User talk:Ice Cold Beer/Archive02

IEEE Alexandria Student Branch
Dear Ice Cold Beer, I don't understand why you deleted the page IEEE Alexandria Student Branch. It does represent a popular scientific institution in Alexandria, Egypt. It's also worth mentioning that it includes at least 1000 members and its considered one of the largest non-profitable organizations in the city! Wikipedia must include an article for it. 62.135.39.226 (talk) 13:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I deleted the article because there wasn't any assertion of notability. To show notability, articles must have verifiable information provided by reliable sources. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 16:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the page says the reason for deletion is: (A7 (group): Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a group/company/etc.). I don't think this is a problem of notability?
 * Anyway, I think if you restore it back, I may start asking some people to help me make it more verified... or maybe I can delete those unverified info, but keeping the rest! 41.236.38.245 (talk) 00:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't see that you had responded until now. See WP:CSD. The importance/significance statement is the same as notability. I can restore the article to a registered account's userspace, but I cannot restore the article to the articlespace. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 03:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * fine, jplz restore it to my userspace, I'll work on making it more verified by checking some reliable sources, then I'll put the final version to the articlespace... oh and I would really appreciate your tips on writing a good article :) Thanks (Ahmedsaieed (talk) 01:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC))
 * Done, see User:Ahmedsaieed/IEEE Alexandria Student Branch. Please see the note I left at the top of that page. It is very important. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 08:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Balsamiq Deletion
Greetings - I saw that you deleted the Balsamiq entry I submitted/created as "Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a group/company/etc." I wanted to avoid appearing like an advertisement for the company (and it's product called Balsamiq Mockups). It's significance, IMO, is that it's by the far the easiest application for non-technical users to mockup their vision. I use it in my day job (publicly traded investment management firm) as well as my hobby startup. Please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkingbking (talk • contribs) 11:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I deleted the article because there wasn't any assertion of notability. To show notability, articles must have verifiable information provided by reliable sources. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for removing vandalism from my user page Abhishek Talk 05:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

FlatDoor.com Speedy Deletion
Hi Ice Cold Beer: Can you help me understand how my FlatDoor.com was so egregious that it called for speedy deletion? I recognize the "Blatant advertising" tag, but when I compare its content with several others, I'm puzzled. See Guru.com, Workopolis, WebEx, Wordpress, Amazon.com, Ebay. Most of these provide a description of the site's activities, and several have less discussion of the surrounding arena than does my article. Can you elucidate a little further? Thanks. Flatpat (talk) 19:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The article looked like a brochure for how and why I should use FlatDoor.com. Additionally, if you have any connection to the website please determine if you have a conflict of interest. Thanks, Ice Cold Beer (talk) 20:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Two things: (a) I'll try to rewrite to include a little more comparison with other sites and such (there is a small section on competitors at the bottom - I'll try to enhance that and see what else I can find that would strengthen the neutral content. (b) I'd appreciate it much if you would review some of the articles I refer to above and let me know if there is an essential difference between my post and these. Re COI: I am connected with FlatDoor.com, but am trying to provide useful information about a whole area that I don't see well covered to date. The Reverse auction is a start on this, but I believe there is quite a bit more to be disseminated. Appreciate your assistance. Flatpat (talk) 21:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Let me be a bit more clear (and blunt); I strongly discourage you to write about FlatDoor.com. Regarding the other articles: they (mostly) contain verifiable information via the use of reliable sources. With the exception of one of those article, ther are written from a neutral point of view. The article you wrote had none of these qualities. You should read the policies I linked to improve your encyclopedia writing, but (again) please don't write about FlatDoor.com. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 22:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

OK - that's reasonably clear. Flatpat (talk) 23:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Material via Discussion Only
Thanks for pointing that out, Ice Cold Beer! I'll use other tags for these from now on. -FlyingToaster (talk) 05:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 05:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Ivana Kotov
With all the respect, the reason to delete Ivana Kotov is very non pro and ignorant. Ivana Kotov is a very important name in Serbian music education, serbian culture development, and due to her achievements to graduate from an USA college on a unique scholarship, as the 1st and only serbian vocalist ever, Ivana has been rolemodel for thousands of serbian kids pursuing music schools in Serbia. We are a small country on the Balcans, and for development of our music culture, names like Ivana Kotov are very important and rare. There were 3 people working on this article, and we would like to have a brief explanation, and right to have our article back. Ivana Kotov does not need any kind of advertising, her name simply belongs in the encyclopedia.

