on a range of published opinion, not one the words of one (incorrectly sourced) journalist. These are all errors that would be infinitely forgivable if made by ordinary users. That they were made by an admin, someone who assumedly has invested a good deal of time in Wikipedia, speaks poorly for you. Faktczecher 17:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry....
The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 23:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Personal Analysis on Homosexuality
A couple days ago you left a caution on my page saying that I had contributed personal analysis to the homosexuality page. I want to obey the rules of Wikipedia, but I do not understand how my edit was personal analysis. I want to avoid future warnings. If you could enlighten me on my talk page I would appreciate it.Joshuajohanson 01:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions on Model Railway scale/gauge ratio terminology.
Hi Gwernol, I am sorry but you are very much mistaken. The number zero should be used in all naming conventions.

This is from the historic fact that when the Gauges 3, 2 and 1 were prevalent before the war and a smaller one was introduced they used the progressively smaller number of 0 (zero) as in Gauge 0. When the scale and gauge was halved for the new table top railway (literally half Gauge 0) the term H0 was used. The second character being a zero.

The confusion has set in with the pronounciation of this zero as Oh as in reciting a telephone number in the UK.

The situation has not been helped in that Hornby-Dublo was used as a brand name for the introduced 00 range.

All naming conventions should reflect this use of the number zero.

Examples used in the UK market are as follows: 0 gauge, 0n16.5 gauge, 0n14 gauge, 0n9 gauge, 00 gauge, 00n9 gauge, H0 gauge, H0n9 gauge and 000 gauge.

The use of the term scale is not used in the UK. Adrianmc 16:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Question
Hello Gwernol, I see that you help a lot of Wikipedians. Well I have one. About Awards/Barnasters, can unregistered users/Anonymous IPs get an award/barnaster? To respond, please post a message on my talk page. Thanks! Pro Game Master87 05:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Meetup
Dear Gwernol,

You have either attended or expressed interested in the previous NYC Meetup. I would like to invite you to the First Annual New York Wikipedian Central Park Picnic. R.S.V.P. @ Meetup/NYC -- Y not? 15:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Airway.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Airway.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 10:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Howdy
We need some help editing Sheerness FAC. Do you have a mere two minutes to look at it? Jehochman Talk 02:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Spam in Blurb.com
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Blurb.com, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Blurb.com is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Blurb.com, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 09:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:12.5in
A template you created, Template:12.5in, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the <tt> </tt> tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 02:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

United States Army Special Forces in popular culture
Hi. I'm contacting you as an admin with whom I've spoken before (regarding vandalism of my user page a while back), because I'd like some advice on this article, which I've just come across. It feels for all the world like original research, but I'm not sure what the first action should be in this case. If you could spare a moment to point me in the right direction, that would be great.

Many thanks, Chrisd87 22:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Eli Manning?
Gwernol-

I recently received a message from you directed towards my IP address (70.23.174.46) pertaining to an article on the football player Eli Manning, but I'm afraid it was misdirected. I hate American football with a burning passion and want nothing to do with that sort of neanderthalic drivel (sorry if you actually like it and I offended you with that last statement :P). You might have gotten a number in the address wrong or something, I'm not sure. Also, I don't know if this was the correct way to contact you about this, but I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, so excuse any mistakes I may have made.

Thanks, SF

Amerigo Vespucci
The Amerigo Vespucci article received heavy editing today by unregistered users, which I noticed at WikiRage.com. The article may benefit from a good review. According to Wikipedia Page History Statistics, you are one of the top contributors to that page. If you have the time, would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 01:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * WikiRage is a very handy tool for spotting unusual editing patterns, isn't it? Gwernol seems to be on a wikibreak.  You may want to email if it's urgent. - Jehochman  Talk 01:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

User:71.224.24.99
This user has added more vendalism, if you could please block them. Dr ea my <sup style="color:indigo;">\*/ <sub style="color:lime;">!$!  19:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Dreamafter. Gwernol is on a Wikibreak, so I have looked into this for you.
 * It appears that has not edited since June 21. Are you sure you have the right IP address? If you need further assistance, you may contact me on my talk page. Thanks, Satori Son 19:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Nike, Inc.
The Nike, Inc. article received heavy editing today by new/unregistered users, which I noticed at WikiRage.com. The article may benefit from a good review. According to Wikipedia Page History Statistics, you are one of the top contributors to that page. If you have the time, would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. Thanks. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 07:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of QuickTime Player
An article that you have been involved in editing, QuickTime Player, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. Kiranerys-Talk 20:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Help
Dear Gwernol,

I was wondering if you would please help me make Image:M&LKlogo2.jpg legal according to Wikipedia Guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Masterchief46517 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)