User talk:InShaneee/Archive/Oct06

Why did you blank my user page?
Why did you blank my user page?

Where are the "personal attacks"?

Where is the "rant"?

I keep important information on my user page, and your actions are against policy. Please revert. Deuterium 02:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

You didn't answer any of my questions.

Anyway I've changed my page so it doesn't even mention any users my name. How could it possibly be a personal attack if no one is named?

Also, you didn't need to blank the entire page. That is pure vandalism. Deuterium 02:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi - no problem with your actions - I just give lots more warnings. I note your user page does not make it clear you are an admin though - I would have left you to it otherwise.--Arktos talk 02:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Many of us don't like others editing our user pages. I didn't of course edit yours - just made the suggestion :-)  Arktosifying is obviously a great addition to the English language! Regards --Arktos talk 07:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

There's a history of this with Inshanee. See [] Sarastro777 05:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

your RV in Talk:Natasha Demkina
You recently reverted another editor's comments in Talk:Natasha Demkina. Was this a mistake? (You can reply here.) KarlBunker 19:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No, that was intentional. The user's comment was a wide personal attack coupled with a vast copy/paste of text. If he has something to say, he can find a civil way to do it. --InShaneee 19:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

No InShaneee, it was NOT a personal attack. You are abusing your administrative authority by censoring comments on talk pages that do NOT violate Wiki rules. If you continue, I will file a complaint. Askolnick 20:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I saw no personal attack; is it your contention that characterizing Pravda RU as "sleazy" is a "personal attack"? I submit that a journal is not a "person" and the characterization is reasonably valid and supported by the evidence that the editor provided. My eyes are a little bleary right now, so perhaps I missed some actual personal attack in there. If not, and if you can't give a better argument for that RV, I'll be replacing the comment you removed. KarlBunker 20:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It is NOT harrassing text. InShaneee, you're clearly abusing your power here. You were appointed an administrator - NOT a censor. You are not only ignoring my protest, you're also ignoring the protests of another editor and an administrator. Your escallating campaign of harrassment has left me no choice. I have filed a complaint.Askolnick 20:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Another two cents- I don't see personal attacks, I see harshly worded criticism of Pravda RU as a source. Friday (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, I did not threaten you. The only one who is threatening people is you. Virtually every communication I've received from you has been a threat. I have no power with which to threaten anyone. You need to be more concerned about what other Wiki administrators can do. They have the power to enforce Wiki rules and standards -- which you are clearly violating when you use your administrator authority to intimidate editors and stiffle debate. Askolnick 22:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * InShaneee, instead of responding to my complaint on WP:AN/I -- or to any of the editors and administrators who have agreed your actions were unjustified -- you continue to harrass and threaten me for any criticism of pro-paranormal editors. And here you turn a blind eye to Keith Tyler's personal attack, but threaten to block me for responding to HIS attack! Not only are Wiki administrators not allowed to use their blocking powers to censor content they don't like - as you blatantly did - they are not allowed to discriminate and use their power to protect editors on the side of an editing dispute they support. Repeatedly, you have stood by and watched Tyler and Dreadlocke post one personal attack after another, while using your administrative authority to threaten me. Such conduct is an abuse of the authority giving to you by the Wiki community. This latest threat doesn't leave me wuth any real options. Unless you can show where you ever threatened to block Keith Tyler, Dreadlocke, and Andrew Homer for their personal attacks, I will begin the mutually unpleasant process of filing a RfC over this and your previous abuse of administrative authority. Your choice. Askolnick 23:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * InShaneee, I apologize for my mistake. I didn't see the "Keith, the same goes to you" comment at the end of your warning. So I struck out my entire comment above and apologize. Askolnick 01:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Askolnick
User Askolnick is harrassing me endlessly on the CSICOP talk page. When I cite sources he refuses to check them and will simply insist I made them up. If I disagree with him he threatens me with warnings about disruptive behaviour. I openly accept that I have not responded well to this, but now the constant posts on my talk page threatening me with action if I don't submit to his bully-boy tactics have crossed what I believe to be an acceptable boundary.Davkal 01:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Err... sorry to jump in, Inshaneee, but I've been trying to figger what's going on on the CSICOP talk page — it's hard to do that from zero — and I happened to notice this complaint. Davkal, what "constant posts" on your talk page are those? Askolnick has posted twice on your page today. I have to go back to... hmmm....no, going back doesn't seem to help. Askolnick has actually posted twice, ever, on your talkpage. (You have posted four times on his in the past 20 minutes.) Bishonen | talk 01:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC).