Looking forward to hear from you. Thank you.

IvanaKotov (talk) 14:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Calling me unprofessional and ignorant is a really bad way to get any further explanation from me. And you don't have a "right" to have a Wikipedia article. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 16:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, if there are three people using this account, that needs to stop. There should only be one person per account. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 20:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Unprotect a page you deleted and protected
Hello, I was wondering if you unprotect the article "Joe Hollywood" and "Joe Newport". I have information for a great legit article for the two of them. Thanks so much! (Createrr2000 (talk) 16:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC))
 * You should talk to Stifle, who protected both of those. I would create the articles in userspace to demonstrate notability before asking him. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 16:52, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Willis
Hi, I work for Willis the insurance broker and I'd be interested to know what needs to happen to put our entry back up on Wikipedia? Why was it deleted in the first place?

Kind Regards Doug 89.28.184.53 (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * If you work for the company, then you probably shouldn't be writing about it. Please see WP:COI. Thanks, Ice Cold Beer (talk) 16:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I don't understand however why the Willis entry was taken down due to "the web content not indicating why its subject is important or significant." It appeared to be just like other broker entries (see Marsh and Aon)? Is it possible to see it back up there? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.28.184.53 (talk) 12:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There was no assertion of notability, which is cause for speedy deletion via WP:CSD. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 23:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, is there a wauy you can send me the Willsi page that was deleted and I can look at it to review and amend and then send back. Many thanks. 10:26, 31 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.28.184.53 (talk)


 * If you sign up for an account I can put the artice in your userspace. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 23:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, my account is Keighleyd. And can you show me whereabouts there is no assertion of notability within the article. Many thanks.

Hi, further to my email of yesterday, please can you send me the artcile to mey userspace. Many thanks

16:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Ice Cold beer, please can you help me. I'm looking to post the Willis entry back on Wikipedia. Can you send it to me useaccount - Which you advised me to do last week? The account is Keighleyd.

09:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keighleyd (talk • contribs)


 * I redact what I said earlier. Because you have a conflict of interest, I will not copy the article into your userspace. Apologies for the confusion. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

List of casualties etc
ping!-- R OGER D AVIES  talk 15:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Same problem as in list of battles by casualties. There was lots of noise after I deleted all unsourced material, but now the article is sourced and growing steadily. If there is a link to sourced material use the same reference in another article. I have no problems with that, but wikipedia articles or links to them aren't sources. I will leave it at that and take a look next year and remove again all unsourced material. Wandalstouring (talk) 17:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * My point is that for some of the material that you deleted, the source was already available in another article. You just had to copy and paste. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 18:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No. The one putting it there had the duty. Sorry, but I can't check whether anything is sourced somewhere in wikipedia and what exactly the numbers represent, that isn't how things work. You can check if you have time, everything without a source will be removed. Wandalstouring (talk) 14:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I wasn't saying that it's your duty. I just think it would have been more productive. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 23:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Block
Unless my cache isn't clearing correctly, user:Masonkayleb is still on the notice board page.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 07:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you :)  C T J F 8 3 Talk 07:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for this on the Drew Griffin article. I was trying to excise the material you took out but undid the wrong edit, so thanks for fixing my mistake.

Also congrats on becoming an admin. I've been on an extremely low-level of wiki activity for several months and did not know you had been promoted. I recall that we've disagreed on some stuff in the past (mainly on the US state terrorism article I believe) but I'm sure you will be (or rather are) a fine addition to the admin core since you always seemed like the level-headed sort. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 19:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, and thanks for the kind words. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 02:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Open Source Ecology
Hello, I was wondering why the article Open Source Ecology was deleted and protected? The group is a very noteworthy organization that is working towards creating a just and sustainable future, and have become well known for the research they're doing north of Kansas City. I believe it said it was deleted for advertising. I can easily change the page to be just static info. Thanks! Mdkoch84 (talk) 09:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Source_Ecology


