User talk:Icairns/archive/archive 05

Annie Oakley
Hi Icairns, I take it you've been keeping an eye on edits by 65.96.4.111. His/her deletion of "b. Phoebe Ann Mosey" didn't make sense and I appreciate your revert of that. However, you simultaneously reverted his/her second edit added to an as yet unnamed media references section: "In Legends of the Hidden Temple, one of the artifacts was the Leopard Skin Cloak of Annie Oakley." That children's TV show Wiki article does list the cloak, and the cloak also has numerous web references. Perhaps you should restore that latter as a good edit. â¢ Motivation? Speculatively, this is 65.96.4.111's childish game to make you either partly wrong or have to work harder to separate vandalism from his/her valid edits. If 65.96.4.111 persists with this game, you may be aware that there is a page to report complex pattern forms of vandalism, which group judgment would help avoid a you vs. 65.96.4.111 grudge. Milo 02:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've partially reverted this item - this time with context, which the original version was missing. Ian Cairns 07:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Geronimo Geronimo Geronimo (GGG) appears to be the same user as User:65.96.4.111. GGG re-reverted the context that you added to the good faith edit, though this time there was no vandalism (thanks to my previous edit summary "complex vandalism alert"?). The problem with the good faith edit is that it is trivia that doesn't fit with the list of actors and performances of AO. Even that would be ok in its own section, except that there is currently an anti-trivia movement at WP. Someone else may eventually remove it for that reason. Seems to me that the best option is to wait. If GGG/65.96.4.111 gets banned, or gets into an edit war at AO, then revisit the content. Milo 04:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

AVG Anti-Virus - thanks
Thanks for the quick fix, and better wording. I didn't want to go out on a limb and declare someone else's future software to be free. --CliffC 05:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Would you mind taking a look at this? It's been sitting stale for nearly an hour and a half now. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 00:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Pat, This has now been dealt with. Thanks for raising it. Ian Cairns 01:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Yup, thanks for responding. :) Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 01:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the userpage vandalism revert
Thanks very much for the userpage vandalism revert. :) It was my first. :o GeorgeBills 11:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You're most welcome. Ian Cairns 19:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Sunshaper / Weida (copied from email)
Hey, I have been auto-blocked. Can you lift the block for me? Regards, Weida


 * Please refer to the message on your User talk page. Ian Cairns 07:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

70.182.0.190
Hey. 70.182.0.190 did have a last warning. Other users just piled on more warnings instead of reporting him. See User talk:70.182.0.190. No reason not to block? Thanks, Prolog 15:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The last final (level 4) warning was on Oct 25 - over a fortnight ago. Since then the IP went back to level 2 and was last seen on level 3 warnings. Although there was vandalism today, it was not enough for me to block the IP on sight. I would have liked to see a recent Level 4 and then subsequent vandalism after that Level 4 before taking stronger action. Thanks, Ian Cairns 15:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Why Did You Revert My Edit To Halifax!?!?!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!08:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)08:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies - I clicked on the wrong link. Please sign your comments on other people's talk pages. Ian Cairns 08:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies, In my rage, I must have forgot to complete my signature.100110100 08:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Annie Oakley
Hi Icairns, I take it you've been keeping an eye on edits by 65.96.4.111. His/her deletion of "b. Phoebe Ann Mosey" didn't make sense and I appreciate your revert of that. However, you simultaneously reverted his/her second edit added to an as yet unnamed media references section: "In Legends of the Hidden Temple, one of the artifacts was the Leopard Skin Cloak of Annie Oakley." That children's TV show Wiki article does list the cloak, and the cloak also has numerous web references. Perhaps you should restore that latter as a good edit. â¢ Motivation? Speculatively, this is 65.96.4.111's childish game to make you either partly wrong or have to work harder to separate vandalism from his/her valid edits. If 65.96.4.111 persists with this game, you may be aware that there is a page to report complex pattern forms of vandalism, which group judgment would help avoid a you vs. 65.96.4.111 grudge. Milo 02:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've partially reverted this item - this time with context, which the original version was missing. Ian Cairns 07:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Geronimo Geronimo Geronimo (GGG) appears to be the same user as User:65.96.4.111. GGG re-reverted the context that you added to the good faith edit, though this time there was no vandalism (thanks to my previous edit summary "complex vandalism alert"?). The problem with the good faith edit is that it is trivia that doesn't fit with the list of actors and performances of AO. Even that would be ok in its own section, except that there is currently an anti-trivia movement at WP. Someone else may eventually remove it for that reason. Seems to me that the best option is to wait. If GGG/65.96.4.111 gets banned, or gets into an edit war at AO, then revisit the content. Milo 04:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

AVG Anti-Virus - thanks
Thanks for the quick fix, and better wording. I didn't want to go out on a limb and declare someone else's future software to be free. --CliffC 05:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Would you mind taking a look at this? It's been sitting stale for nearly an hour and a half now. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 00:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Pat, This has now been dealt with. Thanks for raising it. Ian Cairns 01:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Yup, thanks for responding. :) Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 01:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the userpage vandalism revert
Thanks very much for the userpage vandalism revert. :) It was my first. :o GeorgeBills 11:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You're most welcome. Ian Cairns 19:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Sunshaper / Weida (copied from email)
Hey, I have been auto-blocked. Can you lift the block for me? Regards, Weida


 * Please refer to the message on your User talk page. Ian Cairns 07:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

70.182.0.190
Hey. 70.182.0.190 did have a last warning. Other users just piled on more warnings instead of reporting him. See User talk:70.182.0.190. No reason not to block? Thanks, Prolog 15:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The last final (level 4) warning was on Oct 25 - over a fortnight ago. Since then the IP went back to level 2 and was last seen on level 3 warnings. Although there was vandalism today, it was not enough for me to block the IP on sight. I would have liked to see a recent Level 4 and then subsequent vandalism after that Level 4 before taking stronger action. Thanks, Ian Cairns 15:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Why Did You Revert My Edit To Halifax!?!?!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!08:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)08:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies - I clicked on the wrong link. Please sign your comments on other people's talk pages. Ian Cairns 08:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies, In my rage, I must have forgot to complete my signature.100110100 08:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Athlone
Not sure whose page I should be posting my reply on, so I covered the angles! Ian, I understand the deletion of my "edit". Unfortunately while I know for certain the climate data for Athlone is incorrect, I don't know a source of any correct data. User talk:Sarah777 (Sarah777 02:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC))


 * Go on. I'll ask. How do you know the data is incorrect if you don't know the correct data? Ian Cairns 02:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Or put it another way. The existing data has a source - Yahoo! weather - maybe right, maybe wrong, but cited and verifiable. If you can provide an alternative verifiable source - then you can be bold and replace the data with your new values. But Wikipedia needs to know where the replacement data is coming from. Otherwise, there could be suggestions that any new data is unverifiable - and that data will probably be reverted until its verifiable source can be identified. Ian Cairns 02:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow! That's quick. The average Max in July and August (23c) and average Min. in January (-3c) are well beyond the Irish range. Rainfall figures look OK. My guess is the data are based on some climate model that Yahoo accessed and not on recorded data. (Sarah777 02:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC))

It's like you read that Little-Haywains-Hamlet-on-Tyne has an average July max. of 33c and average January min of -10c. But could you insert the correct figures; with references?! (Sarah777 02:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC))


 * I looked on Google and there was one other source - which had different data. But I've no way of knowing which was the correct data. Yahoo! ought to be citable... Perhaps you can identify the best source? Ian Cairns 02:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Ian, the data at (scroll down to graph, put mouse over temp bar to read the figures) seem to be correct. It appears several weather services on the web use Knock Airport data for Athlone.Knock is sixty miles NW of Athlone on an exposed hilltop and has a cooler and much wetter and windier climate. No other source I've found has figures like Yahoo - which, as I said, I guess is the product of a model. (Sarah777 14:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC))


 * Fine. Go for it. You can now substantiate / cite your editing. I appreciate that little WP editing is cited, as it ought to be, but you were going to knock out a cited source. Fine if it's replaced by an alternative sourced citation.BW, Ian Cairns 14:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

A satisfied customer emails...
why do you have to block me for a week? Don't be fascist, don't go on a power trip, I understand that you hold a policing position as far as wikipedia goes but what the hell, seriously its not that severe. Honestly, i've made worse edits than that one, yet you have to step in and ban me for a week. I HOPE ALL YOUR FUCKING CHILDREN DIE !!!!!! - rescued from my spam folder and transcribed by Ian Cairns 20:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Invalid username
Hi - have posted a reply on my talk page. Cheers. --Oscarthecat 22:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Singapore / Starhub block
On Nov 9th you blocked a shared IP address at Singapore's Starhub ISP. Prior blocks of the address had used anon-only and account creation allowed; yours on first inspection doesn't appear to have. Would you consider changing this to an anon-only block? We recieved a collateral damage complaint to the unblock-en-l mailing list.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert 22:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No problems. Thanks for raising this. Ian Cairns 22:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've just checked and another admin beat me to this 10 mins ago. Ian Cairns 22:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

A25 road
Hi! Just a quick note to let you know that the prod appears to be related to the one I put on Norwood Road. In fact it is an identical comment. Would you have any objections to me removing it? Regan123 03:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem at all. I can't see the logic of these particular prods. Thanks, Ian Cairns 07:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

"Angry Bahraini"
Hi, the anon that User:Zora reported on WP:AIV is a repeat offender who has been on a harassment campaign against her, mechanistically and blindly reverting edits by her - always with a new dynamic IP of course. Given the repeat nature and the obvious malicious intent (these reverts are all done blindly and totally without regard to content), I don't think there's any need for warnings. If he strikes again and you see him on AIV, I'd suggest just blocking on sight. Thanks! Fut.Perf. â¼ 10:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I've suggested Zora takes this to WP:ANI as well. Ian Cairns 10:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, sorry I didn't notice you were already discussing it on Zora's page. Fut.Perf. â¼ 10:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

194.154.22.54
Hi there, did you block anon-only? It has history of collateral damage. Personally I'd go for >1 month. Thanks/wangi 11:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello Wangi. You are obviously more experienced with this user and I have no problem with you un/reblocking on that basis. I'll be back there in a few minutes. Thanks, Ian Cairns 11:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies - our blocks / unblocks clashed. Hopefully, my overwrite is still OK with you? Let me know if not. Thanks, Ian Cairns 11:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Aye, should be good. Thanks/wangi 11:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Why?
With all due respect, why did you block me from entering the nobel physics prize page? please respond as soon as you can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapigan (talk • contribs)


 * I am investigating - but I do not remember blocking your username. Please supply details (and sign your name afterwards). Ian Cairns 18:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ref Special:Contributions/Rapigan, I can see no attempt to edit Nobel Prize pages.
 * I can confirm that your username has never been blocked
 * Is it possible that someone else is sharing your IP address and they have vandalised, causing your IP address to be blocked, and catching your username in the collateral damage? If so, let me know and I'll investigate further. Please sign your reply/replies. Ian Cairns 19:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Mabey...but thank you very much anyway. -Rapigan

Categories named after politicians
Please note that Category:Categories named after politicians is not redundant with filing such a category in a country-specific category. In fact, that type of categorization is explicitly required on categories named directly for an individual person. Bearcat 08:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that - and apologies for the delay in replying. As far as I see this, there are two parallel category hierarchies being used, for example: Category: Politicians and Category: Categories named after Politicians but there are several examples. Both are self-evidently categories - the former fits into an extensive hierarchy and has huge numbers of articles and sub-categories; the latter 'meta' category is either a pleonastic tautology or a tautological pleonasm, and contains very few articles or subcategories. By splitting categories into one or the other of the two hierarchies, but not both, we are ensuring that we have no one complete / comprehensive hierarchy. I was 'bold editing' one of these smaller 'meta' categories to ensure Wikipedia had one usable complete hierarchy - Wiki users are not going to check both hierarchies. Perhaps I am missing some deep understanding here. Ian Cairns 09:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Award