I posted my complaint on his page and made a few changes to it. He has posted twice only, but the point is that the abuse and threats have shifted from the CSICOP page to my talk page. These threats of administrator action have been placed twice in one day since I failed to simply submit to his bully-boy tactics. If you really want to help, Bishonen, then you would do well to read things prior to simply counting things up. Look at the number of times Askolnick has accused of making up my own defintion of ad hominem, and look at how many times he has said this since I pointed out that my definition was 100% accurate according to hundreds of websites dealing with logic (some links were provided). His most recents threats to report me for disruptive behaviour concerned my providing links to a number of articles written by someone he said hadn't written any articles. As I said, Bishonen, whichever side of the fence you sit on re this particluar debate, if you really want to help then you should examine carefully the tactics that Askolnick has employed and condemn them - I don't care if you condemn me as well (I am no angel) but Askolnick has crossed several boundaries that simply should not be crossed. Davkal 01:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

ND RfC
Hey Shane, I finally put up an RfC for the Natasha Demkina dispute. Let me know if it looks ok, especially my somewhat long statement. The actual request is here: Biographies RfC Thanks! Dreadlocke ☥  01:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Re Scientology
Hi I made some edits to the Silent Birth section because it was slanted against Scientology and Hubbard in an inappropiate manner. ex. Mentioning that corn syrup was not available to Romans without mentioning that honey was. ex. Using the loaded term concoction in relation to the Barley Formula. ex. Making the unsubstantiated claim that Hubbard had no qualifications to give advice on children. I have children and that gives me some qualification. Hubbard was self-educated in the field of nutrition. ex. Stating that most medical experts discount anything without substantiating that claim is just silly. I could go on. I am an ex-Scientologist and though I am not great supporter of the CoS, I recognize a slant when I see one. I offered balance in the article. I suspect that you are a Scientology critic but please do not let your personal feelings color your responsibilities as an administrator.

Congrats
We're neck-and-neck for most edits on Shadow the Hedgehog. :)  69.145.123.171 Hello!  Friday, August 25, 2006, 03:37 ( UTC )

Request for input at admins' notice board
Greetings. I suspect we could use a new voice on an ongoing issue with user conduct. Three editors have expressed themselves about User:Kmaguir1 at the admins' noticeboard, here. Thanks for any input you may wish to provide,--Anthony Krupp 15:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

From justanother
Hi, InShaneee.

I see that you are arbitrarily reverting my good-faith edit in Scientology. Please note that I was restoring a previous description, i.e. many vs some, that another user changed without adequate justification per the referenced sources.

Please take the trouble to read the talk page before arbitrarily changing something. I have been editing on this article for over one week and believe that I have earned a certain amount of respect. It ain't easy. It is much easier to revert than to contribute in this article, that is for sure.

I will change it back one more time - if you have something to contribute please discuss it under Scholars on the talk page.

Thank you --Justanother 22:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"Pushing it"
Unclear what you think is pushing it, and which rules are being violated. I would say given our history, you are not very objective. In the future if you think I am "violating" some rule .. please just directly file a complaint on ANI or the appropriate area rather than bothering me with your undesired opinions. Thank you. Sarastro777 05:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Arpad vs. Juro
Since you decided to block User:Juro for his disruptive behavior, I would like to kindly ask you also to warn User:Árpád to refrain from his disruptive behavior. In his |last comment, he conspicuously abused statistical data in order to manipulate readers. The initial number of "Hungarian" schools in Slovakia was a result of the preceding Magyarization of predominantly Slovak regions. These schools did not primarily serve the Hungarian community, but they represented a means of oppression on Slovaks in the Kingdom of Hungary. In addition, Arpad denied any significant cultural history of the Slovaks and Slovakia. That is factually wrong and quite offensive (yet somewhat unsurprising in the light of his previous comments ). He seems to enjoy offending non-Hungarian nationalities living in Europe (see for example ). Maybe I am wrong, but I would call |this and |this disruptive behavior. What do you think? Arpad systematically pushes his extremist POV (Hungarian revisionism that is the attempts to change the post-Trianon borders of Hungary), which is by the way prohibited by the international law (the peace treaty between the Allies and Hungary after WWII). Perhaps it does not mean anything to you, but Arpad's refined attacks are disruptive for many Central European users. Since you are now involved in the ongoing dispute over very sensitive issues in the region, I wonder if you can deal with Arpad in the same way as you have dealt with Juro. Cheers. Tankred 01:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Futuristic Sex Robotz on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Futuristic Sex Robotz. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Mystere 05:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