 * The article was an advertisement that appeared to have been written by the company. If you are affiliated with OSE, you probably shouldn't be writing about it. The article was protected by for being repeatedly re-created. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 00:46, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

speedy delet of History of Houston Astros
what do you mean by "merge discussion is more appropriate"? The History of the Houston Astros article was an exact copy of the Houston Astros article that is now in the process of being updated. The History of the Houston Astros article has no citions or links. It was copied from the original. Please look at it again.--Mickey 19:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickeyp2814 (talk • contribs)
 * Undoing a declined speedy is a bad idea. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion
What am i suppose to do about the page you deleted of mine? I am the copyright owner and dont' know how I am suppose to prove that so the entry can remain on wikipedia.
 * There are instructions on your talk page. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 01:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Caspian blue

 * I think you should take a second look at the Caspian blue complaint. The roots of Caspian blue's gaming go back to 2007 and 2008 when Caspian was editing as both Caspian blue and Appletrees raising the issue once again of whether Caspian blue is more than one person editing with a single account.


 * If you do a Talk search for both Appletrees and Sennen goroshi, see here; and follow the link to this page, here;, you will see that at 15:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC) Caspian blue as Appletrees was working the same MO.


 * At the same, they were also editing as Caspian blue, see here; 


 * Ditto, back in 2007, (15:50, 26 November 2007) Appletrees was running the same line of attack against Sennen Goroshi, see here; . Caspian blue edits go back as far as 14 December 2006, see here;.


 * The purpose of all this, for Caspian blue, is an attempt to neutralize any other editor perceived as a threat to their control of Korean related topics, especially any relating to Japan-Korea relations, especially any other reasonable or informed editor who is not scared off by Caspian's typical gaming of the wiki.


 * During those episodes, the editor made ever reasonable attempt at discussion, "Let me try to make this as clear as my patience will allow me. As you are unhappy with the current edit, do you have any suggestions regarding this article, that might be considered to be a compromise? I have already made one edit, that I thought would be a good compromise, but you didn't like that edit. Do you have any better suggestions?" but fell victim to Caspian's usual tactic of being unwilling to discuss content but instead invest in complains such as this one.


 * This is yet another typical piece of highly manipulative and hysterical piece of wiki gaming full of the usual dishonesty, exaggerations, and non-sequiturs.


 * How long is it going to be before you admins wake up to what Caspian's MO is all about?
 * Why should they be allowed or encouraged to continue wasting other editors' and admins' time and energy poisoning the spirit of the community in this manner.


 * Noting the previous discussion related attempts by Caspian blue using their previous sockpuppet account Appletrees to discredit Sennen Goroshi, is it time to question yet again if Caspian blue is working as a tag team, or are more than one individual using the same account, to control topics?


 * How else could they afford the time to invest in such long and detailed admin complaints? --118.16.167.159 (talk) 06:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I see no evidence of disruption from Caspian blue, and your sockpuppetry allegations look like nothing more than a WP:CHU. I wonder how you managed to find ANI with your first edit. Any thoughts on that? Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello, Ice Cold Beer, if you stick to ANI longer, you will see this sock (Japanese Plala IP) of a banned user = 's grudge edits at least twice a month. The vandal even harassed admins, Rlevse and Fut.Perf so that he was indef.blocked along with his long-term sockpuppetry, disruption. Requests for checkuser/Case/Documentingabuse which was filed by me. Just for your information. I think he will be evading with another dynamic sock IP for at leat 2 hours from now, so please watch on AN or ANI. Thanks.--Caspian blue 06:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sigh. You'd think that these people would grow up eventually. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. the vandal had been evading from his block 15 times a day to vandalise ANI on September (usually 6 or 8 block evasion per one time), so I'm so sorry for your trouble. He asked Sennen goroshi for help, and Sennen sided the vandal until the banned user was reblocked. He may hop to other admins to "advocate" Caspian blue's MO. My reputation has been quite tainted by this banned user.--Caspian blue 06:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hold your head high. I'm not too familiar with this issue, but from what I've seen you're handling this nonsense well. I've s-protected ANI so the socks are done disrupting it for a couple of hours. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Because this is not a first time or even 5th times (maybe over 10th? with his sock IP), but could you look at this by ? Thanks.--Caspian blue 06:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but a new sock, also visited my talk page.--Caspian blue 07:10, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