 * Many thansk for this - but all I did was to dab a link and add a category... Are you sure this was worth a barnstar?? Thanks again, Ian Cairns 09:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks
Thank you for reverting my userpage Natasha 22:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You are most welcome. BW Ian Cairns 09:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Categories named after religious figures
Why was this deleted? It appears to have been in use, and I can't find any evidence of it being on CFD. It also parallels various categories in Category:Categories named after people. Mairi 03:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies for the delay in replying - due to recent absence. I've moved this discussion here to follow the previous discussion. As you will see, I considered the Category: x and Category: Categories names after x as broadly comparable and duplicate. My bold editing involved moving articles back to the more complete category hierarchy instead of leaving subcats and articles in one of two similar categories. I have no propblem if you wish to reinstate the category. However, all these categories needs better context to explain why subcats / articles go in one category but not in the other. These similar categories also need cross-linking. Ian Cairns 01:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Message Blanking
Shotwell is doing exactly the same thing!!!--Tony X Liu 19:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I can see him reverting your vandalism. Can you indicate where he is blanking messages? Ian Cairns 19:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

72.144.120.153
While this user's edits may appear to be content dispute, they are in actuality vandalism. In the user's second edit, he/she made a noticeable bit of vandalism by cutting off one end of a heading, and most recently changed the character's age from initial 15 to 12. The little regards to spelling/capitalization is also a dead giveaway. The information being added is nothing more than a random assortment of cards. --Benten 19:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * OK. Did you try opening up a line of discussion before +test4 ? I'll monitor for a while, Thanks. Ian Cairns 19:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I will now, but I didn't see it as necessary given the very obvious nature of the edits. Likely, the user will just continue to vandalize though. --Benten 19:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

dab mercury
Hello multilinguist! I just noticed the small change you put into "Decay scheme". What is the meaning of "dab"?HPaul 07:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello Hpaul. 'dab' is short for 'disambiguate' though I'm not sure which language it comes from... :-)) In this case, if you look at Mercury, you'll notice multiple meanings, and I wanted "Decay scheme" to point at the correct 'sub-'meaning rather than the general page. HTH, Ian Cairns 09:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you want to deal with 138.217.174.99
Seeing as he vandalised your User Page and you gave him his last warning do you want to deal with him or should I? I have never been the type to block someone... --'''An Apple a day keeps  -The Doctor-  Away.. 'Or does it!'' (talk)(contribs) 04:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for dealing with that. He's now blocked. Some people can't see a warning in front of their face. BW, Ian Cairns 07:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

An anon user writes...
I AM TELLING THE TRUTH...... I AM A CHRISTIAN........ I FOLLOW THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.....

I AM 14 YEARS OLD.

May you please unblock my IP 72.177.68.38. It is a school IP and it is shared by multiple users. Its a home school. Me and my seven brothers and sisters are home schooled, the is my uncle, he very smart with computers!!! We are supposed to use Wikipedia and the internet for educational purposes.

We just want to start over and start a new leaf!! On the weekends we edit Wikipedia and surf the internet. That Bobabiba character is my older sister, I told my mom that she is causing trouble on the internet durning school time (8:30-5:00), my mom "banned" her from using the internet.

May you please unblock my IP 72.177.68.38. PLEASE ITS ALMOST CHRISTMAS!!!!!!!!!!!!

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS. DO NOT UNBLOCK THIS IP. JUST DON'T. ANYONE WHO THINKS TO UNBLOCK THE IP: JUST DON'T. IF YOU REALLY REALLY FEEL LIKE UNBLOCKING THE IP, CHECK WITH DMMCDEVIT AND THEN DON'T. Syrthiss 15:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

How come one person is opposing your idea..

I noticed that user: JzG an admin wrote a rude and disrespectful message on my talk page.

See multiple threads on admin noticeboards and talk to Dmcdevit. Bobabobobo, what part of "fuck off" are you having trouble understanding? You are not welcome here. Not at all, not in the least, not even slightly. Go away, please. Guy ( Help!) 15:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I also noticed that my IP has not vandalized.

 PRIVATE 

O.k. that Bobabobabab is my sister Grace, she was a "good" editor. She loves anime, Yu-Gi-OH and Pokemon. So she was trying to improve the Pokemon episode lists by uploading alot of fair use Pokemon images, she also was creating seperate episode pages, but the conflict started when A Man in Black opposed the images via discussion on the PokÂ¨Â¦mon Collaborative Project and change the template which included the images, so Grace created sock puppets to keep the images on the template, which User: Ryulong got involved.

Which Grace and Ryulong became enemies:

Subject Re: Wikipedia e-mail Sent Date 11-15-2006 11:03:02 PM	From Ryulong <> 	add to black list add to white list add to Address Book To "Aywana Tokiwana" <>

Listen. I don't care if you are 13, or whatever. Stop vandalizing my page at the Japanese Wikipedia. It's your own fucking fault for impersonating me TWICE and I got my user name changed to the one that I should have had in the first place. Go edit Bulbapedia. I couldn't care less what you do over there. If you want, bring up your ban to the ArbCom at the English Wikipedia, but then all you can edit is your case. Just LEAVE ME ALONE YOU GOD DAMN CHILD.

* 15:04, 3 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Image:ScreenshotPokemonEpi63.JPG (top) * 13:18, 3 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:43, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:38, 2 October 2006 ( hist) (diff) Fear Factor Phony * 00:37, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Battle Pyramid Again! VS Registeel! * 00:37, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:37, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Wikipedia talk:PokÂ¨Â¦mon Collaborative Project/Archive 7 ( Â¡ÃºPokÂ¨Â¦num template.) * 00:36, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) User talk:A Man In Black ( Â¡ÃºEPISODE IMAGES fair use rationale ) * 00:34, 2 October 2006 ( hist) (diff) Fear Factor Phony (RV every episode list has seperte pages for the episode look at the Simpsons, Prison Break, etc) * 00:33, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes (RV every episode list has seperte pages for the episode look at the Simpsons, Prison Break, etc) * 00:32, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Battle Pyramid Again! VS Registeel! (RV every episode list has seperte pages for the episode look at the Simpsons, Prison Break, etc) * 00:31, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:30, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:29, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Battle Pyramid Again! VS Registeel! * 00:28, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:27, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:26, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:23, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 00:23, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Battle Pyramid Again! VS Registeel! * 00:18, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Battle Pyramid Again! VS Registeel! * 00:12, 2 October 2006 ( hist) ( diff) Template:Yugiohepisode (RV) * 00:11, 2 October 2006 ( hist) (diff ) User talk:A Man In Black ( Â¡ÃºEPISODE IMAGES fair use rationale) * 12:10, 29 September 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon episodes (http://www.tv-tokyo.co.jp/anime/pokemon_bb/) * 12:08, 29 September 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon Advanced Generation episodes (RV; back with images) * 12:06, 29 September 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Diamond and Pearl episodes * 11:53, 29 September 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon Original Series episodes (RV) * 11:49, 29 September 2006 ( hist) ( diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Battle Frontier episodes * 03:12, 29 September 2006 ( hist) (diff) List of PokÂ¨Â¦mon: Diamond and Pearl episodes

I hope this will give a "Whats going on".

PLEASE UNBLOCK!!!!!!!!!!! THOSE ADMINS ARE BEING BUTTS! I AM A CHILD YOU ARE NOT GOING WITH THE "GO EASY ON KIDS"

(end of email)


 * Hello. I'm at a loss why tyhe above edits are schooltime necessities. Never mind. I checked with User talk:72.177.68.38 and - wow! - you certainly have caused a stir. Please refer to the admins / sysops who blocked you. I'm sure they have given due consideration to your situation. Good luck with pulling it all together. Proving you will behave differently in future will be difficult. Ian Cairns 01:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Enlighter1
The 404 blitz is only incidental, the edits prior to that give it away that it is Enlighter1. The 404 blitz in itself is against policy as dead links are normally not removed. In this case the editor has a vendetta against Reuters. see here for background. Agathoclea 21:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I thought there was a Wiki project / clean-up weeding out old / broken web links? I agree that the previous Reuters edits were totally unacceptable, but I can't fault removing bad links until I check your allegation that it is against Wiki policy. Thanks again, Ian Cairns 21:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Just been reading up and the relevant info is at Dead external links. While something needs to be done about dead links deleting them without replacing with the relevant info just because you have an aversion against the site in question is at least a violation of WP:POINT. The user in question was indef banned his persistant vandalism some month back and has since been a valuable contributor to wikipedia by helping us find a lot of open proxies and otherwise compromised machines. Warning Sarcasm! Agathoclea 14:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Reading, Berkshire
Hi Ian, thanks for doing that. Waggers 09:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

unblock request- temp2
hi, its temp, my comp. wont let me log in, but temp2, whom i know in real life, is requesting to come back and actually edit and change username. could you please unblock him? thanks. also get my computer to work woudl be nice :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.104.243 (talk • contribs)


 * Hello Temp. It's usual to sign your name on comments added to Talk pages using ~ - but you weren't signed in, so none of your edits were attributed to you. I blocked Temp2 some time back when the username was brought to the attention of the sysops as unacceptable, and I thought it was confusing - see WP:U - as I would do with your username Temp. The problem lies with the edit history of your contributions where your edits look like temporary edits, which don't exist. Could I politely suggest that you and your close namesake consider using alternative names? Thanks, Ian Cairns 19:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Have you considered using the tag on your userpage? This will get another sysop to review my original decision to see whether I was being fair or paranoid. Thanks, Ian Cairns 19:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Maiwand
Can you tell me what "i~5 wounded or missing" means? (I'm guessing it's a typo for either 815 or 915, but I'd also like to make sure the number of casualties add upâcf. first paragraph.) Robert K S 18:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Robert K-S. Hmm. It appears as though I copied corrupted text from one (inappropriate) article to the other (more appropriate) article without fully proofreading. I've now gone to the named URL to locate substantiated figures. Are these adequate or do you have better (substantiated) figures? Sorry about that. Ian Cairns 19:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * But cf. first paragraph. How do "21 officers and 948 soldiers killed, 8 officers and 169 men wounded" add up to "1,123 British and Indian soldiers", and how does "a reliable estimate of Afghan casualties is 3,000" gibe with "over 7,000 Afghan warriors"? Robert K S 20:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I spotted that - that's why my edit was sourced. The Infobox is unsourced as far as I can tell. However, whoever produced these figures can see where I obtained my figures. I'm no expert on this battle - I simply tidied up poorly-edited articles. Would you be happy if I adjusted the Infobox numbers to agree with the Googled source? Do you have any source that a) agrees with the Infobox numbers b) supports some other figure? Feel free to edit this yourself. Ian Cairns 20:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Hi Ian.

