User talk:Kingoomieiii/Archive 2

Talkback 1
talkback -- VS talk 11:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you for your advice about barnstars but I know very little html and the things you suggested seems very complicated. Will continue to do it the the way I have done until know but I relise I should learn more html and utilze the opportunities we have here at Wikipedia. --NOAH (talk) 16:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the help in creating the templates. I will only give barnstars to those who deserve them. In fact I read comments made by User:Interestedinfairness for almost an hour before I gave him/her barnstar. --NOAH (talk) 19:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q2 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  15:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you very much. Toddst1 (talk) 12:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, I'm finding it hard to assume good faith with User talk:Rex Dominator (you commented on my talk page here and dished out some advice). You might also recall his comment;
 * "Unless you want Serbs to start editing the articles on Albania, stopped being disruptive on the article Serbia. There is an unwritten rule, here on Wikipedia, Albanian's don't vandalize Serbian articles, and Serbs don't vandalized Albanian articles".

Obviously he did not heed your advice and subsequently made good on his promise to retaliate for my edit here by adding a "cite-needed" tag to the Illyrian article. This may not seem as malicious from the on set, but having been a part of a lengthy discussion starting here in May, this is definitely an edit designed to disrupt rather than construct.

Although I acknowledge he is a new user and he shouldn't be put off editing, (he has been very active on the Serbia article), I do however feel a 24 hour ban is probably necessary to make him realize some of Wikipedia's rules and etiquette. (Interestedinfairness (talk) 22:41, 15 July 2009 (UTC)).


 * Vandalism is defined on wikipedia as edits that are CLEARLY, DELIBERATELY intended to reduce the usefulness of an article. As far as I can tell from his contribs, he's actually editing less tendentiously than you are, but from an opposite point of view. I'm no administrator, so I can't block anyone- but right now, I wouldn't condone blocking him.


 * You need to keep in mind that your point of view means jack squat here. Rex Denominator appears, on the outset, perfectly within wikipedia policy in his edits. And I find it funny that you'd call his adding of a cite tag "retaliatory", seeing as how you've been edit-warring them into various pro-serbian articles. -- King ♣    Talk    01:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why I bother. After a month and a half of discussions on the Illyrian talk page about including the word "Albanian" into the lead, he goes and adds a cite needed tag. And this is not "CLEARLY, DELIBERATELY intended to reduce the usefulness of an article"? And what does "edit-warring them into various pro-serbian articles" even mean? Regards, (Interestedinfairness (talk) 02:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)).


 * User account was created after the discussion ground to a halt, and that talk page is mighty long. It's perfectly reasonable to assume he never read it.
 * And hey, you know what the proper way to deal with a cite tag is?


 * Don't demand the editor be banned
 * DO find a source, link it in, and REMOVE THE OFFENDING TAG.
 * This is a pattern with you, assuming that every edit you don't agree with is deliberate vandalism (more often than not, by serbian agents out to disenfranchise Kosovo via the ENGLISH wikipedia). There are MULTIPLE schools of thought on the issue of Kosovo's road to becoming a nation, as evidenced by the expansive list of countries that officially see it as a territory owned by Serbia.
 * You MUST NOT edit as though you are CORRECT. This precludes ANY possibility at neutral editing in line with WP:DUE. You must simply edit as the voice of the collective Reliable Sources that have reported on the subject. Verifiability > Truth. In fact, "The Truth" is a misleading concept here. EVERYONE thinks they know it, especially on an issue as galvanizing as sovereignty. But of the 10+ schools of thought, it's possible NONE are correct. This editing style of yours needs to stop. You CANNOT act as 'defender and protector' of Kosovo's position as an independent nation (which is debateable, according to the majority of sources, and your claims that they are influenced by Serbian agendas are IRRELEVANT unless sourced) AND edit neutrally. -- King ♣    Talk    02:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

You got me all wrong. I always use sources, ENGLISH/WESTERN and NON-ALBANIAN ones. If they don't suffice as per WP:V then I do not know what will. One other thing; I think you will find the list of countries that officially recognize Kosovo as a country is "expansive"; not the countries who see it as a Serbian Province, as you say.