You're really asking for an RfC
InShaneee, because of my own mistake in which I wrongly accused you of only threatening me with a block, I decided to cut you some slack and not procede with the RfC against your repeated harassment and abuse of your administrative authority. I hoped all the comments you received telling your your actions were way out of line would bring you back into the fold of judicious administrators. Unfortunately, your latest act of censorship shows that that hope was misspent. You continue to claim the right to censor information on talk pages that you do not like. You have NO such right. I don't care that you don't like sarcasm. You don't have to like it. That's your right. But you don't have the right to remove anyone's comments which you think are sarcastic and you don't have the right to remove anyone's comments that you decide are not "respectful" enough, as you did several days ago. No one appointed you the Wiki Proper Respect Inspector, nor its Official Sarcasm Catcher. You were appointed as an administrator and as such you should be working to reduce conflict and disruption, not increasing it. You appear hell-bent on creating more rather than fewer disputes. You're leaving me no option but to resume the process of filing an RfC. Askolnick 18:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

InShaneee, I had hoped you would get the message that other editors and administrators tried to tell you in their comments on my WP:AN/I complaint. You are not allowed to censor comments on talk pages that you consider "disrespectful" or "sarcastic" or otherwise not meeting your standards of being "nice." You simply have no right to do that. It is disruptive. It causes the very problem that you claim is your motivation for making those threats and deleting comments. And you are not allowed to threaten to block editors for making comments you don't like. Did you NOT read what other editors and administrators told you? It's clear you felt no need to reply either to them or to me, but did you even read what they and I said? I'm sorry the informal complaint didn't seem to help you understand why this conduct is unacceptable. Do you really not understand that this behavior, if not stopped, may lead to your being censured or even cause the loss of your administrator status? With power comes responsibility, but the use of your administrator authority to bully and intimidate other editors and to remove comments you don't like from talk pages is irresponsible use of that authority. Unless you agree to stop this disruptive conduct, I am going to file an RfC requesting that you be censured and stripped of your administrator position. I had hoped I could reason with you. If you're ready to reason, I'll put the RfC on hold. Askolnick 04:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Also InShaneee, it probably would be helpful for you to read this paragraph from WP:NPA. It shows that your recent interpretations of what is and is not allowable speech on Wikipedia is not supported by WP:NPA.
 * Personal attacks do not include civil language used to describe an editor's actions, and when made without involving their personal character, should not be construed as personal attacks. Stating "Your statement is a personal attack..." is not itself a personal attack — it is a statement regarding the actions of the user, not a statement about the user. There is a difference between "You are a troll" and "You are acting like a troll", but "You seem to be making statements just to provoke people" is even better, as it means the same without descending to name-calling. Similarly, a comment such as "responding to accusation of bad faith by user X" in an edit summary or on a talk page is not a personal attack against user X. Askolnick 04:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Zgcard.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Zgcard.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 16:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Civility
Well, what about JzG? He may be acting civil, but that doesn't mean he's not being a terrible Wikipedian. He has constantly been undermining the intelligence and worthiness of CVG gamers, and has been subtly "treating them like idiots". Telling them that a consensus between gamers doesn't count. The only reason I could apply to this is that he's claiming that gamer Wikipedians have a hive mindset. That they aren't capable of accepting that anything could be more notable than games, and I'm sick of him subtly saying "CVG wikipedians are stupid". There are so many people who feel this way, and I wish they would keep their stupid, ignorant opinions to themselves. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I was not explaining. I was asking "why was JzG never given any such warning?" and it turned into a rant. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Uninsulting? Just because he doesn't swear or call names does not mean he's not being insulting. What do you call this? No better than what I've been doing. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I hardly consider that a valid opinion. He informed me that a CVG editor has an opinion that is not in favor of CVG articles, as if that's supposed to surprise me, as if CVG editors act in the interests of CVG articles. Just because he masks it like he has doesn't change what he meant. What is the point of telling me that CVG editors can have different opinions? If he hadn't already belittled CVG editors before, I wouldn't have made the assumption. But because he did, I find it hard to believe that he suddenly stopped belittling them. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You know, this comment does sound distinctly paranoid. It also seems somewhat hypocritical, since the root of the problem was your refusal to accept that a long-standing usage, which exists in dictionaries due to its widespread currency, might justifiably have at least an equal claim to notability as that of a character in a video game.  Of course you could have swayed the argument by posting some credible evidence of the video game usage being more widespread, in response to the multilpe evidenc eposted for currency of the real-world term, but you chose not to do so.  Instead you restricted yourself to proof by assertion.  The end result is that bowser is a disambiguation page, which is a great result for the encyclopaedia as nobody is likely to miss out on the meaning they were looking for; it even links to the stagename from which the Nintendo character gets its name, which is a bonus.  I really can't see a downside here.  Guy 08:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Last bit
Full protection on User talk:Jorge Rodriguesss; thanks lots. ~ PseudoSudo 21:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Uwe Boll
Would it be possible to have a reason why you reverted the edits by 85.50.99.97 on Uwe Boll ? 129.10.110.42 21:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