Just noticed your reversion of Hungerford back to my previous edit, and realised I hadn't come across any of your edits recently; perhaps because I don't edit 'local' topics as much as I used. Anyway it is good to see you are still around. Can I wish you and Linda a belated Happy New Year. -- Chris j wood 17:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hiya Chris - Good to hear from you. I seem to spend a lot of time on Wikipedia maintenance chores nowadays and checking for vandalism - so I'm not often in "Berkshire". Many thanks for your best wishes and the same of course to yourself for the New Year! Ian Cairns 22:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Support for renaming the user language categories?
I noticed that some time ago you asked whether the user language categories like Category:User en should be renamed. I've proposed just such a renaming at User categories for discussion - please feel free to weigh in if you have an opinion on the matter. :-) Tim Pierce 03:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

70.105.210.36
Thanks for blocking him. Now I don't have to wait for the PA notice board. Cheers, --  The  Hyb  rid  12:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You're most welcome. He needs to learn to act responsibly within WP. Ian Cairns 12:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Not blocked IP
This IP: 41.204.243.2 is suspected sockpupet of previously blocked user SummerThunder which may be blocked without final warning afaik. 00:08, 7 January 2007 Icairns (Talk | contribs) (âUser-reported - 41.204.243.2 - no final warning - prerequisite - remove from this list)  âTulkolahtenâ âtalkâ 00:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification - this wasn't in the original AIV listing. Ian Cairns 00:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I can't make the connection between this Nigerian IP address and the Chinese activity of SummerThunder. It doesn't appear in the list of suspected sockpuppets. Please feel free to re-list this IP to see whether another sysop will take a different line. Thanks, Ian Cairns 00:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've got this suspection from Someguy0830 when I was asking why he was reverting this IP edits. These edits are minor and that makes vandalism more complex and hard to discover. Between list of Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_SummerThunder are ones from Australia, Nederland etc. He probably uses anonymizers or open proxies and the suspection comes from the similarity of his edits.  âTulkolahtenâ âtalkâ 01:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * But anyway it is just a hypothesis only.  âTulkolahtenâ âtalkâ 01:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

PatPeter

 * OK, you may remember me or may not, you came to my attention after I finally noticed someone other than me edited my userpage and A) Thank you. B) Your user page is astounding(!!!), I am trying to learn web page design from looking at Wikipedia pages and yours is just amazing (I have no clue how to make boxes, colors, anything) so according to the top of yours I guess thank you for helping me and I hope to speak to you soon. (I do not know how to link my name without two saves, and I do not want to spam your history) PatPeter 04:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for posting on my talk page, I now remembered I also wanted to tell people on My Rules list that conversations should go talk page to talk page (thus upon login one is notified)


 * Annnyway, I do not know why but whoever posted that information about U of Exeter A) did not post his or her name and B) was not me :P (I love this emote). I can hardly make infoboxes and usually just steal and try to edit them (lookat my user page, its a mess). PatPeter 18:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

vandalism revert
Thanks for dealing with the vandalism to User:Tompw/featured topicsâ. I was wondering why the page kept timing out when I tried to view it... then I saw on my watchlist that you'd removed 1,129,886bytes of vandalism! Thanks :-) Tom pw (talk) 23:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Tompw. No problem. It took me a little while to find out that I needed to delete it from the history page - since I couldn't find the rollback amongst all the vandalism... Ian Cairns 23:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Persian Gulf vs Arabian Gulf
You may have noticed that your edit to Persian Gulf has been reverted. The same editors reverting sourced content in the Persian Gulf article have decided to revert all my recent edits to Iran-related articles (namely Arvand Free Zone and Ethnic minorities in Iran, after I made a case for the inclusion of Arabian Gulf as an alternative name (they had never previously edited these articles, so I assume that they are just going through my recent contributions). This has resulted in the removal of legitimate tags, updated wikilinks and my attempts to ensure NPOV. If you look at the reversions, you'll see that this is just vindictive vandalism rather than an attempt to improve articles and there has been no attempt to engage in dialogue on the talk pages. As a result, I believe that my reversions are legitimate attempts to stop vandalism and as such do not breach 3RR. I would appreciate your input in order to mediate a solution, if any can be found.--Ø§ÙØ£ÙÙØ§Ø² &#124; Hamid &#124; Ahwaz 14:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, just so you know, the issue of alternative names has been previously discussed at Talk:Persian_Gulf and the majority of the editors had agreed that the naming issues should be throroughly discussed at its own section Persian_Gulf, and not in the lead, because of the controversial nature of the subject. --Mardavich 15:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ian (by email)

I hope you're doing well. I just wanted to tell you that the edit you reverted on Persian Gulf wasn't simple vandalism. The issue of including the political name "Arabian Gulf" in the lead is very controversial nad has been discussed at Persian Gullf's talk page for a long time now. The majority of the editors had previously reached a consensus that the naming issue shouldn't be mentioned in the lead, and be instead throroughly discussed and examined at its own section Persian_Gulf#Naming_dispute, because of the controversial nature of the subject. The issue is still under discussion, but the person who who tried to forcefully include the name Arabian Gulf in the lead today was User:Ahwaz who has a history of disruption and POV waring, as you can see from his block log: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Ahwaz

Best Regards Mardavich

Thank you for your input regarding that article. We really need neutral users there. Please have a look here : Jidan 19:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks to you all for taking the trouble to comment. I reverted the deletion of a sourced edit setting out both names. In my experience in several countries bordering the south of the body of water, 25 years ago, the English name was Arabian Gulf. The name Persian Gulf was not generally used. The later paragraph does not provide this balance. This usage, whether current or historical, was real and should be mentioned early on in this article, particularly when supported by an independent source, as it was. Ian Cairns 07:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. Well, you were in Arab countries some of which do use the name Arabian Gulf, even in English. However, this is an international wikipedia, not an Arab wikipedia. In English language, and outside a few Arab countries, Persian Gulf is the only common name and the only one sanctioned by the United Nations as the legitimate name of the waterway. To include Arabian Gulf at the introduction would mean that both names are equally legitimate and as frequently used, and that's simply not the case. I do agree that name Arabian Gulf does deserve a mention in the article, and it's already mentioned and examined in the naming section, anything more is giving undo weight. As for Britannica, it's a tertiary source, the article alerady uses primary and secondary sources, which should be given priority over tertiary ones, exmaining the name, its history and the controvesy suurending it. We don't have to copy Britannica in style and content, it's just another tertiary source. --Mardavich 18:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - but I disagree. In those Arabian countries, the English-language term was Arabian Gulf - possibly a translation from the local arabic - but it was the only term used. As an English Wikipedia, it is important that this usage is given due (not necessarily equal) prominence. If there is a controversy over the name then it is important that WP:NPOV holds - and both usages should be described / qualified, and NOT deferred to a later paragraph where it can be pretended that one version isn't really used. The English language uses both terms, depending on the local country. There are several partisans / participants who believe that, if they say this often and loud enough, then all the 'other' usage will never have happened. This isn't reality. Ian Cairns 23:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - but I have to disagree with you. In many Arab countries, it's illegal to use any name other than Arabian Gulf which is why it's the only term used. But we don't live in an Arab country, or by their laws, Arab countries hold only 3.6% of the World's population, and not every Arab uses the term Arabian Gulf. I think, as many other editors do, that this controversial and political usage is already given its due prominence in the naming section. Putting it on equal footing with the commonly used and the internationally accepted name -- Persian Gulf, is giving undo weight. --Mardavich 00:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - but please re-read my reply above. It shouldn't matter to the Intro one bit whether the term is legal or illegal in any particular country or all countries (although this is a valid aspect of the topic that should be described). What matters is that the English language has a valid and proper usage of the term 'Arabian Gulf' (in some countries) and that this usage is properly sourced (it was) in an English language encyclopedia (regardless of what some people and some countries would like). It is encyclopedic to include such usage in an encyclopedia. I did not suggest equal footing - as you have replied - I said "due (but not necessarily equal) prominence" - this is the opposite of burying the usage just because someone does not like to see it.
 * We all live in different countries, with different customs and laws. We have come together to build an English language encyclopedia which is the superset of all the knowledge in this language. I have no opinion of what the arabic Wikipedia has to say on this - I am concerned what the English Wikipedia says and doesn't say. Ian Cairns 08:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I, and many other editors, are of the opinion that the controversial term has already been given its due prominence in the appropriate section of the article, and putting it the intro is giving undo weight and putting it on equal footing with the widely accepted and commonly used name. --Mardavich 08:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Ascot railway station
Hi there. I see you started the Ascot railway station article. I just posted to the talk page querying the station layout description. Your thoughts would be appreciated. Cordless Larry 20:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Monobook problem
I posted this at VP, but maybe you will see it faster here. Check this diff. This was the the update ABCD did on January 11 (most likely the day ABCD noticed his monobook was broken, and fixed it). -- ReyBrujo 03:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for this! Much appreciated. Ian Cairns 10:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

aight nerd
you suck. fin. 1337N355 16:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC) P.S. get a life nerd! do something other than edit wiki all day! get laid! get a hobby!

Hello
Regarding the article Ash (near Sandwich) - you have edited, have you got any green idea about the origin of the name?

Eliko 23:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Eliko. I'm afraid all I did was copyedit the stubs. I'm not aware of the origin of this village. Sorry. Ian Cairns 00:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You are using obsolete user warning templates
FYI: Templates like test are deprecated. They might be deleted at any time. The replacements are listed at WP:UWT. Will (Talk - contribs) 23:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

My plans
I intend to troll wikipedia, not vandalise it. I was just warming up, sorry about the (pretty minor) destruction. A very helpful little gnome 10:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I can't tell the difference between your trolling and your vandalism. Never mind, since another admin permanently banned you, it's all hypothetical now? Ian Cairns 11:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You are using obsolete user warning templates
FYI: Templates like test are deprecated. They might be deleted at any time. The replacements are listed at WP:UWT. Will (Talk - contribs) 23:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

My plans
I intend to troll wikipedia, not vandalise it. I was just warming up, sorry about the (pretty minor) destruction. A very helpful little gnome 10:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I can't tell the difference between your trolling and your vandalism. Never mind, since another admin permanently banned you, it's all hypothetical now? Ian Cairns 11:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Pima Community College
Ian, I added an explanation on Talk:Pima Community College as to why it's currently being targetted (several times now). See also my talk page for more on this stuff. --Kynn 06:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that. The background is much appreciated. Ian Cairns 09:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Ian, I am wondering if there is currently a need for further debate on the issue of the college's entry. I have added a section addressing the arguments for deletion to the talk page, but I am unsure as to whether the page should be considered as under a } call for deletion or not. Can you please read what I've written there and advise me on the status of the page? Thanks. --Kynn 19:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.
Hey there.

Thanks for the editing help. I'm in the middle of a lot of projects lately and any help is .. well, help.

Thanks, again.

-Jeremy Lueck. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.135.170.22 (talk) 06:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC).


 * You're most welcome. However, despite lookijng good (better?), I'm not sure that Spatial Relativity Theory is worth keeping for the moment, and I expect someone will ask to delete it. BW, Ian Cairns 07:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Category : Units of viscosity
I have nominated the Category:Units of viscosity for deletion. Since you created the category, your views on this are invited. Thank you. -Myth (Talk) 06:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for highlighting the proposal here. I'm naturally sad that the structure of category:Units of measure has been unpicked by these recent mergers and will be unpicked further by the deletion proposal. I have commented to this extent - but will not stand in the way of the Wiki consensus. Ian Cairns 20:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Sup nigga, You blocked me one time too many. I'm just sitting here with my homies ravin' and you blocked me biatch. I'm gonna blow your 'ed off lark innit geez.

Thanks Man

Me

PS: Nice picture.


 * ):):):):):) :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:( :(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:((:(:(:(:( âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.219.66.215 (talk) 12:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

inetnum:   	      212.219.66.0 - 212.219.66.255 netname:   	      KING-EDWARD-6-NUN descr:   	        King Edward VI College Nuneaton country:   	      GB admin-c:    	      JG3064-RIPE tech-c:   	       JG3064-RIPE status:   	       ASSIGNED PA mnt-by:    	       JANET-HOSTMASTER source:   	       RIPE # Filtered person:   	       John Goodman address:   	      King Edward VI College Nuneaton address:   	      King Edward Rd. address:    	      Nuneaton, Warwickshire CV11 4BE phone:   	        +44 1203 328 231 fax-no:   	       +44 1203 326 686 e-mail:   	       kingedward_edu@msn.com nic-hdl:   	      JG3064-RIPE mnt-by:   	       JANET-HOSTMASTER source:   	       RIPE # Filtered route:   	        212.219.0.0/16 descr:   	        JANET descr:   	        20 Guilford Street descr:   	        London descr:   	        WC1N 1DZ descr:   	        UNITED KINGDOM origin:   	       AS786 mnt-by:   	       JIPS-NOSC source:   	       RIPE # Filtered

Concerning your face
Quite honestly, I find your face quite repulsive. Please remove this picture or help resolve this problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.223.221.53 (talk • contribs)
 * Hey, non-member, shut-up. His picture is one of the coolest I have seen in a long time. It is so hard to believe it is a picture! It looks like a portrait! It is truely a work of art. -PatPeter 20:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Random Information
OrgName:   	    Leon County School District

OrgID:   	      LCSD

Address:   	    520 South Appleyard Drive

City:   	       Tallahassee

StateProv:   	  FL

PostalCode:   	 32304

Country:   	    US

NetRange:   	   205.223.144.0 - 205.223.223.255

CIDR:   	       205.223.144.0/20, 205.223.160.0/19, 205.223.192.0/19

NetName:   	    LEON-FL-SCHL

NetHandle:   	  NET-205-223-144-0-1

Parent:   	     NET-205-0-0-0-0

NetType:   	    Direct Assignment

NameServer:   	 ROADRUNNER.ADMIN.LEON.K12.FL.US

NameServer:   	 DNS.CSIT.FSU.EDU

NameServer:   	 DNS1.FSU.EDU

NameServer:   	 SERVER.TAL.SPRINTNETOPS.NET

RegDate:   	    1995-06-06

Updated:   	    1996-04-17

RTechHandle:   	 DJ592-ARIN

RTechName:   	   Joiner, Dale

RTechPhone:   	  +1-904-487-7379

RTechEmail:   	  dale@roadrunner.admin.leon.k12.fl.us

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Icairns (talk • contribs)

Category:User templates
Hey man, long time no type (get it? instead of no see). I would like to chat later but now I have business to bring up.