This has been riveting, speak soon. Regards, Interestedinfairness (talk) 02:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Music question
Do you think that Tempest (band) is a prod? Or maybe even a delete? The Real Libs-speak politely 17:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, all of the sources are published or maintained by the band itself, so they don't really help notability. A quick google search didn't turn up much, either. I highly doubt they warrant their own article- though that festival might. --King ♣  Talk  17:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Hey
While I have your attention (do I still have your attention?), do you know any scarrian-esque admins currently awake? I'd love to have User talk:67.242.56.62 stopped as quickly as possible, and the original blocker, Tanthalas39, hasn't been on all day. --King ♣ Talk 19:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh Scarian! I do miss that fella terribly. King, while I am not Libs I shall reply in his place, Scarian basically taught User:Enigmaman everything he knows so he's the next best admin. 86.3.61.125 (talk) 16:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Thanks for showing me! 86.3.61.125 (talk) 21:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments On My Talk page
Your comments are noted however, I do not think that warning applies to comments left on talk pages. Nevertheless it won't happen again. Cheers --Sikh- History 19:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The template I used is the generic version of the language warnings located at Warning, though it doesn't actually cite a Policy page. It does use the term "comment", however, whereas edits made in articlespace are generally referred to as "contributions".
 * Anyway, what language is that? Google Translate comes back with Esperanto, but it can't actually translate from it. --King ♣ Talk  19:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I see. In that case my apologies. Like I said it won't happen again. It was just a little joke between me and Information_Line. Regards--Sikh- History 19:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Most people aren't aware that the EN wiki is only for english. --King ♣  Talk  19:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:User talk:67.242.56.62
Hi Kingoomieiii. Ah, well, I was away when you left me a message. I would have taken action but, it looks like Tan has already dealt with User:Spooky873. Best,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 00:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your comments below VS' block template, King. Having dealt with the guy before, myself, I would be inclined to agree that he was actually socking. Socking to evade a block is still socking, King! :-P 86.3.61.125 (talk) 15:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Hi there KING, VASCO here,

Thank you very much for your input. My only additions now are the following, solely regarding the first "editor". Maybe i am a little bit over the edge with the second (WEST HAM or WEST HAM UNITED in player infobox really makes no difference to me, at least it should not).

But the "user" 86.146.115.20 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/86.146.115.20) IS a vandal (therefore, don't understand your redundant assumption); when someone puts in a player infobox, and in more than one instance, that they played for a team when THEY HAVEN'T, it is vandalism (this practice is not only foul language or removing contents, LIES are also vandalism i believe). He/she is a vandal, if you don't want to block (supposing you can), that's another story.

Ty very much for the "chat", keep up the good work,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, no. Vandalism is the DELIBERATE addition of factually incorrect information, and I have no reason to assume that IP editor didn't think he was correct. Again, it's entirely possible that he thought he was improving the page.


 * From the linked page:
 * "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism. For example, adding a controversial personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism; reinserting it despite multiple warnings is (however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW)."
 * I'd advise you TALK to them before requesting further administrative action, because like I said, that user will bounce off WP:AIV in seconds, because they haven't been warned ONCE. And please, when you talk to them, be nice.  --King ♣  Talk  20:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, did not understand you, mate. What exactly do you want me to place, and where? I will happily oblige. As well as you are sure that anon "user" is not a vandal, be sure that i am to trust, entirely. Yep, disclosure does bring trust.

Cheers, VASCO - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 21:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't doubt your trustworthyness. I just think you've jumped the gun in thinking this editor is vandalizing the page. Certainly, the edits aren't constructive. But if you take a step back, and Assume Good Faith, I think you'll see how a mistake could be made. Hop over to the editor's talk page, and leave a message. Otherwise, it's WAY, WAAYY too soon to make any judgements about them. What is it, five edits? Did YOUR first five follow all the rules? I know mine didn't. It's important we not throw the book at new editors, lest they leave, and take their future good contributions with them. --King ♣  Talk  00:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Exactly what i was looking for mate, thanks a million for that template tip. It now sits proudly at the top of my talkpage. Cheers, keep up the good work.