My Question
An answer to my question would be nice. Why was I blocked but not the other offending party? Torturous Devastating Cudgel 16:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

My Talk Page
It's my own damned Talk Page page, and I'll disenvowel whomever I damned well please. If you don't understand what's going on, don't criticize it. --Calton | Talk 15:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Try reading the link above -- and since you responded so quickly, it's clear you didn't. Try remembering the point of not altering comments. Read the link again. Notice the difference? --Calton | Talk 15:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. You're trying to cleverly insult him. Don't do it again. Your mind-reading skills are falling short. I do it because it leaves the bogus comments without my being forced to read them -- which is certainly more honest than deleting them outright, which is what he does. Any suggestion otherwise is projection on your part. --Calton | Talk 16:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The next time you display such incivility, regardless of what any other user may or may not being doing, you're going to get a time out. What part of I do it because it leaves the bogus comments without my being forced to read them did you miss? What part of that is reliant upon or rationalized by the clause that follows? I believe deleting comments from one's Talk Pages is dishonest and I don't do it, no matter how stupid or insulting they are, but I'll be damned if I'll be forced to read them every time I have to go to my own talk page. Calling it "incivility" is flatly wrong, no matter how you handwave about it. --Calton | Talk 16:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comment
Ok, I actually see what you're talking about. But it's hard to deal with somebody putting down every single idea he reads. Check that page up, every single project is put down by that nobody*. And by "nobody"* I mean anybody. I just realized he is just a regular editor like me, but he acts like he calls the shots contributing to nothig but criticism (and I don't mean the good healthy kind).

In another article I relyed in my memory because I felt sure and put wrong some missing data, I corrected it myself as soon as somebody commented it. And he tells me "please don't rely on your memeory". Firstly, it wasn't that big a deal, seconly I research a lot, thirdly I haven't seen him contributing with info yet, and finally I don't know about him but I'm not a machine. He is such a jerk. I don't like what I did or my tone right now, that's why I haven't been writting a lot latelly, but I understand howcome I had sch moment of weakness.