Your userpage is miscategorized under this category, if you can get it our that would be swell.

Also, your talk page looks like it was vandalized, im fixing it. -PatPeter 02:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Summary
Copied from French Wikipedia - Wikipedia license applies

Licensing
cc-by-sa-2.5

"Wikipedia license" (whatever this might be) and cc-by-sa without credits? Are you serious? Please be more carefully the next time you upload an image. --32X 20:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * If you check this page's history, you'll notice that I have not made substantive changes to your edits - it was a vandal. Please check before you accuse. Ian Cairns 19:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think User:PatPeter is a vandal. With that change the direct quote was destroyed in its context. --32X 20:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't accused PatPeter. There were real vandals around. Ian Cairns 21:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the vandalism
Hi Ian: Thanks for your dilligent editing of the Wikipedia Atom page; I noticed on "my" talk page that there were apparently vandalism attempts, and I'd like to apologize for those, this is a school IP and some students seem to want to ruin it for those of us who enjoy editing Wikipedia legitimately. Thanks for your contributions to keeping it clean!--200.60.12.163 15:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You're most welcome - please consider getting a login to avoid being tarred with the same brush as your colleagues. Ian Cairns 16:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award
 For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award originated by Pedia-I (Explanation and Disclaimer) â   TomasBat   ( @ )  ( Contribs )  ( Sign! ) 19:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Åebinkarahisar
Ben bu topraklarda Åebinkarahisar da yaÅÄ±yorum bu topraklada doÄdum bu topraklarda bÃ¼yÃ¼dÃ¼m ve neler yaÅandÄ±ÄÄ±nÄ± sizlerden daha iyi biliyorum ama benim Åehrimin benim yaÅadÄ±ÄÄ±m yerin tarihinin yanlÄ±Å taraflÄ± ve lobicilik faaliyetleri iÃ§erisinde insalara olmayan bir Åeyi sahte, asÄ±lsÄ±z ve dÃ¼zmece kaynaklarÄ± sunarak olmuÅ gibi gÃ¶stererek anlatÄ±lmasÄ±nÄ± Ã¶nleyemiyorum banlanÄ±yorum yada Åebinkarahisar maddesi kilitleriniyor. Sizler bu topraklarda yaÅadÄ±nÄ±zmÄ± da biliyorsunuz ? Ermeni DiasporasÄ± tarihi istedikleri gibi yazabilir mi ? Ellerinde yetkileri var diye bu yetkilerini kendi Ã§Ä±karlarÄ± iÃ§in kullanabilirler mi ? Neden tÃ¼m TÃ¼rk sayfalarÄ±na sadece asÄ±lsÄ±z ermeni soykÄ±rÄ±mÄ± hakkÄ±nda bilgiler ekliyorlar Vikipedia tarafsÄ±z ve Ã¶zgÃ¼r ansiklopedi deÄilmi ? Madem bu admin arkadaÅalar Ã§ok bilgili neden coÄrafi, ekonomik, nÃ¼fus bilgilerini insanlar iÃ§in faydalÄ± olacak bilgileri girmiyorlarda sadece asÄ±lsÄ±z ermeni soykÄ±rÄ±mÄ± hakkÄ±nda bilgiler veriyorlar. BU HAKKI NEREDEN BULUYORLAR ? --88.231.200.89 10:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC) âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.231.200.89 (talk) 10:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Thank you for your message. If you require a reply, please check with my Babel listings above for languages that will elicit a reply. Thanks again. Ian Cairns 10:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Old talk page discussion - people categories
Please see Category talk:Categories named after people for an old talk page message of yours I spotted and replied to. Thanks. Carcharoth 18:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Ian Cairns 19:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

BLOCKING
Dear Mr Cairns

It would appear that you have blocked my address for vandalism. I am one of many users who use the www.elizcoll.org webmail. As a responsible member of staff at Elizabeth College, I visit the Elizabeth College entry to clean up any deposits left by less responsible pupils!

Sometimes Wikipaedia has a 'bad hair day' and blocks me without any good reason citing another user as doing the blocking (this has happened several times). Would it be possible for you to confirm (or not) whether you have blocked me?

Elizabethan EditorEditor Elizabethan 11:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Elizabethan Editor - Thanks for your message. Apologies if you have been hit by the collateral damage from blocking an IP address - action often needs to be taken in a hurry to stop the worst excesses. There are no immediate indications whether any given IP address is being used by other usernames or not. Sadly, I have no way of finding out your IP address without some more clues. I checked www.elizcoll.org which is not responding. I looked up its IP address - 212.30.8.59 - but there is no Wiki user at this IP address. I found User:212.30.31.19 - who vandalised your college article. S/He was banned recently, but not by me - in fact, I have not commented on this person's work. Checking back, I have NOT edited anyone's talk page in the User:212. anything range. Unless you can be a little more specific on which IP address has been blocked, I'm afraid that there is little I can do further to help. BW Ian Cairns 12:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Sean mc sean
As I had just blocked this user, I removed your message to him and substituted mine. Please contact me if this is a problem.--Anthony.bradbury 22:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Anthony - No, it's no problem - just a necessary complication depending on which order you set about blocking people. Thanks for clearing this up. No need to let me know next time. Rgrds, Ian Cairns 22:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

ELIZABETH COLLEGE
Dear Mr Cairns

Thank you for you kind and considered reply. Our school website is suffering from some difficulties and is prone to shutting down on us! We will sort this out this week. There are a great number of users on our webmail as each pupil has his own account and, as you may imagine, there is much traffic!

Thank you for going to the trouble to explain.

With kind regards

Editor Elizabethan 07:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Herschel Grammar School
Thanks for adding a date of establishment. Do you happen to have a source for this - I would still like to clear up whether Herschel started in the former Slough Sec buildings or the Tonman Mosley (primary) ones and a source for the start date might well illuminate! Many thanks Grblundell 08:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Grblundell. Thanks for that. I was working off an email that claimed this date - but I have seen no other date. The email also stated the Slough Secondary buildings. As you said Tonman Mosley was a primary school (much smaller) and I believe it was still working in the 1950s (headmaster: David Watkins, husband of my junior school class teacher). I run the www.oldpaludians.org website. Thanks, Ian Cairns 08:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks - this ties up with my understanding (and what the Herschel GS article said at some point), so I've modified it and I'll flag my comment on the Herschel GS talk page. Grblundell 19:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Category:Systems
Thank you for your contribution to Category:Systems in the past. There is currently a Call for Deletion for this category. If you would like to contribute to the discussion, you would be very welcome. In particular, if you would like to save this category, please add a Keep entry with your "signature" using " ~ ". Please do this soon if possible since the discussion period is very short. Thank you for your interest if you can contribute. Regards, Jonathan Bowen 18:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there!!
Just saw your report on WP:AIV. Do I perhaps know you by any chance? - Alison âº 23:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Alison - Thanks for your greeting, but I'm afraid that I have no past connection with Motorola. Please see my user page for glorious details and a photo (but no biography). You're welcome to persuade me that there was a connection, but it has escaped me for the moment... BW from Tilehurst, UK. Ian Cairns 23:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah! Different Ian Cairns, RF engineer dude. I met him in Basingstoke in the early 90s. No worries :) - Alison âº 00:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I was there in the early 90s, but working for ICL at the time (maybe 6 months). Curiously, the name is very popular - at one time there were 3 of me in the local phonebook... Oh well. Almost a connection. BW, Ian Cairns 00:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for looking into this. I appreciate your help. Okkar 13:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome. Ian Cairns 13:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

69.132.199.100
Hi! I noticed you blocked this user for a short amount of time. I don't know if you are aware, but this user is also CineWorld, for whom a RfC was filed some time ago. I also found this site, off-wiki, connected to this IP: http://www.aboutus.org/index.php?title=TurboFace.com&diff=prev&oldid=5796593

The site mentioned there seems to involve an internet con artist and convicted sex offender. If the charges are true, should he be allowed to edit articles involving underaged actresses? At the very least, this user seems to make no worthwhile contribution to Wiki. I know Wikipedia is hesitant on blocking IPs, but it seems this person is the only one who uses this IP, and, as I said, not for constructive edits. He's going to start the whole thing, all over again, when he gets unblocked anyway, so, what would be the appropriate thing here? Thanks.

Ispy1981 15:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Ispy1981. Thanks for the above. If you feel that there is a serious charge to be levelled and to be answered, then please raise this at WP:ANI. You clearly know your way around WP - so you'll know / can find the process... WP:AIV can only look at current vandalism. Thanks again, Ian Cairns 18:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I noticed
I noticed that oversight. It's been a long night, and I guess I got sloppy with my tildes and template selections. However, the spirit of the action was to create a record on the discussion page of 205.222.248.136 to show that yet another incident of vandalism has occured from that shared IP. The warning can't be directed at anyone specific anyway, because the IP address is shared amongst God knows how many high school students. It has been shown to be a problematic address and putting a soft block on it would probably be beneficial for Wikipedia as a whole, given the IP's anonymous users' apparent ratio of bad edits to good. --Dynaflow 13:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Tampering
Please don't tamper with my talk page. It is not an article space, and it is annoying that you treat it as one. Also please don't justify such tamperings with. Editors' talk pages are not sacrosanct, despite what is said in that automated template. Thank you. RedRabbit1983 10:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * You are mistaken - I didn't "tamper" with your talk page, I reinstated warnings that you had no right to remove. Your talk page may be written by anyone - PROVIDED that they remain civil and PROVIDED that they do NOT remove warnings. Your actions have been identified by several admins as invalid, and your warnings remain on file - deleting them doesn't remove them from the record. Please adjust your attitude when you return from the current block otherwise further blocks will increase in duration. Ian Cairns 12:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey -- while I agree with your block (it's also been upheld by Yamla), I do want to say that per WP:VAN, users removing warnings from their talk page is not considered vandalism, and from what I've seen trying to make a big deal out of it only leads to escalation. But the personal attacks that went with it were clearly unacceptable.  Mango juice talk 17:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've read the same paragraphs and somehow came to a different conclusion - maybe the clarity isn't there? Maybe some discussion is required? I differentiate between comments on a user page, which s/he is welcome to delete, and warnings on a user talk page, which are there as part of a formal WP procedure. It becomes next to impossible to police vandalism if one has to investigate all the diffs of a talk page to determine whether any a specific user has or has not been previously warned. I accept that old warnings can be removed as and when they become stale, but I need to know all relevant current warnings when I am checking - not stare at a deliberately-blanked sheet. Ian Cairns 18:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

By email
Icairns,

I have supplied a reason for why I should be unblocked and this has not been addressed. I should prefer someone other than you to review it; however the block message says that I should contact you via email.

A summary of my reason is as follows:

You blocked me for vandalism, and did not allege anything else subsequent to the final warning. What you construed as vandalism was not actually vandalism: Vandalism says something to the contrary (quoted in my reason). If the action in question was not vandalism you ought to unblock me, as per blocking policy.