VASCO - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * My wiki-friend, just to wrap up this discussion about vandalism or lack thereof (you have your ideas, i respect them), take a look at this example: this player, Bruno Saltor Grau, scored 0 goals for one of his clubs, and this "user" changed it to 87!! (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bruno_Saltor_Grau&diff=304166882&oldid=303045325); you think this person, in his mind, really thought it was a good contribution? I think not, maybe it's just me...

Cheers, VASCO - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 02:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * That's... a different user. And that's called a "test edit". No administrator in his right mind will ban a user for two or three bad edits, especially when the user has NEVER BEEN WARNED, or even INFORMED that their edit was unacceptable. Please read through WP:BITE, WP:VAND and WP:BLOCK. You're taking these edits FAR too personally, and at this point I'd suggest recusing yourself if you're really going to seek immediate blocks any time an IP editor maligns a football player.
 * I've warned the linked IP for you. Please see User talk:78.150.4.135. This encyclopedia is a big open space, and most people poke it at least once to see what it does. That's fine, we warn and coax, hopefully teach. The ones that learn, become good editors. The ones that don't, end up indef blocked. But if we start blocking for tiny little bad edits, especially as a user's FIRST edit, we'll chase everyone away. We don't want this to be like SomethingAwful or ElitistJerks, a forum that people read, but are afraid to post on for fear of being banned.  --King ♣  Talk  14:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And by the way, there aren't just my 'ideas'. This is Wikipedia policy. --King ♣  Talk  14:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Even though i understand your point, i was misunderstood again. Of course i know it is impossible for a block after 2, 3 edits. Also, i have only requested blocks for bonafide sock vandals (one had 15!!) and 2 or 3 standard IP which i saw were up to no good.

One other doubt: how to qualify what is a test edit and what is not? Even the worst vandal has his/hers first edit, i believe...But i agree with you, sometimes (too often?) i am little too engaged, gotta tone down a bit. Oh, and my only beef with vandal(i)s(m) is not only football, far from that, happens to be my favorite field of contribution.

Speaking of: could you do me a favor, please? I have been trying, to no avail, to move these two footballers' pages (Franky van Der Elst and François van Der Elst), to no avail. Have already managed to move Leo van Der Elst. Why you ask? Because the correct language form, in Flemish - and i think in German too, although such names are much less common there - is "van der Elst", not "Van Der Elst". Only way "van" gets a capital is in the start of a sentence. I get this strange message "a similar page already exists", dunno why. Could you help me out?

Thank you very much for your (future)help and (past)enlightenment, take care,

VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 14:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "Test edit" is really a term we use to avoid saying "bad edit". Really, future vandal or not, most editors start with a few- good editors stop, and begin editing within the rules, once they find out what they are- and the vandals end up liking the test so much, they keep going! But in the end, they both started with test edits. You're not a bad person just because you once spit up down the back of your father's favorite shirt, after all. (Hey, it's not my fault he tried to burp a baby while wearing his favorite shirt).
 * Be careful calling people 'socks'. Multiple edits over several days from very similar IP's editing the same article isn't always socking. In fact, the simpler explanation could be, he's using a computer lab, and doesn't always sit down at the same system. He may not even be aware that he's doing it!
 * I know I sound like an apologist. I just feel it's important that the newcomers be welcomed, and given enough time to learn the rules before being punished for not knowing them. After all, in the mean time, everything they do wrong can be undone.
 * As for your other issue, there are redirects sitting at the names you're trying to move to. Ask an administrator to merge the pages instead- that'll move the article to the name you want, replacing the redirect. --King ♣  Talk  15:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks a million man!! I guess one could say you have been the yin to my yang these past few hours :) ;)

Just one clarification, lest i am again misunderstood. The guy i told you about that had 15 sock was not anon, it is 15 accounts, honest (please see this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas/Archive).