I dont get him, what's his goal? I don't think he'll be happy until wikipedia is a blanc page with absolutely no info at all. Who the hell is he to judge me? I promess to behave, you can keep an aye on me, but tell him to please be more consederate to people. For what's worth, I'm sorry.--The Judge 20:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I give up, I can't handle that guy. I'll just ignore him.--The Judge 21:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

This is the kind of attacks Chris does, "I'm really trying to understand your writing. No offnse intended, but is English your second language?--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 12:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC) "...like the memory thing, technically he is right, but he is mean. I wrote the English thing at the top of my page. Of course he intends the ofense.--The Judge 22:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

User Lutherian
How long do we have to tolerate Lutherian and his disurbances?
 * ,,

Ass wipe? Gay devil worshippers? Provocative racist? --Eupator 21:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Fine, that covers the "provocative racist", what about the other two?--Eupator 03:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a blanket warning. He's been warned. --InShaneee 14:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Flying Spaghetti Monster
Please do not remove individual posts, the anon is a newbie, don't bite the newbies.Hypnosadist 21:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Cease editing my comments on the talk page.Hypnosadist 22:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Civility: stop editing other peoples post for MINOR reasons. There are real civility issues out there like


 * I am keeping this bit of filth for evidence and show.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FHis_excellency%2FEvidence&diff=69701704&oldid=69699623


 * In my own defense: A man has a right to his opinion. I do feel Timothy Usher is a bigot. I do feel that Jews are screwing up the planet (though admittedly Muslims, by far, surpass the Jews in their capacity to destroy things). Look at history. Only recently has it become the norm to like Jews. That only came about after certain countries (eg America) adopted them as the collective dame-in-distress needing shelter and protection. Sort of the precursor to the chihuahua. Before then, Jews were hated in Europe and America alike..And everywhere else. We all know Jews were once banished from most culturally superior European countries. The only reason why Poland took them in was that they had loads of money. Probably the same reason why Washington panders to the now. Point is, alot of people dislike Jews. I'm entitled to, so long as I don't demonstrate that dislike on articles dealing with the topic of Jews. We don't penalize people for not liking things, do we? His Excellency... 00:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

So how about dealing with things like that. PS this user is not perminently banned!Hypnosadist 22:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't Edit peoples posts! Admin privilages do not give you cart-blanche. Deleting an anon editors posts on talk without giving a reason is not going to make them get a login is it. Don't bite the newbies!Hypnosadist 22:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Editing someones reply even off topic is something i have never seen especially as such talks are common (too common you're right) but as i say why not start with people who do it alot! I gave you info on an editor that does that and you say a make a personal attack? Lots of people have told him about it and its the nature of the content thats the problem. Rants and Conspiracy theories, do something about it or don't, don't matter to me. And in the part of the world i'm from the phrasing "If you cannot act civil, YOU will be dealt with accordingly, like it or not" indicates a threat, because of good faith i don't take it that way.Hypnosadist 22:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You have not said how my edit is a personal attack, it is a comment on a users negative editing. It was just an idea for you if you are bothered about chatting on a talk page, if not thats ok. But why is the FSM page specially picked out for this kind of editing? Try Talk:2006 transatlantic aircraft plot insted! Lots of chat for you to edit!Hypnosadist 22:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply
Thanks! :) &mdash; Khoikhoi  02:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi
Would you please take a look at these ,. Thanks.Heja Helweda 05:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually the above user does not have access to the unabridged Merriam Webster's dictionary. So she deleted words that she did not find in the non-unabridged version.  Despite the hardwork that has gone in finding these words.  Also some of her edits are very unscholarly and she should not delete from enteries which she did not do enough research on and instead concentrate on enteries where she has put up unreliable material.  --alidoostzadeh 05:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * For example she deleted this term: ;Zerda: Etymology: Arabic zerdaw, probably of Persian origin. Fennec. .. whereas I have given full reference which is available for any subscriber to merriam-websters unabridged dictionary. But she deleted it with no valid reason: .  Deleting materials that are soundly references is unacceptable.  Some other words where also deleted although they were soundly referenced.  This is actually vandalism of content as proper sources that are reliable (Merriam-Websters dictionary) were given.  Also my reference to Assyrian/Armenian genocide is that in the article she edits, she does not mention them for political reasons, although I am not interested in her articles.  But I do consider removing primary sources like Merriam-Websters unabridged dictionary (which needs subscription) as vandalism. --alidoostzadeh 06:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

hey Shane
please check your e-mail. thank you!  ITAQALLAH  14:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Warning
This is your final warning to stop Wikistalking me. Further action will brought to the arbitration comittee.