Thank you.

RedRabbit


 * Please see my rationale above. You already have two admins who have independently reviewed your reason - you can see that on your talk page - provided you have not yet blanked it. Ian Cairns 18:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You said this in your reply: "Please see my rationale above. You already have two admins who have independently reviewed your reason - you can see that on your talk page - provided you have not yet blanked it." (The text following provided is bolded).

I have read your rationale above and there is clearly no consensus. It does not seem to be an adequate reason for blocking. In fact, the admins who reviewed my reasons seemed to disagree with you. In your reply you might also like to show civility - the clause beginning with provided did not contain practical advice.

RedRabbit


 * I refer the questioner to the answer I gave previously. The two now three (shortly to be four admins) - independently of myself and of each other - upheld the block - I did not interfere with any of these reviews. Please argue with them. The bold section above was a qualifying clause - a standard English grammatical construct - it would clearly not have made any sense to look at your user page if you had already blanked it - as you have done previously. Ian Cairns 20:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Icairns,

You are the only user I can contact because an administrator has protected my own talk page. That's right: he protected it from being abused by its owner. I think this is going too far. He also censored one of my messages requesting that I be unblocked. If you believe Pilotguy's action is consistent with policy, please point me to the policy page which authorises such actions -- dare I say, arbitrary ones. Censoring me on my own talk page is too low for me, for it is difficult how I have harmed others on my own talk page.

I gave an earnest reason for why I should be unblocked, but this was deleted and my page protected. I was not making petty attacks in my appeals. How is an earnest reason abuse?

RedRabbit


 * You have requested me to stand back from the reviews of your behaviour, which I have been happy to do - and I offer no personal opinion on the reviews. 3 admins have now reviewed your behaviour and found it to contravene WP policy. Your block has been extended by "your disruptive edits" from the original 31 hrs to one week. Perhaps it is time to consider whether it is your behaviour / attitude that is the cause of all this and adjust this accordingly. If you can't see that your behaviour is the root of all this, then further issues are likely to arise when your current block expires and your editing resumes - and any further block durations will probably increase. Ian Cairns 07:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Icairns,

You have posted my latest email on your talk page but placed it out of context -- I don't know whether you were already intent on remedying this, or if by the time this gets to you you've already fixed this. The correction described in the last email was to a previous email which you have not posted. It looks as if I am correcting the email before this, and thereby you are making me look very silly indeed. Please place it in its proper context.

Please note: I am not trying to abuse emails by making them so numerous. Because I am banned from posting messages on my own talk page, this is only way I can communicate; if I could post on your talk page normally, I would.

I think this 31 hour block has been blown out of proportion. I have not pronounced that the responsible administrators have been bad, but that I disagreed with my block on grounds other than for my original personal attack. After my block, I have not used foul language; not harmed, intimidated, or disrupted administrators; not tampered with any page but my own (how could I do otherwise?). It appears my block was extended because Pilotguy was offended at my appeals, even though they were not uncivil. Was he offended that I didn't take kindly to being blocked?

One thing is ironic. Alison promised an administrator would review my new appeal. Instead, an administrator deleted it, protected my talk page, and extended my block. Sorry about repeating this. I am over the appeals to my original block; I am offended that my appeals were judged to be so bad (malicious, intimidating, profane, what?) that I deserved not to edit wikipedia for the rest of the week. I was writing on my own userpage too.

I would take this up with those responsible. But how can I? I cannot even edit my own talk page.

If you did not get the email before the correction, I can re-send it.

RedRabbit1983

Sorry. I wrote the previous email rather quickly and didn't proofread it. I meant to say, in a particular sentence, that I was not threatening disruption. I left out the word "not" by accident. It was too late to correct it once I pressed send.

RedRabbit1983

Icairns,

You have posted my latest email on your talk page but placed it out of context -- I don't know whether you were already intent on remedying this, or if by the time this gets to you you've already fixed this. The correction described in the last email was to a previous email which you have not posted. It looks as if I am correcting the email before this, and thereby you are making me look very silly indeed. Please place it in its proper context.

Please note: I am not trying to abuse emails by making them so numerous. Because I am banned from posting messages on my own talk page, this is only way I can communicate; if I could post on your talk page normally, I would.

I think this 31 hour block has been blown out of proportion. I have not pronounced that the responsible administrators have been bad, but that I disagreed with my block on grounds other than for my original personal attack. After my block, I have not used foul language; not harmed, intimidated, or disrupted administrators; not tampered with any page but my own (how could I do otherwise?). It appears my block was extended because Pilotguy was offended at my appeals, even though they were not uncivil. Was he offended that I didn't take kindly to being blocked?

One thing is ironic. Alison promised an administrator would review my new appeal. Instead, an administrator deleted it, protected my talk page, and extended my block. Sorry about repeating this. I am over the appeals to my original block; I am offended that my appeals were judged to be so bad (malicious, intimidating, profane, what?) that I deserved not to edit wikipedia for the rest of the week. I was writing on my own userpage too.

I would take this up with those responsible. But how can I? I cannot even edit my own talk page.

If you did not get the email before the correction, I can re-send it.

RedRabbit1983


 * Sorry - the previous email was diverted by my spam-traps for some reason. It is now rescued and put into the correct place. I am now busy in real life and may not be able to post further emails for a few days. However, you have had an opportunity to express yourself here for a short while. Ian Cairns 16:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for help
Sir, many members of The Miniatures Page are in a dispute with Larry Dunn over the way he has edited and his methods of dealing with inexperienced contributors who make an honest effort to do the correct thing. You have blocked our user name spamjaguar for removing entries made by Mr. Dunn on our discussion page. We have made a truthful entry to Mr. Dunn's discussion page, which he reverted http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Larry_Dunn&diff=123313205&oldid=122615089 that we would like to see kept on his page. How do we go about our quest under wiki procedures since we are very new at this and have made many mistakes, some honest, and some intentional. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Spamjaguar 21:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Please reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-03-31_I_Ain%27t_Been_Shot%2C_Mum%21 for a blow by blow. Spamjaguar 22:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for approaching me with your problem. I'm afraid that I am busy in real life at the moment, and am reluctant to take on this problem if you require a short-term consideration. Please can you refer to another admin for the moment. If this message remains, I will have a look on my return. Apologies - Ian Cairns 07:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sir, thank you for your time, we realize you are busy and will try another route to resolution. Spamjaguar 17:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Icairns, this account "spamjaguar" was created to vandalize my userpage and to act as a "meatpuppet" account in a debate I was having with a company that was spamming a wiki article with references to its products. The company's proprietor told me by private e-mail that if I did not stop removing references to its products, it would "consider its options."  Soon after that, numerous accounts were created to vandalize my user page and to meatpuppet on the issue of the company's name in the article, and on a new article the company created specifically to advertise its product.


 * To make a long story short, the company asked for a mediation on its newly created wiki article and mediation occurred and was closed, but this user has persisted in blanking his user page to remove references to his vandalism and has added rambling blocks of text to my user page about my evident evil (some by dredging up every e-mail I ever posted to the internet and making some very odd claims about them).


 * Take a look at his user contributions to see more on this. With that in mind, I have little toleration for seventy or eighty lines of invective posted on my talk page by a user that has previously vandalized my user page. Larry Dunn 15:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for this background - as you see, I asked not to be involved in this, but to ask another admin if at all possible. Good luck in sorting out all this. Ian Cairns 15:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, will do. Larry Dunn 15:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Systems and Category:Systems appeal
Many thanks for your support re Category:Systems. Following the deletion, Mdd has initiated a WikiProject Systems. If you would like to participate and support it, do add your name under WikiProject_Systems.

In addition, I'm trying for an appeal for Category:Systems â see Deletion_review/Log/2007_April_20 â we can see what happens anyway, but do add to the discussion! Procedure and following guidelines seems to be important for success, so do read the guidelines on overcategorization and add comments in the light of this if you wish. Best regards, Jonathan Bowen 18:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Active vandal
I'm chasing after User:alantaylor222 who I've reported at AIV. If you could speedily block him, it'd cut down my workload! Ta. --Dweller 09:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No edits since your t3 'last warning'. I've added a t4 and will block if he vandalises again. Ian Cairns 09:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries, Riana got to him. See what he did at Pedophilia. --Dweller 09:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Shutuplosernoonelikesyou
Can you please also lift the account creation block on that user. I see that the autoblock was disabled, so that's covered. This way, the user will have another chance to create a new account with an appropriete username.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 22:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. I'll look at that right away. Ian Cairns 23:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Tampon
Why do you lie and hate!!! WE KNOW WHO CREATED IT YET YOU HAVE FAKE INFORMATION!! YOU HATE WIKIPEDIA!!! WHY??????????? âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.191.51.254 (talk) 20:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

Blocked anon's Criterion Collecton link fixes
I see you've blocked 199.231.146.254 for alleged spamming. The individual was actually repairing the links as the website in question has recently switched domain names. The company had issued a plea for assistance in repairing incoming links, such as the hundreds on Wikipedia, which was answered in part by the individual in question. This has caused some confusion among spam watchers, as evidenced by the conversation here. However, the edits were made in good faith and, whether or not the user continues to contribute to Wikipedia, I'd appreciate it if you could null the ban. Thanks, Doctor Sunshine   talk  00:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your note - IIRC, I responded to the bots reporting the 'spam' links on AIV. However, I accept your description and have left a note on the anon's talk page. Although it looks from here as though the block is still in place, I am unable to remove the block since the Wiki unblock facility can't find the block ID, and gives me an error message - I have tried several times. Has someone else already lifted the block? The block would have run out anyway in a matter of hours. Ian Cairns 10:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No worries. Thanks again for you assistance. Doctor Sunshine   talk  19:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

John Smith
I undid your addition at John Smith. The List of Chancellors of the University of Cambridge does not note a John Smith in 1497, 1499, 1504. Was there another source for his inclusion? Thanks. -- JHunterJ 12:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It was List of Vice-Chancellors of the University of Cambridge. I was reviewing both these articles and the equivalent ones for Oxford at the time. Ian Cairns 13:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Gotcha. I restored the (tweaked) entry. Thanks. -- JHunterJ 14:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for "a short period"?
That was remarkably lenient of you!

I'm not really here to complain or anything, I just can't help but contrast my recent indefinite block (not by you) for my admittedly incivil, but otherwise principled "personal attacks" upon another editor at the RefDesk, for making a series of rather disturbing remarks concerning Nazism. Still, my behaviour was wrong and only after promising to abstain from relentlessly criticizing that other editor's remarks as instances of what I termed "Nazi Apologism", was my block removed.

Yet I can't help but notice how a particular vandal who gets his kicks out of vandalizing Sir Winston Churchill's article by having it refer to Churchill as a "cocksucker" gets blocked for "a short period". Do you honestly believe that this vandal can ever be reformed into a constructive editor?

I'm really not criticizing you here, nor am I at all angry. I just find the whole thing rather odd. Am I really considered worse of an offender for my hypersensitivity to antisemitism than another who vandalizes Winston Churchill's article by making it refer to him as a "cocksucker"?

I'd be curious, if you get the chance, to hear your take on the whole thing.