[un-indent] Blocked...again. I wonder if this person will figure out that it takes me much less time to block him/her that it does for he/she to type a disruptive message on your talk page. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, if you see Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Documentingabuse, just half of two third of his block evasions are recorded there. His way of thinking is very unique, so he will remain as a monster. He strongly believes that he is wrongly indef.blocked for my RFCU report on him. (in fact he was almost indef.blocked for his massive sockpuppetry several times even before the report, but I wonder a day ever comes that he acknowledge his behaviors.--Caspian blue 07:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I just zapped another one, . Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. Wow... he created a sock account again......--Caspian blue 07:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, me again. This sock account currently harasses, b'crat, so could you block him? Thanks--Caspian blue 09:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked him again. The problem with IP hopping is that the account creation block doesn't get him. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 09:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. He may have more sock accounts given his massive sockpuppetry. Japanese time is currently early evening, so he may do such thing to talk pages of his own sock page, Rlevse, Future Perf at Sunrise, and you and other admins, or editors who had a dispute with me.....--Caspian blue 09:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

[un-indent] You're welcome. I'm going to bed now, so if any of this nonsense continues I won't be around to mop up for several hours, unfortunately. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 09:43, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but before you leave, could you delete sock's edit history to Rlevse's talk page and the sock talk page? Because the sock is outing not only Rlevse's personal information, but also his family's.....with very offensive languages. I believe this should be deleted ASAP.--Caspian blue 09:51, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry I didn't get to this last night. It looks like those edits have been oversighted. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage
Just a quick note, you spelled "administratorship" wrong. &mdash;C eran »^« 23:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Whoops, looks like I missed that second i. Thanks for the heads up. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 23:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Zahd
If I was out of line removing the God stuff from his user page, feel free to put it back. 0:) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. I certainly can't blame you too much for blanking it, especially with the horrific rhetoric that he had been using. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 04:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And someone else took it away again. I don't want to get into that squabble any more. As I've said about 10 times at ANI, it's not the words, it's the attitude behind it. There are plenty of user pages that say "I'm a Christian" or "I'm an Atheist" or "I believe in the Church of Baseball". It's not the words themselves that are the problem. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If there was a Church of Baseball I would join it, so long as they advocate for ditching interleague play and that silly rule where the All-Star Game determines home field advantage in the World Series (by the way, my non-answer means that I don't care anymore). Ice Cold Beer (talk) 05:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You forgot about abolition of the DH, and the Instant Replay for home run calls. Be aware that there are various sects of the C. of B. I lean toward the Reform wing, so I don't have a major league problem with those things. Although the All-Star Game thing was really pushing it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would bag the DH but I like the instant replay system they've put in place (as opposed to the NFL system, which is awful). It's quick and nearly impossible to screw up. Despite what may appear to be some old time-y ways, I'm actually a big proponent of reform (but that's another, longer discussion). I also wish the BBWAA would stop selecting awards based on outdated statistical analysis. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And I wish the Veterans Committee would elect ballplayers while they're still around to enjoy it (like they should do with Ron Santo) rather than waiting until they're dead 30 years (as with Joe Gordon). :( Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I wish the BBWAA would get it right so we don't have to rely on the VC to elect players like Ron Santo. I fear that Bert Blyleven will be in the same position as Santo in a few years. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 20:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

sockpuppeter: Lucyintheskywithdada
Hi, Ice Cold Beer. I come here for a stuff regarding the persistent sockpuppeter,. He appeared as and requested for checkuer. Could you take a look at this account? Thanks.--Caspian blue 19:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like a sock of Lucy to me. I would go ahead and add Show-me-the-evidence to the checkuser request at the top of the page. We'll see what happens from there, as I would be uncomfortable blocking before a checkuser releases his/her findings. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 19:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I added a comment to the CU case. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, I've indebted you a lot. The sockpuppeter's harassment campaign does not seem to be stopped forever.--Caspian blue 06:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you indefinitely semi-protect Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Documentingabuse‎ just like its main page because of the sock's vandalism? Also is vandaling ANI again.--Caspian blue 06:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Indefinite s-protection and block are done. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much....--Caspian blue 06:22, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Could you comment on his latest unblock request? Thanks,  Sandstein   07:28, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unblocked. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