Sarastro777 05:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

DND Campaign
You can go ahead and boot my articles. I had already copied my articles before I even bothered to protest, foreseeing the inevitable.Broken Piece 17:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

User Lutherian
Naturally, I'm tolerant of others' opposing views and always assume good faith, but how much more do we have to put up with comments like these, ? --MarshallBagramyan 18:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Ruzgar
I do not see any racist slurs and etc at this diff. The page protection is unwarranted in my opinion (strictly based on that diff, didnt look too deep). He is also complaining about his block.

I'll translate the discussion on that diff for you (I will overly simplify it too). Basicaly Ruzgar's inclusion of the POV image was a reaction to the existance of similar images on Armenian Genocide. He was violating WP:POINT in that sense.

Regarding the incident: While I agree that Kurdistan Workers Party article should not have such pov images, I further feel same standard should be applied to Armenian Genocide and other similar articles.

-- Cat out 23:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The fact is, not only did the user continuously and knowingly disrupted that article with that image, and even after being blocked, encouraged others to continue in his stead. That's what I consider trolling. --InShaneee 17:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Even so, his ISP has a semi-dynamic ip so the block is causing collateral damage. I am not compaining about the existance of the block, I am complaining about the length of the block. I also feel that the protection of the talk page is unnecesary. After all, he can simply IRC/email for that, this only prevents me from talking to him.
 * I feel the user is frustrated with his inability to work on Armenian Genocide article (a frustration I share) and that this WP:POINT violation is steming from that. I feel what he seeks is right (removal of pov images from Armenian Genocide article), just that his method is completely wrong (attempt to force pov images to Kurdistan Workers Party article).
 * -- Cat out 22:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

My block just expired can you unlock my talk page. Ruzgar 17:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Stargate SG-1
In your edit summary you said "This has been discussed elsewhere to this conclusion." Could you provide a link to this discussion? The only discussion I know of is on the talk page, and if any concensus was reached, it was that the main campaign is noteworthy. --Tango 19:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Please see the straw poll on Talk:Stargate SG-1 about the fan campaign and give your opinion there. Thanks! --Tango 10:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Exile and the Kingdom (Lyrics)
You speedily deleted this article (and rightfully so), but there's currently an AFD for it that needs to be closed. Thanks! -- Merope Talk 19:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage
Thank you for reverting vandalism on my userpage. The user B&W Anime Fan has been cited before for vandalism, and was twice blocked previously for vandalizing Wikipedia (specifically my userpage :P) I don't know why he continued his vandalism, especially because since he apologized to me for it after his block period expired. Perhaps he has lapsed into his old habits. Anyways, thanks once more for your sharp eyes! =) –-  kungming·  2 | (Talk ·Contact) 00:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wikiproject Paranormal
I'd be happy to help you, but you'll need to be a bit more specific about what you want me to do. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks pretty good for a regular template; you might want to shorten the initial text a bit, though, since people have been complaining about crowded talk pages.
 * As far as the other stuff, I can help you add that if you want. If you'd like to experiment on your own, though, here is some annotated code from WPMILHIST for the things you need:


 * The end of the banner layout, closing off the tables and show/hide divs.


 * The second part of the assessment code, which produces the actual categories for bot-parsing. Note that the "Stub" rating includes support for auto-tagging by bot (the whole #if block in that rating); if you're not planning to use bots for rating, you probably don't need this.


 * Hopefully this will be somehow useful; if you have any other questions or requests, please don't hesitate to ask! Kirill Lokshin 20:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll take a look at it. As far as the project-side implementation, you might want to take a look at WP:PROJGUIDE (which isn't complete yet, but should still be useful); but feel free to borrow chunks of WP:MILHIST infrastructure if you need. :-) Kirill Lokshin 21:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I fixed a few stray links and the show/hide code, but everything else seems to work. Is there some reason you didn't include the first part of the assessment code, which actually shows the assessment in the banner, as well as the old peer review/collaboration categories?