All the best, Lewis 02:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Lewis. Thanks for your message. As an admin, I regularly run down the list of reported vandals, and I'm afraid that I dealt with the immediate problem and didn't look far enough back on this person's editing. Despite only one day's editing, every edit was a vandalisation. So, on review, that user has now received an indefinite block. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. BW, Ian Cairns 10:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I happen to believe that calling Winston Churchill a cocksucker does not mean that whoever did this cannot be reformed into a constructive editor. In fact, indefinite blocks are totally drastic. I think there should be a WikiProject to rehabilitate vandals! A.Z. 06:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It's good to hear that they are Wiki users with the time to rehabilitate offending users. My immediate task, and one that I was required to participate in on becoming an Admin, was to patrol vandals and to fix vandalisation. It's possible that, in time, this user could have been rehabilitated - but it would have needed someone to follow him around (clearing up after his parade); or the luck that random users found and corrected all his efforts - the alternative is that Wikipedia will start to fill with his deliberate inaccuracies causing it to lose the confidence of its users. My temporary ban was for the Winston Churchill issue; my permanent ban was because all edits (not just Winston Churchill) were dire vandalisation. If there had been a Wiki tag, and a follow-up Wiki probation officer, I would have used it. Ian Cairns 09:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Password
Thanks for the email warning - my password is now changed. Ian Cairns 20:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Troll Smashing
Thanks for blasting that troll for me. :D E. Sn0 = 31337 = Talk 22:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. Reverting the vandalism on your page was just one of the reversions... Ian Cairns 22:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was talking about the block, m8. He deserved that one. Reverts are simply damage control. You have a good day! E. Sn0 = 31337 = Talk 22:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

great job :)
Only kidding you a twat. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Tehuber (talk â¢ contribs) 23:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

IP blocking, WP:ANI, etc.
If you're requesting reviews for blocks, please do so on WP:ANI. As for IP blocks: they should never be indefinite. AOL addresses shouldn't be blocked for very long at all, as AOL users often switch between addresses every few pages they visit. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 23:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * And I've just gone through and removed all of your previous indefinite IP blocks, reblocking them when appropriate. It's probably best if you block for only 6 months at most, and then only for educational institutes and other shared IPs that are unlikely to change during that time. The internet is a volatile place and IP addresses shift about all the time. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. Yes, I am aware about IP addresses and indefinite blocks. I needed to close down my PC very quickly - but had become involved with resolving a spate of school article vandalism from (when I checked) non-school IP addresses. Hence my request. Thanks again, Ian Cairns 07:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Spelling corrections for Ailanthus altissima
Thanks very much for going through the article and correcting all of my shameless spelling errors! However, I have one question: is there a basis for your preference of 'north-eastern' over 'northeastern'? Both are found in the dictionary and I have been unable to find anything in the Manual of Style that would suggest that one is preferred over the other. This has come up before and I personally prefer the latter, but if the former is correct I will start using it as well. Thanks again- you certainly saved me a lot of trouble! Djlayton4 | talk |  contribs 12:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You're most welcome. I'm afraid that I was following my spellchecker's lead, except for obvious American spellings with which I had no problem. Most of the compasses I've seen have 'North-East' rather than 'Northeast' - but I'll check in my dictionary. Thanks again, Ian Cairns 17:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Help about an article that you asked to be deleted, please! ^_^
Hello, I am Milan Tair (Milantex on wiki) and I have one question about something that you might help me with!

Namely, one article created (not finished entirely) by me was deleted by you (may not have been you who clicked delete! ^_^) in suspicion of being advertising. Now, the thing is that I have never actually written an article the way that the encyclopedia needs it written. For this I need help!

I would like to write two articles.

1st is about a language project (one of a kind) that I have been working on one whole year and have finished a month ago, which has been reviewed and marked as excellent by two linguists from my school and from the university for language learning in Belgrade. The language has it's own writing scripts (two of them) and the grammar is totally new and different from any language that they have ever seen. I have been working on making it phonetically and not semantically and logically adaptive to humans, but speakable, readable, writable and real time understandable. I want to make an article about it as well and to put it in the list of other fictional (made/created) languages that exist on Wikipedia. I hope that this is not against the rules.

2nd is the OS that I have made as a school project. Many people have put their OS's on Wikipedia and there they are. MenuetOS, MiniX OS and others are all small projects of non commercial OS's that are NOT used like Linux, Mac or Windows, but are still there. Why would I be banned from doing so as well when the OS is configurable, editable and programmable as well as those are?

And 3rd is about the maker of those two! Myself! I would like to write just a bit about who made the language and the OS just like Tolkien and others; and Linus have their profiles. Doing something that I do not gain profit from and have made solely open for the public would ensure that I may get a place in Wiki as well ans many others who have made their own articles about their own stuff (and I do not want to have it made as an advert) since it IS NOT available on the net and no other external links would be placed there! That is my point!

I would like to hear from you on this request and would also ask for your help about this. I mean, in the correct formulation of the sentences and the whole paragraphs (without going off topic in some) and things like that.

Regards, Milantex.


 * Hello Milantex. Thanks for your message. I sympathise with you over your intentions. However, it is important to realise that this website is an encyclopedia and not a (self-)promotional channel. As such, Wikipedia requires all editors to ask themselves whether the topic is notable and is verifiable from independent sources. I realise that this is an ideal and there is much rubbish written in Wikipedia on topics most people have never heard of. So, have your school projects been reviewed by anyone outside the school? Have they appeared in technical journals? Been mentioned in newspapers, TV? If no, then it is likely that your projects - although worthy and interesting - are not encyclopedic in the way that Wikipedia demands. Similarly, for people. Unless a person is notable (e.g. appeared in print) then it is unlikely that there is much point writing an article for self-promotional reasons. There are very few school students that appear in Wikipedia, and most have reasons for appearing that have nothing to do with their schoolwork, e.g. film stars, etc. Please do not misunderstand me - I do not want to discourage you from contributing to Wikipedia - far from it. However, I would caution you about writing up school projects - since these could be seen as non-notable by experienced editors - and you may find your article removed / marked for deletion. I hope that helps. Please read the Wiki guidelines / policy on content. I will post a link here shortly. Regards, Ian Cairns 11:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Blue dwarfs
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Blue dwarfs, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Blue dwarfs is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Blue dwarfs, 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. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Blue dwarfs itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Article
You restored with the speedy tag, and I looked it over, and it's notable... -- Evilclown93 (talk)  01:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

University navboxes
Commendations on your work on these navboxes. Unfortunately, non-free images are not permitted in templates (per WP:NFCC). Where a free image is available, I tend to substitute that instead (e.g. Template:University of Manchester), otherwise the images just have to go. Apologies. — mholland (talk) 22:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with the rules. I simply re-used the image available at the main university article. If there is a problem with that, then almost all university articles will need adjusting. Thanks, Ian Cairns 23:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * There's no problem with the logos on the main university articles themselves. Policy requires a fair-use rationale for every article in which an image appears.  WP:LOGO covers the use of most logos on the main article of an organisation, but not on related pages.  A navbox is transcluded on every related page, some not even in articlespace, and the non-free content policy doesn't stretch to that. — mholland (talk) 23:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No problems. Whatever - I'll not add any further navboxes. Ian Cairns 23:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Ian:

Thanks for your message regarding the entry "Areal Velocity". I had corrected some technical errors in the existing article and added some information based on a new paper that just appeared in the American Journal of Physics. However, I'm not a Latex user and messed up on formating some math symbols. I had actually asked a colleague a few days ago to help me with the formating, but when he opened the page yesterday, the article had been reverted. I'll try to fix it this week.17:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)BallinamonaBalinamona

Alexander Cockburn family
Well done for the edit on Alexander Cockburn's illegitimate family. Could you provide a reference please? Cutler 13:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I declared the 1851 and 1861 censuses under references. I can probably add some more references shortly. Ian Cairns 14:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting Apollo program
Thanks for being the one to revert this opinionated vandalism on my part - but hey I got a WHOLE 5 MINUTES!! Yay! :-) Bennyboyz3000 00:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I must be getting slower in my old age...  Ian Cairns 00:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status
The Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to and/or  status. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU. Thank you. Delivered on behalf of user:xaosflux 01:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Takashi Inoguchi
Thank you for your reading and making a bullitin to the article "Takashi Inoguchi ".He is a splendid researcher of international power politics and the husbund of Kuniko Inoguchi. Takashi is acting as a senior vice president of UN university in Shibuya, Tokyo.I hope Icairns to have notations on the matter of UN.Of course please give some permissions to my uncomfortable English.The DQN,macbeth 23:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you - there is much room for improvement of this article. Good luck! Ian Cairns 06:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Message from User:Andranikpasha
Hi! Im working at English Wiki not so long time but all the time Im doing anything a user Grandmaster wikistalks me. Even 3 days ago he added my name for the sockpuppets check list of an Armenian user (Artaxiad) Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Artaxiad, without any explanations, just because I find some uncorrect things and unreliable sources in articles (which seems to be previously edited by him). Now his co-editors use the adding of my name at this "list" and sending me warnings User talk:Andranikpasha, writing to admin'lists Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents that I can be a sockpuppet and making "a bad image" for me. Id like to know if anyone has rights to send my name to a sockpoppet check-list without explanations and then use it against anyone. Thanks in advance! User:Andranikpasha


 * Thanks for your email. I'll have a look into this shortly. Ian Cairns 21:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Nigel Balchin
What's the best format for a reference that's used throughout (as with the ODNB)? It has a pretty good Balchin biography that would be a RS for filling out the article.

I'm not at all keen on the GRO references. They're primary sources, not very accessible compared to the ODNB, and maybe even skate on the edge of WP:SYNTH. Gordonofcartoon 02:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 1) What reference? What does RS mean in this context? Perhaps use WP:CITE and the citation templates, as per the way I edited your ODNB reference?
 * 2) There is no other way of uniquely referencing a birth, marriage or death since 1837 in England and Wales without the GRO reference. I could accept a line of argument that said we didn't need them at all - but, if you agree with adding BMD references, then they are the business. The GRO references are available from several different sources, www.freebmd.org.uk is free but dwindles out after about 1920 for the moment; they are several other inexpensive subscription websites e.g. www.ancestry.co.uk, www.genesreunited.co.uk, and their various competitors. The GRO is also housed on paper at the Family Records Centre in Myddleton Street, London. However, this is closing in early 2008 because the numbers of the public attending has fallen since widespread easy access to the records across the internet. I find these GRO internet records far more easily accessible than, for example, the ODNB - which is subscription-only service from here and has only one source website. The nearest public paper copy to me is over 6 miles away, and would take me an hour to visit. I can not check ODNB references effectively from here, or check them at all. Last time I used the website was their last 'free access' weekend - a few years back.
 * SYNTH - I can't see what I am accused of fabricating. How do cold BMD events add to the point of view I am 'pushing' ??? I have quoted independent individual facts, referring to the BMD events of a particular author. I have also added links to relevant internet articles. However, I have no opinion on him. He's my second cousin once removed - hence my interest / stack of family information - but I never met him.
 * Ian Cairns 02:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Got it. RS = Reference source?? Ian Cairns 02:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Re your message at my Talk page.
 * I see Tyrenius added info on citation at the top of this page. Anyhow, a reply is available back at my Talk page. Rgrds, Ian Cairns 02:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It doesn't cover the point I mentioned, though. I know how to multiply cite; I just wondered if there was some way to indicate a reference that's used throughout.
 * As to GRO vs. ODNB, I guess it depends where you are. Here (Devon) we have free access from home on provision of library ticket number. So perhaps the access issue isn't as clear-cut as I thought. However, I think the latter is far preferable for being a secondary source.
 * I don't mean fabricating; it's just that collecting GRO records (primary sources that have not been fact-checked) seems to me on the edge of creating a novel synthesis that hasn't been through the collation and editorial process of a generally accepted third-party source - which the material in ODNB has. Gordonofcartoon 03:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The syntax for repeated references is:


 * where repeatedname is the same each time it is repeated. I'm trying to understand why primary sources shouldn't be allowed but secondary ones are ok? I've recently been editing some music hall Wiki articles, and I've adjusted the birth dates by up to a year or two in some instances (duly evidenced of course) due to primary source information, compared with, say, the established biographical details available from IMDB or other web fan source. In other cases, there were conflicting fan sites, and I was able to confirm the details on one. Everything I add to Wikipedia is subject to its own collation and editorial process - and I expect any inadvertent (and advertent) errors to be corrected. I'm paraphrasing, of course - but we're building another secondary source here. Regards to Devon from Berkshire. Happy days undergraduating at Exeter. Ian Cairns 08:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Genealogics
Can you add some references to Genealogics so it meets WP:WEB? --NeilN 12:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. I'm still developing this. Ian Cairns 12:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