thanks
As I stated on my talk page, I shall try to have a more pleasant attitude with my comments/summaries/etc - I will probably continue to edit some articles that attract controversy but there are no reasons why I should not be able to do that while maintaining a polite tone. Sennen goroshi (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks! Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Follow-up to your block on User 24.187.112.15
As soon as he was able, anonymous editor 24.187.112.15 thumbed his nose at your 24-hr block and re-posted the personal attack that got him blocked in the first place. He also deleted your notification of the block from his talk page. I hope you see fit to impose a very much longer block this time, indefinite would be best. Thanks. ► RATEL ◄ 06:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked for a week. It's the user's right to remove comments from his talk page. Also, IPs are rarely blocked indefinitely and there hasn't been nearly enough disruption from this IP to justify a long term block. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I kept reverting it back in; I thought block notices were to stay in place until the block is concluded.
 * And from the way the anon has been blanking it out repeatedly, I am willing to bet walnuts ot wikidollars that this young person is going to be sitting in the corner again very soon. :) - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  02:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I know that declined unblocks have to stay in place. I've never seen anything that says block notices must stay in place. That doesn't mean I'm not wrong, however. I'd agree that the IP probably will get put in the penalty box again in the near future, although I'd love to be wrong about that. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:47, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ice Cold, your block was ignored, again. He has started the same thing again: diff. I humbly request a permanent block. ► RATEL ◄ 03:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Re-blocked for a month. Again, we rarely block IPs indefinitely. This certainly doesn't merit such a block. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 05:29, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * He's back under a new IP: diff1 diff2. Sorry to bother you with this.... ► RATEL ◄ 00:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a never-ending saga. He's back again. Diffs:   Can you arrange a page protection on the Drudge Report page so that IPs cannot edit? On the Matt Drudge page too please. Thanks. ► RATEL ◄  01:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not really seeing enough disruption to justify protection. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 01:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Anonymous IPs are making the same change every single day, for weeks! Again today! diff Please, I am not paid to maintain that page, and it's taking time every day for me. At least cut the anonymous edits out. ► RATEL ◄ 05:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * And again, twice in one day. diff. What does it take before a block is applied? ► RATEL ◄ 15:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd take the problem to WP:ANI. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 22:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You don't have the authority to partially protect a page then? ► RATEL ◄ 03:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I do have the ability to protect pages. It's just that upon a quick glance I don't see enough IP disruption to justify page protection. I'm on a wikibreak right now and I don't feel like intensively digging through diffs. That's why I suggested a report to ANI. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

A question raised by the actions of Ray Johanson
After a spree of his/her nonconstructive edits ( [here] ) earlier today (12/27), and subsequent warnings, you issued a block on ray johanson. Considering the nature of the edits, I certainly have no problem with this, but it does strike me as odd that one of the warnings issued was for a comment (or was it comments?) left on my talk page. As a non informative page, it seems.. unjust somehow, especially because I was not the one to revert and warn the user(This is MY talk page, after all). Really, I would not have warned them, or reverted their comment, I would just explain my actions in a professional, mature manner, and leave the immature and somewhat abusive message there as a record of sorts. (Yeah, I know it's in the history page, anyhow.) It's not like my talk page is frequented by lots of people (I hope..) In any case, is there any specific wikipedia policy(Or maybe just strong precedents) about user talk pages? OR does this have more to do with Huggle checking user talk page edits, as well as edits to actual articles? I'm kind of clueless.. (But it was kind of neat to see my talk page on Huggle..) Also, I just received this warning from Vianello(At the bottom of my talk page - I don't know how to link directly to the comment yet.)... Any clue what's going on here? I mean, other than that someone is trying to make me look bad, somehow? (Well, having an entirely fictitious and ambiguous user page is kind of asking for it)Is this a good reason to fuel more baseless paranoia, causing my slow degradation into a homeless alcoholic? Or should I just have a Guinness, laugh, and forget about it?

