User talk:HamatoKameko/Archive3

Congratulations!
→ Hot   Dog   Wolf  20:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Nazzzz
Two yeses - yes, you may call me BRS (but thanks for asking, most don't even bother), and yes, we have to keep an eye on this guy. It may be time soon for warning them about their actions. Meantime, yeah, close watch on related stuff is called for. BTW, I know you have Twinkle, but would it be handy to have rollback as well? As an admin, I can now grant you the tool if you fancy it. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I have deleted the image as a copyvio and a repost of deleted material. Nazzzz has been blocked for 36 hours; lets see if that has any effect - if not, we may be loooking at a block for a week, and I doubt he'd return after that. Besides, if he does he will probably still be disruptive, and indefinite blocking would then be nescescary. BTW, you should now find that you have the rollback tool ;-D Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 07:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Nazzzzz's stealing of copy-righted information.....
hello! how are you? how you say you are against Nazzzzz, i couldnt agree more with you! do you know what he did? under erna siikavirtas biography, he stole information that I WROTE and made it his own!! ALL of the information under her biography IS MINE!! and if you dont believe me, contact the administrator of the official Metal From Finland website! i wrote erna's biograpghy, and sent it to the admin of the official Metal From Finland website, and they accepted it. and all of what you see under erna's bio was stolen from the Metal From Finland website, and from me! Nazzz stole all that information from me! and if you dont believe me, her is the link to the [official] Metal From Finland website regaurding the link that I WROTE!: http://www.metalfromfinland.com/people/1456/Erna+Siikavirta it makes me so upset to think why someone would do this? anyways, i contacted BRS, and i dont know what he is going to do about this...do you? - shamsie
 * I'll look into it. Thank you for contacting me instead of adding your name to the article again. I appreciate it. :) --HamatoKameko (talk) 09:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

thank you so much HamatoKameko! i really appreciate it :D and by the way, forgive me if i was acting up and causing any problem, really i am sorry. i just felt that it was wrong to steal info, and lie saying it was theirs. anyways, i really apperciate you taking my side into consideration :D and also, i am sorry for posting my name without even warning anyone, which caused confusion...sorry. but anyways, do you know what we are going to do about this?

shamsie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamsie (talk • contribs) 16:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge Proposal
There is a discussion going on about whether or not to merge WikiProject Dogs and WikiProject Dog breeds together. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Coaster1983 (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Dorothy Goetz
I think it is very discouraging when someone sticks a "cleanup" tag on an article four minutes after it's creation, as you did on mine. In fact, it is so discouraging that I am not going to finish the article. Perhaps someone else will clean it up. Mattisse (Talk) 16:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Cleanup tags are not meant to be an insult to anyone; it is merely a notice that there is work still to be done. As an evidently long-time Wikipedia editor, you should know better. I had no intention of hurting your feelings, and frankly I'm insulted by your childish response, which reads very much as a differently worded version of "I'm taking my ball and going home."
 * I had no way of knowing whether you had completed your contribution to the article or intended to continue working on it, therefore, I tagged it so that others interested in article cleanup could more easily find it. You likely already know this, but if you're in the middle of working on an article, you can tag it or  to indicate your intention to continue editing it.
 * Please take a step back and re-assess the situation, and please don't take such an edit so personally. I believe that you are vastly over-reacting by taking a simple cleanup tag as reason not to finish an article you obviously care about. Never did I intend to discourage you, and I apologize that my actions were taken as such. --HamatoKameko (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Why Did You Delete My Jayms Madison Page?
She has worked with Taylor Dane, Jay Z and Ghostface Killah and she is signed to BMI... she is an upcoming artist that is making her way... why was she deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siiren (talk • contribs) 20:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I beg pardon? I'm not an sysop, and as such, I don't have the power to delete pages, even when I want to. It is possible that I tagged the page under Criteria for speedy deletion, probably under the notability guidelines, but I did not delete it myself, which shows that at least one other person agreed with my assessment.
 * If you disagree with an article's nomination for speedy deletion in the future, you can tag it with and explain why you think the article should stay on the article's talk page. Even if you consider the person notable, if the article you create doesn't clearly explain why the person is notable, it's likely to be deleted. Hope this helps, and please don't take the routine maintenance of the site personally in the future. :)
 * PS: Please don't type in all-caps; in internet conversation, it is considered shouting, and thus is considered aggressive and rude in conversation. ;)
 * --HamatoKameko (talk) 09:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Gaiafan
removed level 4 warning, always start with a level 1 warning, unless its extreme.


 * I must admit I disagree with your removal of this warning. With all the recent trolling of Gaia and Gaia-related pages by certain idiot #channers, as well as a probable attempted (though failed) phishing attempt, I'd call it perfectly reasonable to go straight to level 4. Especially since the only edits this account has made has been to vandalize Gaia Online and its talk page. --HamatoKameko (talk) 15:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure, I can see your concern. But, we deal with individual editors, and we generally should avoid going straight to a level 4 warning, one reason is admins at AIV|AIV will look at the warnings given, and if they see only a level 4 warning, they're less likely to block, unless the vandalism is very severe. Have a look at this, it may help you out. Steve Crossin   (talk to me)  15:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I see your point. I may have jumped the gun a bit (I'm having trouble staying fully awake), but please don't assume that I'm dense. ;P I've read all of that before, and while yes, I probably should have warned them first, had I caught them sooner they would easily have racked up three warnings by now, as it's quite obvious the account only exists to vandalize. I predict the account will either be dropped entirely now that its been caught, or used to create more problems, in which case I would appreciate at least the re-addition of a level-one warning, so that no one has to start over from the ground-up with this potential problem user. --HamatoKameko (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, I have no doubt that you are not dense. I just thought I should point it out. I've bitten a lot of newcomers myself. Vandalism only accounts still need to be properly warned though :) Steve Crossin   (talk to me)  15:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)