City of London churches
Do you know if anyone has ever tried to find exact grid references for the churches destroyed in the Great Fire of London? Or inded, if a definitive list of churches already a distant memory in 1666 exists?Bashereyre 20:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid that I'm not aware of any such list - welcome though it would be. BTW, congrats on your edits to these articles - you've added enormously to them!! Thanks, Ian Cairns 21:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

We got a problem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.125.106.90

This IP adress is from the Saranac Lake High school, and this vandalism has been going on for a year now. I suggest that if you want to stop this, block the Ip adress from editing, like a soft block or something, forcing them to register.Xana Tarantula 16:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this. The High School identification doesn't appear in my listings - are you sure? I can only see them editing for just under 2 months. Otherwise, I would agree with you - and if you review my edits this afternoon, you'll see that I've been soft-blocking appropriate addresses. Rgrds, Ian Cairns 16:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks much!
It's 2:30 AM on my side of the planet, I just rescued my son who had a blowout on the way home from work, I'm tired, I'm nearly finished with Wikipedia forever because of the vandals...and I wanted to personally thank you for blocking that "Kramerkid" character. It's guys like that who drove me to the brink when I used to edit and administer under another username. Have a great weekend and thanks for being there to help this site. I'm off to bed. :) Regards, --PMDrive1061 09:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC) 

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


 * No problem - glad to help. Take a Wikibreak and hopefully see you back real soon! Ian Cairns 10:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Baconator
I was wondering if there could be some administrative action (a merge, for example) for the baconator article? Other items on fast food menus don't seem to get their own articles, and at this point the article only exists as a vandal target, getting hit more than once a day at times. This has had a merge suggested at least as far back as August. In addition, can anything be done about Template:Smellyourfear? This seems to only exist at this point for the use of vandals as well, including on the article in question. I don't know what rules Wikipedia has on the template namespace, but it would not seem to me to be the best place for a vandal template. --OuroborosCobra 08:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello OC. I see that baconator is already the subject of a merge proposal. I've also nominated Smellyourfear for deletion using Template:Tfd as you were also welcome to do. Ian Cairns 12:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Wingate
Greetings

It appears my work is under some attack and I seek some assistance from you.

Cheers Christopher Wingate —Preceding unsigned comment added by WingateChristopher (talk • contribs) 23:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Christopher - Thanks for your message. I think that 'the attack' refers to some misunderstanding of the principles of Wikipedia, e.g. Neutral Point of View. As such, it is rare - to the point that it never happens - that someone creates an article in which they have any direct interest whatsoever. This is to avoid Point of View - POV. Unfortunately, no matter how impassively you have produced your article, it is up to an uninvolved third party to create this article on your behalf - not you. Please do not produce the same article under the cloak of anonymity - Wiki editors are very good at spotting this too. The third party needs to provide 3rd party references / sources for all aspects of the article. I make no allegation against your person or your impartiality or the 'good faith' of your editing - simply that this is just not done in Wikipedia. I hope that you can bear with the Wikipedia community while your article is reviewed. It is very likely that it will be deleted or severely tidied. Please do not think this is any reflection on the quality of the article - although there were some issues that would have been needed to be dealt with - simply that the community needs to be assured that NPOV is followed. Best wishes, Ian Cairns 23:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

PS: You need to sign all comments on any Talk pages anytime using ~ Thanks, Ian Cairns 23:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Homersimpson07
Thank you for clarifying this issue, and placing the gentle warning notice. Bearian 17:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for this - I have clarified my block on User talk:Homersimpson07 - I am not taking sides on the article or the opposite viewpoint - I am simply objecting to anyone vandalising this or any other Wiki article. If major changes need to be made, then they should be agreed in prior consensus on the talk page. Thank you. Ian Cairns 21:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?
Dear Sir,

I've never used wikipedia to edit anything and I've only JUST signed a new account to try to find out why I can't view the pages. It shows that my IP was involved in some sort of vandalism.. I've no idea how it happened but I can assure you that I've never done anything to ruin the integrity of wikipedia.

If you can, would you please take away the ban that is on me?

Many thanks and best regards, Johann —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slowth (talk • contribs) 17:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Taptos
Apparently a sock puppet of User:Roitr? Corvus cornix 22:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * My apologies - I was called away. I've now tagged User:Taptos. Thanks, Ian Cairns 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * thank you. Corvus cornix 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Wojoud
Would you mind deleting Ben deignan, this is the article that User:Wojoud got blocked for re-creating. Thank you. Tiptoety 00:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry - someone else got there first. Thanks, Ian Cairns 08:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

vandalism
Hi Ian,

Yeah I get what you mean.. but I don't intend to edit anything on wiki actually I use it mainly for info gathering. And the main problem with the ban is that when I click on some links.. it says i'm banned from editing when all I want to do is read the information on the link. I use a laptop so I don't think anyone else shares this ip? I just registered before I emailed you so I'm abit confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slowth (talk • contribs) 07:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SecondUS.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SecondUS.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Duets
Category:Duets is based on the primary meaning of the word duet (in fact, the only meaning given in my Merriam Webster's Dictionary), "a composition for two performers." I have removed the performer-oriented subcategories you added to this the category page as it would result in the mingling of performers and works in the same category. If you want to make a category for musicians who perform together as a pair I would suggest Category:Musical duos, which could be made as a subcategory of Category:Duos. If you do so it would also be fine to add a disambiguation link to the new category from the Category:Duets page. InnocuousPseudonym 21:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Eraser
He's at it again. Cheers, RCS 07:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I will monitor for a little while. Ian Cairns 11:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've had to revert three times since you wrote this right above - i'd be glad if you blocked him now, he's tiresome. Thanks, RCS 15:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey
I removed the prod from Bob's Burgers again cause the AfD already has comments on it. Kwsn  (Ni!)  18:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. No problem for me. Thanks, Ian Cairns 18:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

User:TUMAS214‎ etc.
Hi,

I notice you've drawn the connection between User:TUMAS214‎ and several other sockpuppets. I've been trying to sort out edits made from these accounts over the last couple of days; there are several more socks:


 * User:Bartolomas214
 * User:McDonaldmas214
 * User:Obrienmas214
 * User:Chotisornmas214
 * User:Chuenprayothmas214
 * User:Tsomas214
 * User:Ilyarmas214
 * User:Nataliethommas214
 * User:Cunliffe214
 * User:Leemas214
 * User:Smallmas214
 * User:Seneviratnemas214
 * User:SchulteMAS214

The majority of the edits made by these accounts are badly-written POV essays. Do you have any suggestions as to how best to deal with this?

Regards, Oli Filth(talk) 13:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Oli. Thanks for that. I'll mark them up in due course. I'm no expert on sock-puppetry, but I think I'll leave a note on the noticeboard requesting specialist attention to this. Thanks for raising this! Best wishes, Ian Cairns 14:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I've just noticed this myself -- see User_talk:El_C -- there are lots more socks. Seemingly tons of them. If you look at the histories of the pages they edit, that leads to more socks which leads to more pages. And I, too, am at a loss for as to how to deal with this. I can't even understand why he's using socks in the first place -- or why he hasn't talked to anyone. But this needs to be dealt with... somehow. Gscshoyru 14:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * And... I just figured out what's going on. See this pdf. I don't think they're actually socks. That's what the problem with this is. Does someone think we should have a talk with the instructor? Gscshoyru 15:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well done for spotting that!! .. and I quote..

"1) Wikipedia assignment. Worth 25%. This semester you will choose three concepts, things or people relevant to MAS 214 and will contribute to (or create) their Wikipedia entries. Your contributions must include citations to readings and other resources from MAS 214."


 * .. and I've just reported this group on WP:SSP - Cheers, Ian Cairns 15:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You forgot to put it on the SSP page itself, so I did that. But I'm not sure these should be considered socks, though -- they're all just college students attempting to finish an assignment (which is due on the 31st, which is why we've had such a sudden rush). Perhaps we should open a thread on WP:AN? Normally, contributions are welcomed -- but these are all somewhat misguided students whose contributions violate WP:NPOV (And WP:CITE half the time) because they are written as essays for a class. If the students and professor knew how to better contribute, then this class might end up adding useful content in future years. What do you think? Gscshoyru 15:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * FYI, I've reported this at WP:AN now. Oli Filth(talk) 16:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Block of 68.149.188.69
Hello – This IP editor contacted unblock-en-l today after you blocked him for making three vandalism edits to November 29. He was pretty upset about it and called my attention to his edit history, and I felt he was correct in his assertion that he is not a vandal. He was cleaning up three instances of vandalism, and said he was about to repair a fourth instance when he was blocked.

His edit summaries may have been confusing, because at first glance they look like the automatic edit summaries given by the software when pages are blanked and replaced with "poop" and so forth. I unblocked his IP address, and I wanted to let you know. Thanks. - Krakatoa  Katie  23:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. It was fairly hectic this morning and it's possible that I may have mistaken some edits. I'll double-check tomorrow. Thanks again, Ian Cairns 02:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, last week I closed an AFD as 'delete' and nixed the article – only problem was there wasn't a single 'delete' comment on the page. That wasn't, like, embarrassing or anything. :-/ Stuff happens, 'cause we're all human. Except the bots. And the cabal. :-) - Krakatoa  Katie  18:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of User:Business Publication
It looks like since you blocked this user they've reverted to using an anonymous account to attempt to all of the spam articles they created. The sockpuppet is. --Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 18:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know - much appreciated. The account is marked up as a sockpuppet. I think this can now run its course. Rgrds, Ian Cairns 19:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

FYI
When you get vandalism only accounts like Sirsquacky - please indef block em, no need for this 31 hour stuff - there's no way they're ever going to be a useful editor. -- Tawker 14:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. Willco. Rgrds, Ian Cairns 14:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Oversight
Did you pass anything along to oversight concerning the edits to User:Sasha Callahan? I didn't want to send one from me, one from Sasha, and one from you, but I imagine they can cope.  Acroterion  (talk)  19:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Acroterion. I recently blocked User:12.174.138.197 for crimes including attacking Sasha's talk page. But I have had no other connection with this Sasha's account at all. Was there something in particular that I missed? Rgrds, Ian Cairns 19:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The edits by that user to Sasha's talk page contained a considerable amount of someone (not Sasha's) personal information, which should be oversighted. I'll do the report; I just didn't want to send a duplicate if you'd done it already.    Acroterion  (talk)  19:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ooops. Many thanks for that!! Ian Cairns 19:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Pnazionale
Pnazionale only edits the article and talk page about himself, but does so in a more or less responsible way. I have unblocked him as I am familiar with him and his editing over a period of several months. There are serious problems with us hosting the material he has been deleting. Fred Bauder 18:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I note the personal involvement of User:Jimbo Wales in the edit history of Giovanni di Stefano . However, User:Pnazionale has provided NO edit summaries for his earlier reversions. I have no problem with your reinstatement in the circumstances - but there is no documented history to follow this. Ian Cairns 22:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

In Remembrance...
--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 18:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

You are correct
Hello. Thanks for correcting me about practising vs practicing. Apparently both are correct though, but "practicing" is US spelling and "practising" is UK spelling. As this is an article about a British scientist you are absolutely correct to use British spelling. Most of the books written by Franklin were written by Americans, so much of the verification of material was probably done from these sources, so US spelling may have crept in. Anyway sorry for reverting your correct correction, I should have checked before changing. All the best. Alun 05:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:TheFingerer
He is requesting unblock, just thought you should know. This is Zanusi 07:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Ian Cairns 08:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT
This is a magic word, not a template, so please use a colon instead of a pipe. DEFAULTSORT:x Thanks.Flatterworld 16:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * That's very interesting. I have been using colons all the time with this format. If you have found a pipe, I would be interested to know where - if it was me, then it was a typo. Thanks, Ian Cairns 16:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I've now found the intersection between our edit spaces, and it was article Vladek Sheybal. So, yes, it was a typo. I can offer hundreds of alternative articles where I've used the correct format. Ian Cairns 17:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Ian Cairns
Hello Ian. I thought that you may be interested to know that your namesake now has an article. The three of us also share a common first name. Cheers. &mdash;Moondyne 08:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that!! I was totally unaware of this person - but I've edited the Talk page to clarify. BW, Ian Cairns 09:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked IP User:66.244.236.132
You've blocked User:66.244.236.132. Thank you. I'd like to also draw your attention to the fact that the host seems to be compromised in some fashion if I'm interpreting SORBS correctly. -- LeadSongDog (talk) 17:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added a sharedIP template to this user - according to its registration - but what have you found out from SORBS? Thanks, -- Ian Cairns (talk) 21:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

By email
Hello. Are you interested in helping me set up the travel guide Wiki? It is going to be a travel guide wiki for people who wants to know more about a certain places. It can be found here: http://travelguidewiki.scribblewiki.com/Main_Page

NHRHS2010


 * Hello NHRHS2010. Thanks for your message - I have very little spare time at the moment, and put most of my effort into Wikipedia. So, sorry. I don't think it sensible to promise you - if I can't complete. Thanks, Ian Cairns (talk) 01:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked IP User
Thank you for blocking User:72.95.137.5, an account used solely for vandalism. JNW (talk) 16:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello JNW. The block is only temporary and is consistent with extending earlier blocks - but should his editing behaviour continue then he can look forward to longer and longer anonblocks. Ian Cairns (talk) 18:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
Dear Icairns,

I am seriously sorry for inadvertently vandalizing the article Mary I of England. I did not mean it as malicious, because I was merely using it as an example as to how Wikipedia can be edited by his new account. Despite that "poop" was an immature example, I undid the edit right after, but it obviously did not take effect. I'm sorry for the trouble and wish no hard feelings. I will be much more careful in the future.