 * As a side note, you may want to move the project page to WikiProject Paranormal (which is the standard capitalization convention for WikiProjects) before you gather too many subpages. Kirill Lokshin 22:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, done. I've created an example here that shows what the template looks like with some parameters set. Kirill Lokshin 22:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Only the first table (the current counts) is bot-generated; the monthly statistics have to be computed by hand. It's just a bit of time with a calculator once a month, though, so I think it's doable. Kirill Lokshin 00:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Once the bot picks up the assessment categories, it should create the page automatically. Make sure that you put Category:Paranormal articles by quality in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments, though, or the bot won't find it. Kirill Lokshin 22:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the kind words! :-) Kirill Lokshin 23:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks from Blainetologist
Hello, please see this diff - User:Blainetologist has continued attacking me despite my previous warning to him. Khorshid 15:08, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Human Potential Movement
I've been wondering why you consider the Human Potential Movement to be an example of the paranormal (since you rated it for the Paranormal Project I assume you consider it to be part of the paranormal). I find several of its assemptions and claims to be preposterous, but I don't think anyone's invoking paranormal phenomena. But perhaps you can enlighten me. John FitzGerald 19:37, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply. I'd say parapsychology plays little if any part in the human potential movement. The most influential writers in the field all seem devoted to the idea that realizing one's potential is an entirely normal affair. I beleive that's one of the reasons for its popularity. John FitzGerald 22:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I took the tag off. I see the source of the confusion now. As a result of this discussion I'm now interested in your Paranormal project. You seem to have some productive debate going on on those pages. I may be checking back later. John FitzGerald 16:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Cauld Lad stub
Hi Shane. I'm intrigued as to why you have categorised Cauld Lad of Hylton as a stub? It lacks a few headings, and an illustration, but apart from copying the story vebatim from a published source, there is probably very little more that could be said on the subject! I was responsible for expanding it to its present length, about a year ago. What more do you think should be added? SiGarb | Talk 22:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern
Thanks for your concern, but pointing out someone's biases and inappropriate conduct is not incivil. I see that he's lied about me up above. As for your comment on edit wars, I already have a policy that I do not edit the content of Ahmadinejad's page myself, becuase Khorshid and his fellows started an edit war themselves the last time I did that. Blainetologist 15:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your threat to me: please stop deliberately misconstruing policy. I have studied it quite thoroughly after earlier disagreements I have had.

I consider your threats to me to be incivil behavior. Blainetologist 17:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!
And thanks for the heads up about the banner, I had assumed that it need the whole syntax to work correctly. Should I go back over the other articles I marked up and correct them?--Tascio 18:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Blainetologist
Blainetologist just did the same thing to me he's been doing to you: after he unfairly called Antaeus Feldspar a stalker, I left a "no personal attacks" warning on Blainetologist's talk page. He just responded and claimed I have "threatened" him by doing so, and somehow thinks I was "uncivil" by calling him on his own uncivil behavior. Clearly, this editor is just trying to be disruptive. Can something be done? wikipediatrix 19:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I called Antaeus Feldspar a stalker because he hunted down ALL edits I made in a period and removed them without even bothering to read them, and falsely claimed I inserted unsourced material. That is stalking behavior. Blainetologist 20:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Unless you're psychic, there is no way you can claim to know that he didn't read them. I agree with his reversion of your edits and would have done the same thing myself had I seen them at the time. wikipediatrix 23:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

regarding Blainetologist
InShaneee, hi. I wonder if you could let me know where Blainetologist "vowed to continue incivility and edit warring", as you indicated here. I'm just beginning to look into the situation, at Blainetologist's request, and I'd appreciate any clarification you can provide. Thanks in advance. -GTBacchus(talk) 22:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

NPA and vandalism
Is this kind of stalking behaviour something that wikipedia permits? 

And the list goes on, from a different member of my fan club. I should post this on the AN too. Miskin 23:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Why you Block me? I did say word and you gonna block me, I should report you to the creater of this whole Internet Site. Sense I'm a nice guy I'm not gonna do that! Please unblock me.-Gamer322 8:40, 28 September 2006

O.K. How you do that cause I'm new here I stared probably The 1 or 2nd week of June of 2006-Gamer322

Thanks you a great friend or pal whatever you thank I am. Let me ask you a question Can I still edit the page and then go to the disscussion page?Gamer322