Well, i'm off to something....good i hope! Take care, VASCO - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 15:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * O.O wow... my mistake... that's a lot of socks. And hey, no problem, happy to help. --King ♣  Talk  15:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

IP business
Hi there KING, VASCO here,

What do i mean by standard IP? I may be, of course, wrong in the technical jargon, but i always thought standard IPs were the ones always stable in one computer, like mine. I called the others hopping or dynamic IP.

Since i guess you saw my message to User:VirtualSteve, this "user" which is CLEARLY onto my case, after a couple of summaries from me he did not like - but he started vandalizing here, even telling me to shut up in one summary after reverting to his antics (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luis_Aguiar&diff=302578671&oldid=302461247), has also done this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:NothingButAGoodNothing&diff=305185006&oldid=298762426) in my userpage, with a totally different IP (hence the "dynamic"). The penalty? A magnificent 55-hour penalty (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:88.106.200.59).

I have the gut feeling this "user" is only beginning with me; that's the last time i feed a troll, honest to God (or akin)!!!

Cheers, have a nice week,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 19:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, alright. The usual term in English for those is "Static IP", as opposed to dynamic. --King ♣  Talk  13:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

If you have time...
Could you watchlist Led Zeppelin and the first 2 LZ albums. There is a new account trying to cruft the pages with Jeff Beck Group fanboy soapboxing content. The Real Libs-speak politely 14:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Will do. --King ♣  Talk  18:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I left a message on his page. I don't really listen to Zep (and I can't name all the members), so I can't really form an opinion as to who's on the right side here. --King ♣ Talk  13:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair and civil (although I don't believe the editor has the same sort of attitude... seeing how he was blocked for edit warring) I see he was nabbed for being a sock of a previous user with similar editing habits. And looking back he also resembles a troll from long time ago named Zephead999. Zephead999 was tagged as a sock for a user named Dragong4. Dragong4 was permanently banned from Wikipedia but has returned many times under many different disguises. Hmmmm???  Some editor just don't know when to just stay under there bridge. The Real Libs-speak politely 14:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If I'm not mistaken, he was banned for 3RR on Led Zeppelin II... --King ♣  Talk  15:14, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Sig
Read that thread at ANI closely, it wasn't another person, they were talking about you so no need to change. Nja 247 20:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm referring to User:King of Hearts, who's sig is "King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades;", but thanks, I did notice that :3  --King ♣  Talk  20:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yea I see now. Cheers. Nja 247 20:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Take a took at TheSunshineRainbow's page and read my comment --BondiEmily (talk) 10:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

4chan
Penneth has made a further addition of the "Pedobear" comment, which would go against the "Edit War" remark you made on their talk page. I reverted the addition, but I will leave the further reporting/commenting to you, as I do not have the tools or knowledge at my disposal to do so efficiently. Gpia7r (talk) 18:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey King!!!! :P
I quote Just to clarity, you are not entitled to voice your opinion in articlespace, I have one never edited an article and two where do you have the right to tell me I cannot voice my opinion. You are. I could understand if it was in an article, but it wasn't. --BondiEmily (talk) 12:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "Articlespace" is, as you said, "in an article". I was clarifying that neither you nor anyone has the right to voice an opinion there. I thought I was pretty clear, actually. --King ÖÖmie III 12:59, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey King (again) - I just edited something I thought you should be the first to know!!! :)--BondiEmily (talk) 16:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Addition to Request for Mediation
I have created a Request for Mediation regarding the 4chan Article. I added your name to the list involved, but if you would like to be left out, please let me know. Otherwise, I ask that you please sign the page agreeing to voice your opinion. Thanks! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/4chan .Gpia7r (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

If you have a chance
Latin metal is being battled over and currently an AfD. I personally don't think it exists and have voted to delete. The debate is sorta dead-even Perhaps you could opine on it. The Real Libs-speak politely 15:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, reading through that page, it seems pretty solid. Go Pandora some Ill Nino, you'll know exactly what they're talking about. Flamenco music with electric guitars and screaming. --King Öomie 15:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree but everyone is allowed their own view. The AfD just needed more input to swing it one way or the other. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Music List
Thanks a lot! I'll be sure to check out those bands you suggested. Nice to see someone on this site with a similar musical taste as myself. :) TheSickBehemoth (talk) 03:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)TheSickBehemoth