Sincerely,

Mitchell Is The Man.


 * Hello Mitchell. Thanks for that. The vandalism was applied twice and removed once - if I remember correctly. The Wikipedia audit trail sees everything. Please make some worthwhile positive contributions... Thanks, Ian Cairns (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup"etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards,


 * Thanks for that. Ian Cairns (talk) 11:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops
Thanks Ian, i don't know how that happened Raymond Palmer (talk) 20:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

"Non-Current Report"
How is this a "non-current report"? Just because there wasn't an admin around at that very moment (or for 15 afterwards) that excuses this editor's behaviour? What are you telling vandals exactly? If it sits there long enough you get away with it? Come on, Dude! - NeutralHomer  T:C 19:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comment. I make the chronology:


 * 24.87.61.232 = [ S010600155837ff68.vc.shawcable.net ]
 * 1507: User's "Last edit" of any kind
 * 1823: Last warning to User's talk page by yourself
 * 1834: Report added to AIAV by yourself
 * 1846: Report removed from AIAV by myself as being 'non-current' - having received no other attention by other admins.


 * Now please read / re-read the header to WP:AIAV - in particular the point (1) for Editors - and then double-check the timings above....
 * If you check my record on AIAV, you'll find that I am fairly consistent (although I offer no guarantees of absolute rigour), and I am happy to defend the above as both reasonable and well within the Wiki guidelines. Hope that helps, Ian Cairns (talk) 20:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologizes on the timings (I caught one that on my watchlist and then seen the rest on a contrib check). I went into revert mode and didn't check the times, so that was my mistake...sorry about that.


 * What you showed me though, with the IP coming from Shaw Cable in Canada, makes me wonder why that he would edit US PBS Television station articles.


 * Either way though, I do apologize for the confusion on the time and I apologize for the way my comments above read. I was pissed off at another user (since taken care of) and I took my frustration out on the wrong person, so I apologize to you.


 * If you would, could you please keep an eye on that IP and watch his edits. He has a history of add "Western" to the "W"s in US calls and "King" to the "K"s in US calls (even though they never stand for any of those things) and he has been warned before.


 * Thanks for commenting back. Take Care... NeutralHomer  T:C 20:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No probs. Thanks for your reply. Ian Cairns (talk) 20:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PHANTAS.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:PHANTAS.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks (bot) for the above - this reply is for documentation purposes only, I'm not expecting you to read this. The guidelines have changed considerably since I uploaded that picture - last year I think. I think it met the usage guideliens at that time. I'm happy for it to be deleted if it no longer meets the current guidelines. Ian Cairns (talk) 20:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandal from school account 70.254.54.66
Sorry about reporting this as I did, not sure what I was supposed to have done, and it took me a while to figure out this was a school account. However, the vandal is current. The vandalism to Music of Israel was done in the last few hours. The vandal deleted the name of a composition in the section Music of Israel and replaced it with his/her own name. --Ravpapa (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. As you will have seen, our guidelines deal mostly with ongoing vandalism - i.e. further vandalism after the last 'final' warning / a vandal who is still online as they are reported. As such, your music vandalism was probably history by the time you spotted / reported it. The rationale is that admins can leave messages for the vandal, but the vandals only see these messages if they are online at the time. Some of these vandals' IP addresses change from logon to logon - and they can miss the messages if they come back hours later. I wasn't sure whether the music title was a personal name, e.g. Peter Grimes, or not. You clearly had the specialist knowledge. In future, you might wish to revert the vandalism, leave a warning for the vandal and then, _IF_ still ongoing, leave a report on WP:AIAV. Thanks again, Ian Cairns (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

IP jumping vandal
What do you suggest with the top question on WP:AIV? I've not dealt with that issue before. --AW (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It's effectively a new report for each IP address - or else ask the poster to put a multiple ip report. In any case, it may need to go to the other Vandalism Incident noticeboard. HTH - Ian Cairns (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

vandalism

 * & keeps trying to add information of a fake move Tom & Jerry: The Great Beginning into Piracy,Spike (MGM)‎ ,Barney Bear,Barney Bear,Mammy Two Shoes,Butch (Tom and Jerry),Screwball Squirrel,Jack Black,Wanda Sykes,Lil' JJ,John Goodman,Long John Silver,DreamWorks Animation and Nickelodeon Movies, please help these. 123.193.12.44 15:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Anon - sorry no name provided. Firstly, I am not a specialist in this Wikiproject area. You would be well-advised to find an admin within your Wikiproject and ask them for assistance - they will be more easily able to recognise the vandalism. You saw how difficult it was for me earlier to confirm that the subtle vandalism had actually occurred. Secondly, you need to open up a dialogue with these two anon users and try to discuss / reach a consensus about the non-existence of this movie. Is it possible that they know something you don't? If their assertions are true then they must have a source for this, which _must_ be quoted. Without a source, their data can be challenged and removed. Point out to them on their user talk pages that their data is unsourced and liable to be removed. Add warnings to their talk pages pointing out the bad edits - so that there is an audit trail that any admin can follow. Add tags to each of the articles identifying the incorrect unsourced data. Thirdly, if the first two methods have not worked, then you can request semi-protection for the above articles. This would prevent all anonymous editing of the pages and force editors to log in. Fourthly, if you suspect the two IP addresses to be related, then raise a Sockpuppet report on them, so that they can be treated as one user. Chances are that these are 2 schoolchildren on adjacent computers in a school computer room. Fifthly, raise this particular vandalism as an issue in your Wikiproject. If more of your Wikiproject members were aware, then maybe these vandalisms could be reverted quicker? Once the vandals see their work being reverted quickly by a chorus of like-minded editors then they will cease or move somewhere quieter. Otherwise, I have no magic answer for you. Please continue to report cases of vandalism to WP:AIAV, but please ensure that they are fully documented. Within an audit trail pointing at the specific vandalism, then subtle vandalism will be difficult for a non-specialist admin to identify. Thanks, Ian Cairns 16:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Eddieppp
Hi. You blocked Eddieppp a few weeks ago. Every edit by this user since the block expired appears to have been vandalism. Can you take some action again please? Mauls 23:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hi Ian

I have received a new message from you today as follows:

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to River Thames, are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. Ian Cairns 18:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I am concerned about this, and think I may have had my account hacked. I did recently make an edit to the page for the who (rock group) and some months ago to the page for John Rabbit Bundrick, but that is all.

Please advise me as to what precautions I can take to avoid having my login abused in this way again.

Many thanks

Anthony


 * Hello Anthony - Thanks for your message. Yes, on November 13, your IP address was used by someone to vandalise the River Thames article. I am happy that it was probably another person - but that person is making your shared IP address look bad. A shared address is quite common - and is nothing to worry about. I'd recommend creating a named account and signing in from your standard PC. Then, all your edits will be marked as coming from this username and will not be associated with the IP address. Should the other person continue in their ways, then it is possible that anonymous editing from your IP address will be blocked in time. However, your named account will continue to function. From Wikipedia's point of view, it is useful to separate users of IP addresses by asking them to take out named accounts. If you share the PC, please remember to logout after use or when walking away from the PC - otherwise, your named account can be compromised. Let me know if the above is incomprehensible - otherwise, I look forward to your future editing and the isolation of the other person... BW, Ian Cairns (talk) 16:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SECALB.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SECALB.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Once again, it was apparently valid when it was uploaded - the rules have changed since the upload. Fine. Delete away. Ian Cairns (talk) 08:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Please help with user:216.204.49.50
I'm really sorry to bother you with this, I know you must be really busy ... I've been patrolling the 'recent changes' and this user is doing a lot of vandalism again ... I saw that you have personally blocked him before but apparently that wasn't enough ... can you please take a look at his recent contributions and judge for yourself if action needs to be taken - I would appreciate it if you could take a look when you get a chance - thanks, Ukt-zero (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. As you will have spotted, a report to WP:AIV seems to have done the trick and this user is banned - this is the best route to report any vandal. I'm afraid that I am not always present to deal with reports here in a timely fashion. Thanks again, Ian Cairns (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick vandalism response
Thank you for responding so quickly to block a vandal who had already hit 13 articles today with spam links. Rob Banzai (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No problems. His actions had to be stopped. Ian Cairns (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Georgiana
Thanks for the contributions - they are excellent... do you have an interest here? did the article just because I found the picture ... Victuallers (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Vic - I was trying to clear some of the dates of birth uncertain. However, I'm a bit of a genealogy buff and was able to locate most of the extra information with little effort. Ian Cairns (talk) 18:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Noahwoo
I think no one really knew that he had vandalized before, and always presumed that the vandalism they were noticing was the first instance of such. That was Noahwoo, concealing his history from cursory glances. I see that you made the key edit, noting it was the final warning. Maybe when he comes back from his 3 day block, he will have learned a lesson. I'd rather bet on dead ponies to win races, though. Thanks for acting on my AIV report. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  12:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. Yes, some vandals (try to) stay below the trigger threshold - so they don't seem to earn 'final warning's, which are critical to us being able to block their usage. This vandal had done enough cumulative damage to earn a BV - and then straight to block. Thanks for your assistance in raising this earlier. Ian Cairns (talk) 12:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Windsor
Regarding your recent edit to Barbarba Windsor's article. The ref says she married with surname Windsor, can I just check thats definatley what it says. If it is that means it is her legal name, not a stage name as I thought, and the article lead will need to be changed. Any idea about the first two marriages, what name she married under then? Thanks.--UpDown (talk) 08:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Updown - The ref is as I gave it - I remember seeing Windsor as the surname. Any of several GRO websites will suffice to confirm - personally I use www.ancestry.co.uk
 * I'll look up the others shortly. In case of confirmation difficulty, I can email you a picture of the page? but I can't post this. Ian Cairns (talk) 09:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. In that case I will change the opening line, as it appears her legal name is now Windsor. --UpDown (talk) 08:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Quackery
An article that you have been involved in editing, Quackery, 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. &mdash;Whig (talk) 19:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I was only dabbing the article - copyediting. Go ahead. Ian Cairns (talk) 10:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Your block of 24.247.231.138
Congratulations on stopping this vandal. A review of the history will show that no content except vandalism has ever been posted from that static IP at Traverse City, Michigan. I note also that while the posting times seem consistent with SharedIPEdu, (daytimes during the school year) the complete lack of any good content suggests it is not really shared.LeadSongDog (talk) 18:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Ian Cairns (talk) 18:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)