In any case, I applaud your actions against the Vandals. It's the Admins who do the blocking that make the warning and reverting worth it. Huzzah! Huzzah! All hail Ice Cold Beer.

𝕭𝖗𝔦𝔞𝔫𝕶𝔫𝔢𝔷 talk 23:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Mmm, Guinness. A beer so thick you can almost chew on it. In all seriousness, it is your talk page so you can choose to restore the comments made by the now-blocked user. I would advise against that, however. It's better just to revert and ignore vandals/trolls (see WP:RBI). The warning left on your talk page was letting you know that a user created his user page announcing that he/she is a sock account of yours (falsely, obviously). After the user page was blanked, a similarly named user came along and restored the bogus claim. I will be deleting that page and blocking both accounts. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. I was gonna give you a RickK Barnstar... But I see you just got one. Maybe next month - I can see from your contribs that you're plenty deserving. I'm mighty surprised that anyone bothered - reading my userpage, creating the accounts, et cetera. Those vandals.. just have too much time on their hands. But without them, how bored would I be? Just out of sheer curiosity, how much time do you(Or should one) spend on your administrative responsibilities? (I'd consider doing an RfA, but.. I work alot, suffer from a general lack of self-confidence, and get enough gratification out of what I can do with Huggle.. The only benefit I'd see to the community as a whole is that someone else wouldn't have to do as much work. Besides, I like to take 'time off' from editing to read history)

𝕭𝖗𝔦𝔞𝔫𝕶𝔫𝔢𝔷 talk 01:45, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It's sort of difficult to calculate how much time I spend doing administrative stuff because my usual routine is to edit with a ballgame on in the background, and I'll edit during a commercial break or at a point where I am disinterested in the game. I'd say, on average, I spend about 10-15 hours per week doing my admin work. It's difficult to say how often one ought to do admin work. I guess the best answer is to do as much as one enjoys doing it. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Camp Nebagamon Article
Earlier this month, you deleted an article on Camp Nebagamon for blatant advertising. While I don't remember the original article exactly, you probably had grounds for this. However, I feel that the organization is worthy of a Wikipedia page. As an alumni, I feel qualified to rewrite it. Could you please copy the text of the article you deleted into my user space so I could have that to go off of? I am not a Wikipedia regular, so I hope I followed all of the protocol correctly... Thanks.TheYellowMole (talk) 06:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Before I userfy the article I need two things from you. First, you need to convince me that as an alum of the camp that you do not have a conflict of interest. Second, do you have a reliable source discussing the camp? Ice Cold Beer (talk) 08:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as a conflict of interest goes, I am operating under the knowledge that any article I post will most likely be scrutinized by you, and removed if it is not encyclopedic. Therefore, it lies in both my best interest, and the camp's best interest, to write an encyclopedic article rather than have to article at all. Secondly, I plan to gather information from a number of sources. From the camp website, although not technically unbiased, I can draw information that cannot possibly be spun (size of camp, activities offered, etc.) Articles on Lake Nebagamon, WI, the site of the camp, discuss it. Also, biographies of the camp's founder, Max "Muggs" Lorber, exist and provide details about the origins of the camp. If you have any doubts, I suggest that you userfy it and let me pass my attempt through you before I recreate the article. Thanks again. TheYellowMole (talk) 02:49, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * See User:TheYellowMole/Camp Nebagamon. Make sure that when the article is ready you move it into article space (do not cut and paste). Ice Cold Beer (talk) 03:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Spotfixer block
Ice Cold Beer, Your recent unilateral ban of Spotfixer was a poor use of administrative rights to resolve a conflict. A brief search clearly shows incivility and violations of WP:EQ on both sides. The block antagonized one editor, implicitly supported the bad behavior of the other editor, and escalated the conflict further. Administrators have a responsibility to be neutral and reserved. Per WP:blocking, you should not block parties involved in conflict disputes, nor angry parties to "cool them off." Blocking for disruption is appropriate only in cases of persistent gross incivility. Please keep in mind that administrator tools come with a responsibility to be reserved and work to improve the wikipedia project. --Thesoxlost (talk) 16:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I wasn't trying to "resolve a conflict". Spotfixer was acting in an uncivil manner toward several users. I don't need a lecture on how to use the tools. Additionally, I took a brief look at Schrandit's contributions and didn't see anything actionable. I asked Spotfixer to provide diffs of poor behavior by Schrandit, and he didn't do it. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:incivility: "In the event of rudeness or incivility on the part of another editor, it is usually appropriate to discuss the offending words with that editor, and to request that editor to change that specific wording. Some care is necessary, however, so as not to further inflame the situation. It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment."