Thanks for weighing in
Thanks King Öomie for weighing in ... 5 hours after the fact. Perhaps you would also be kind enough to help out this clueless IP by pointing out what was uncivil about my edits that were reverted? Thanks! 121.218.191.100 (talk) 11:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Your edits were reverted because the edit summary was uncivil. That does, in fact, happen. Sort of like running down a hallway and being asked to go back and walk it again. You responding by slinging insults at the reverting admin doesn't help. Feel free to replace the edits, without swearing at the other people editing the article. --King Öomie 13:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Licensing Questions
Hi Kingoomieiii. Just want to say thanks for helping to answer queries on my talk page while I was on vacation. It is appreciated!! :) Cheers,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 07:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! --King Öomie 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Clashwho
Thanks for the sock template. I prefer to edit from an IP address to avoid people attacking The Clash's page in misguided attempts at vengeance. But I guess they're screwed now. 74.73.110.46 (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, nothing like a little pre-emptive CYA. Past whatever aside, I don't want to see anyone go down for something they didn't do. What's REALLY infuriating is when you can't get someone to go down for something they DID do. I'm quite a fan of WP:PBAGDSWCBY. --King Öomie 17:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope you aren't saying you want me to be a bigger dick! But if you're saying that you sent me the template to protect me from sock accusations, then thank you very much! I appreciate it. 74.73.110.46 (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, no, I'm saying that I wish more vandals/problem editors ascribed to that non-policy. Bannings would come swiftly and without mercy, instead of us having to deal with passive-aggressive talkpage messages, subtle POV-pushing, etc etc until they accidentally 3RR. --King Öomie 18:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Calm down...
I noticed that the debate at Requests for comment/User names is getting pretty heated. I warned Cromwellian Conquest, but, the both of you just need to cool it.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 17:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

August 2009
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. ahem... Unionhawk Talk E-mail 17:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * WP:AGF Does not supercede common sense. I was done assuming good faith when he accused me of 'harassing' him because I was a terrorist sympathizer. He's a disruptive editor with no intention of editing neutrally at best, a troll at worst. --King Öomie 17:51, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Want to take this to WP:ANI? Something has to be done, but I'm not quite sure you're using the right approach...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 17:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure how I feel about ANI. --King Öomie 18:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

AGF can be ignored when the user you're trying to AGF with begins to act like an a**hole. ANI can have a positive outcome in some instances. In other it is a complete waste of time and just results in a bunch of 95%'rs spinning their wheels and wasting everyone's time. The Real Libs-speak politely 18:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. How about we just ignore him, and, if he comes out with a personal attack on your talk page, then, deal with it via revert/warn. I have suspicion that he may be a block-evading sock, as all articles he's edited are subject to arbitration enforcement, with several dozen socks and editors blocked.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 18:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * He is User talk:86.133.101.139, previously blocked for warring the same pages. --King Öomie 18:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ooo convenient. Block evasion is an instant bye-bye. The Real Libs-speak politely 18:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The IP's block is over. More than likely he picked his subversive name to WP:VANISH and escape his block and warn history. --King Öomie 18:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: The Aspartame debate. I have to be away from my computer for a while but it might be an idea to take this to the administrators noticeboard as a range block is probably now warranted, especially given the admission by the vandal himself. Good luck with it! I'll check back in when I come back. Best wishes. Sky83 (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hopefully the RfPP goes through. --King Öomie 19:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it did. I'll try to find a source for the sentence he keep trying to change. Apparently it's filling people with rage not seeing a little blue number after it. --King Öomie 19:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Boy that was annoying, but I got it all. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Unified usernames can be trouble. I left my photobucket account Public, and it happened to contain a screenshot of directions from Google Maps. --King Öomie 21:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