Stop editing other peoples comments on FSM talk
Stop editing other peoples comments on FSM talk this post was discusing with me if FSM is just a parody religion. Given that there is this notice on the top of the page which says "From time to time, editors argue that FSM is a real religion. This has been suggested several times, and consensus has always been to call FSM a parody. If you disagree, please read the archives and use this Talk page, before editing the article." it is insane to delete comments talking about just that. I consider this vandalism and as such not subject to 3RR and i will revert your removal of valid talk page contributions.Hypnosadist 12:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Now here's a warning for you using personal attacks in the edit summery. You said "don't be a douche, douche". This is very definately a personal attack, are you going to block yourself for 24hours?Hypnosadist 16:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Blainetologist sockpuppet?
User:Xvidme is a brand-new user who immediately jumped into making the very same changes to the very same articles that User:Blainetologist was doing before he was blocked. wikipediatrix 14:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!
thank you about (re: block User:Supreme_Cmdr) Lordkazan 20:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

User:JBKramer blanked my warnings from User_Talk:Supreme_Cmdr - see this diff Lordkazan 20:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

User:JBKramer has now filed an RFC against me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Lordkazan Lordkazan 21:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Derek Smart
You blocked someone for "blanking" that was actually a content dispute. Please review the alleged blanking. Please respond ASAP. Thanks! JBKramer 20:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, could I ask you to review your block of, who is an established Wikipedian engaged in a content dispute. Thanks, Addhoc 22:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Slightly disappointed you haven't responded. Could you give an indication of your view... Addhoc 23:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You'll notice that it's clearly content blanking of cited content. Yes it's a content dispute, but it's also blanking since there are source citations there which several of us have established to be valid.  The FreeSpace section needs a bit of cleanup (it's new, just put in this morning), but that's no reason to blank it.  Lordkazan 03:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I would really appreciate it if you would encourage JBKramer to withdraw this RFC on Lordkazan's actions. I've spoken to both users. I've seen diffs demonstrating incivility on both sides. I've seen a clear desire on Lordkazan's part to make amends. I have tried to mediate this, but as I am not an administrator I cannot speak with very much authority. I would really appreciate it if you'd lend your opinion on the RFC. I added my signature to the RFC certifying that there was a basis for the dispute, but I now consider the dispute over Lordkazan's behavior resolved. Cheers, DRK 05:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! I very appreciated!!

Suggestion for material removed from WP:HD
Hi Inshaneee, I noticed (via an edit conflict) that you removed, via rollback, a user's post to the Help Desk, which was an article draft mistakently posted there. It appears to have been the new user's first attempt at an article, and I would imagine that he would be surprised to see it simply vanish from the page, with only a rollback-style edit summary, and probably does not know how to use the History function to recover the text. What I did, and suggest as a more useful practice, was to userfy the text and leave a message with a pointer to it, along with newbie advice pointing to the tutorial and "Your first article", etc. Thanks, --MCB 17:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
''' Announcement: It's an administrator! '''

InShaneee, thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was a robust 62/1/1, so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any questions about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thanks again, Chris Griswold

The homage to Neon Genesis Evangelion
OK, people seriously need to stop editing out my adding the fact that they did an homage to NGE in "Hamstergeddon". They explicitly say so in the commentary track for the episode. Anyone with the DVDs can go and check it out!

--FallenAngelII 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Friend haven't to you in a Good Minute.
InShaneee, i got a problem. Every time i try to edit a page a little box show talkin 'bout i need to save something What should i do?Gamer322

im not trying to advertise
hello InShaneee i just made a first star online 2 wiki page and you deleted it due to advertisement. but i am not trying to advertise it. im just putting information of the game on wikipedia. like items and skills. so please reconsider not deleting my page. thanks :)

-mossman95

When creating articles about gyms...
How come you cannot create an article about a Ironworks Gym? I mean, Gold's Gym has an article and so does many other gyms. Ironworks gym was supposed to be an article arguing why private gyms are better than commercialized, corporate gyms. That was what the meat of the article was about, but you deleted it as advertisement.

first star online 2
Hello I was going to add to a page about first star online 2. When I reached the page it was blocked. The game is an online RPG and people could use a good guide. I was wondering if you could unblock it so I could add to it. Thanks.

-RedSoxRule

Fuck on the Beach
I rewrote this article here. If it meets your aproval I would like to have the original article unprotected.Seizurebot1011 21:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)