 * You removed Spotfixer's without even specifying precisely what it was that was offensive, nor asking him to change them or apologize. You did not give him the opportunity to change his wording, as per the WP guidelines. Further, you removed his comments, which should only be used in extreme cases, as per the guidelines.  Then you blocked him for reverting it, which clearly violates the WP:blocking standard from "persistent gross incivility."


 * The blocking policy is set up for four purposes. Your behavior bent or broke numerous guidelines.  The guidelines state: "Blocks are intended to reduce the likelihood of future problems, by either removing, or encouraging change in, a source of disruption. They are not intended for use in retaliation, as punishment, or where there is no current conduct issue which is of concern." There were better ways of achieving these goals.


 * Please don't be defensive; this is not a personal attack. It is an independent evaluation of your use of admin rights, and is meant to be constructive.  Please honestly consider the criticism and move on.  Thanks, --Thesoxlost (talk) 20:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I've read WP:CIVIL. I'm aware of its contents. Another editor had already informed Spotfixer of the problem with his post to the talk page and invited him to re-add the post with the personal attack removed, which Spotfixer declined to do. The block was designed to prevent Spotfixer from further disrupting the project with his/her incivility. I have no problem with you challenging my administrative actions (such challenges are good for the project, of course); it's just that I disagree with your criticism and I am defending myself against incorrect assumptions made about the intent of Spotfixer's block. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

FYI: User_talk:Schrandit "I'm trying not to be a jerk as I write this but you've got me pretty well convinced that you are a bigot, and not a terribly bright one... -Schrandit" "Check the page again, it does not. You are a bit a vindictive jerk and would get me blocked if you could... - Schrandit" --Thesoxlost (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've seen those. I'm not willing to take any action based on those quotes because Schrandit was responding to some pretty nasty comments and because there's only two, and both are directed at one editor (instead of multiple editors). Ice Cold Beer (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Spotfixer has been indef'd which doesn't exactly help your thesis on this issue. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Re:"Deletion of award/warning" on WP:ANI
One word: Plaxico! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * (maybe a bit NSFW) Ice Cold Beer (talk) 04:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Beautiful. :) P.S. Good advice. Work PC sound is always OFF. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Recall
Just so you know, I think you handled User:Spotfixer really badly. It makes people angry to be blocked, particularly when it's for nothing much, and doubly so when it's punitive, not preventive. I hate the way this project has become, like the Stanford Experiment for shutins. You were also rude to User:Thesoxlost, whose analysis of your behaviour was pretty accurate imo. I don't know how you get recalled, but if I had it in my power, I'd remove your bit. There are tons of ways of handling an editor like User:Spotfixer if you AGF in the first place. Why not actually make Wikipedia a better place this one time by unblocking him and trying one of them? Grace Note (talk) 08:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Recall protocol is linked at the top of the page. I've stated this before, and perhaps you've missed it, but the block was to prevent further civility by the user in question. I can't really unblock her if I wanted to (which I don't) as she was blocked by another user and there is a current discussion regarding a block extension. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 08:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I also agree that your attitudes and use of your admin abilities have not been in the best interest of the project. The fact that several editors have demonstrated the fact that you have not been inline with wiki policy and that you don't acknowledge this is troubling.  RTRimmel (talk) 17:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is the link User:Ice_Cold_Beer/Recall —Preceding unsigned comment added by RTRimmel (talk • contribs) 17:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, it turns out that Spotfixer has been indef'd for socking and general poor behavior. Man, do I look stupid! Thanks for your insight, folks! Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It's amazing
- surprisingly, I used an identical edit summary when correcting the exact same mistake ("Bush was the..."), but in the Hebrew Wikipedia instead. HaGamal 17:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I suspect that people are so excited that his presidency is over that they forgot to use the correct verb tense! Ice Cold Beer (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)