re:User talk:Nishkid64
Some of the same information was brought up at Wikipedia_talk:Username_policy. It may need to be oversighted out as well. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * At this point, it's fine if it sticks around. The less special attention that gets paid, the less satisfied the troll is. --King Öomie 23:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment
Thanks for the rfa post... Since I started here back in 2003/4 I've been asked that question a lot. The bulk of them posted to my original account that I used for my first 2 years here (the account where I bother to be polite :-) ) Even my years as an IP editor still brought a few "you should get an account and be an admin" posts. I am always humbled at the notion... but do not wish it. Say... if you want to play Inspector Gadget there is an interesting post from a noble anonymous IP at the lower flanks of admin Buba Hotep's talk page. IP checks and CU reports are not my speed. Hopefully something will come of it. Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 13:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * With only sleuthing behind me (no checkuser), I'd call it a "suspicious" coincidence that User:ITalkTheTruth, User:Thoughtfulnes, User:KingofSuperheros and User:The Source of Wiki Power were all created inside the same two-day span, edit only articles related to music, and all jumped into an AFD as one of their first edits outside their own userspace.
 * Quack quack! --King Öomie 13:20, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yuppers. If I were one for reporting (my achilles heel of the Wik) I would compose a nice CU request. Justice always finds a way on the Wik. Sooner of later the sh*t floats up far enough that the brass can smell it and proper action taken. But sometimes it just takes a quiet wafting-of-the-odour to speed the process up. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:27, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * User talk:Nishkid64 --King Öomie 13:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * King, you are indeed a King. I've been looking at it all day on and off – got as far as compiling this for the SPI, but I'm glad you beat me to it. Job done. – B.hotep •talk• 14:20, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

THE KING... is in the building!!!! The Real Libs-speak politely 14:22, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's all who you know ;D
 * Thanks! --King Öomie 14:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 's bin good to know ya then eh! The Real Libs-speak politely 14:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And now I know which CU to ping next time (I voted for them at the CU election as well, doh!) – B.hotep •talk• 14:27, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nishkid is a pretty cool guy, eh checks users and doesn't afraid of anything! --King Öomie 14:32, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow...I should of known you were a /b/rother too.-- SKATER  Speak. 15:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * On and off. More and more I find that the shock value is gone, and it's a bunch of kids trying to prove who's the grossest. --King Öomie 15:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment
um, hi, but who the heck r U are you? Tubesgirl (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC).


 * An editor with a deep-held respect for what this site is for.
 * Also, an editor who absolutely despises chat abbreviations, ESPECIALLY on a site such as this with non-realtime chat and infinite editbox space.
 * Please sign your posts. Just add "~" after what you type before you save, it's that easy. --King Öomie 15:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Guess what!
We have a new genre troll in the yard. Hasn't heard of WP:RS yet... nor does he care me thinks. Typical soapboxer. He is about to learn about WP:3RR me thinks too. :-) The Real Libs-speak politely 16:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Another guess what... no surprises... he has IP edits as well... just to add to his totals. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And likely this IP as well... good ol' Geoplocate comes in handy! The Real Libs-speak politely 16:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

✅ not by me =P --King Öomie 16:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Two bits
A) guess what this IP likes to do and B) Look at the agenda of this user page here. Nice! The Real Libs-speak politely 14:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good lord.
 * I honestly love it when people start going off about their "First amendment rights" to free speech (which I predict the second editor will resort to at some point, along with calling himself an expert some more). It's like they think these servers are provided by the US government.
 * Yeah, I've got a right to free speech too, but that doesn't mean I can spraypaint whatever words I want onto the side of your house. --King Öomie 15:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you intend for this to go on his user page? The Real Libs-speak politely 15:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * With the tenor of his comment, I assumed it was his talkpage! I'll go move it! --King Öomie 15:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Before I head off for the weekend and leave you in charge :-)
kepp an eye on OfficialCarvin I hate it when a new user names themselves after the article they intend to edit. Makes them look all COI-ish. Likely just a fanboy of the product... but who knows? The Real Libs-speak politely 15:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Will do. I'm leaving him a detailed ==Welcome== with links to all the relevant COI stuff. --King Öomie 16:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)