User talk:Knowledge Seeker/Archive6

''This is an archive of old discussions. You may edit this page to fix malformed signatures or to update links, but please direct new comments to my talk page.''

Colored quote
Your quotes on your talk is blue. is what you put on it to make it blue. I tried it with my name and it didn't work. Is there a way so I can do this cool trick. &mdash; Hurricane Devon (Talk) 21:38, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I found another way. I'll use   to make my quotes Green .  I'd still like to hear how your method works. &mdash; Hurricane Devon (Talk) 22:06, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my vandalism:
Thanks for reverting my vandalism KS. I appreciate it alot... Spawn Man 21:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

mail
Hey buddy. Sent you some, but the page was acting weird. You get it? Regards E []

evolution
Lucian, I found your comments on Talk:Evolution very interesting. I left you a reply there. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 23:34, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * KS, thanks for your reminder and apologies for not checking back on the evolution talk page. I'm not a regular contributor. I did post a response for you if you'd like to take a look. --Lucian 06:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

User page revert
Thanks for watching over my user page. I appreciate your vigilance. Nice ASCII art too, by the way! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hey, no problem. And you're welcome.  :)  --Merovingian (t) (c) ( e ) 08:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Important message
I'd just like to let you know that I think your user page is awesome.

Not because I like Star Trek; I don't. It's just really awesome. -Silence 07:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


 * It is good for the universe. Keep being. -Silence 06:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Editing User Pages :)
Please don't edit others' user pages. This is considered vandalism. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Dear user:Knowledge Seeker--


 * 1. Why did you write on my user page to not edit others' userpages?


 * 2. You give no examples of when I've done this.


 * 3. I just would appreciate it if you simply stopped communicating with me-- writing on my userpage, etc.


 * 4. I am trying to quietly and usefully edit things on wikipedia and don't need fights with you. There is too much anger, vitriol in the world.


 * 5. Let's just agree not to talk-- you leave me alone and I'll let you alone.


 * 6. Human beings are imperfect. It is human nature.


 * 7. You are no exception (assuming you are a human being...hmm. Perhaps you represent a syndicate of human beings).


 * 8. And I realize you have the power to block users, and you are not shy about wielding this power (and really...who wouldn't arbitrarily block people if they had the power. C'mon.)


 * 9. Like Whitney Houston said (and Dolly Parton before her),


 * "And I....I...I...will always loove yooooooooooooouuuuuu. Yes I will always love you."


 * 10. I don't have any problems with you. In fact I love you, Baby!). And as the love article points out, "Just as there are many types of lovers, there are many kinds of love." We are unusual lovers, and ours is an estranged, unfulfilled, but hopeful love. Perhaps someone will write beautiful poetry about it. Ahh, poetry.


 * 11. Thank you.


 * 12. I believe it was Jesus who said, All you need is love (or maybe it was Jesus Jones...I can't remember).


 * 13. Love always,


 * 128.143.218.69Please Don't Block []


 * 14. P.S. Congratulations on being a doctor!


 * 15. Doctors do important work.


 * 16. I'm surprised you have so much time to edit things on wikipedia with your busy schedule. )


 * I gave no examples since it is the only recent instance you have edited another's user page. However, in case you have already forgotten, or are editting with multiple accounts, the edit to which I was referring is the one where you blanked User:Blasphemous's user page. I have never written on your user page. I'm afraid I cannot oblige your request not to communicate with you again. Communication is an essential component of Wikipedia and it is unreasonable to ask someone to stop communicating with you especially when he has only left you one polite message. I made no threat of blocking you. I don't understand what do you mean by saying I am not shy about blocking or that all administrators block people arbitrarily. Don't stereotype. Certainly I will block someone when necessary, but I challenge you to find a single inappropriate block, or to find any instance where I blocked someone without first trying to get him or her to change the behavior in question. If you are User:Blasphemous, I realize that that account is blocked indefinitely (not by me). If you (or he) wishes to change the user page, please log in as User:Blasphemous and either leave a message on the User talk:Blasphemous or send me an e-mail through Wikipedia and I will blank the user page for you. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 16:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Emergency department (Emergency room)
Thanks for your great photo on the above page. I wonder if you would like to vote to help this article along at Article Improvement Drive so that we will eventually reach featured article status.--File Éireann 20:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comment. Emergency department would make a fine featured article, and I'll be happy to try to help out. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Article Improvement Drive
Would you be willing to support Stairway to Heaven for the article improvement drive? It is considered the greatest song of all time by many, and it doesn't even have a correct info box. 06:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, buddy; I'm going to have to decline. I am quite fond of the song, and like most articles it could certainly use improvement, but there are just too many other topics I think are more important. Naturally I'm biased towards medicine, but there are many science and other academic topics which are more important to me. Good luck with Stairway to Heaven, though, and maybe you can fix the infobox yourself! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 10:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Userpage comment
''The comment below refers to my user page. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 10:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)''


 * Difinetly one of for sure. But clearly the best of the 4 telvision Star Trek series.  -- Jason Palpatine 23:10, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce
I noticed that the Medical analysis of circumcision article is on your desk, but on the Taskforce page it's listed as unassigned. Are you still working on the article, or would you like me to take it off your hands? Kerowyn 03:50, 9 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, it isn't on my desk; my desk is empty/closed and the task is unassigned. Feel free to tackle it! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:51, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Med question for you
KS, I seek your infinite wisdom! There is currently a dispute on the article John Kerry over his Navy treatment report -- which read that one of his wounds was treated with "bacitracin dressing." I'm not asking you to get actively involved in the dispute (although you're welcome to if you like), but currently there's a dispute about what exactly this could mean. This seems obvious at first, but keep in mind this was the 1970's so perhaps it's not as obvious in that context. The main question seems to be whether or not "bacitracin dressing" could be read to mean that bacitracin was applied and then it was bandaged, or whether simply applying bacitracin could in itself be called a dressing. Someone on the talk page is arguing that in that time, bacitracin ointment was not available OTC because it was more effective, and thus wouldn't have been used lightly. And of course, a dispute over whether "bacitracin dressing" should be read as "put some bacitracin on it and bandaged" or whether it could also mean "put some bacitracin on it." Sorry to bother you with such a petty question, but believe it or not, this has wasted a lot of peoples' time over the past few months. Thanks... &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 03:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi Kate, nice to hear from you! I guess I'm not sure what to tell you (or if the dispute's still going on). I'd assume that bacitracin dressing involved a bandage of some sort although I am not familiar with what sort of impact the historical context might have. You may want to ask at the Doctors' mess; maybe they can help you more than I. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Re:My Sig
Mr. Black, I just wanted to let you that you have an incorrect closing tag in your signature:  should be   (the slash precedes the tag name for the closing tag). I noticed it because it turned the Village pump (miscellaneous) green, although it looks fine in the history now. You may want to repair any other places you signed with this signature. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Now, I noticed that (just fixed it), but for some reason, it did close, and I never saw anything being green. Weird.--Sean|Bla ck 05:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC) P.S. Just call me "Sean"- "Mr.Black" is my father :).


 * I'm not sure I fully understood your message, Sean. Did you fix your signature now? When I look at the Wikipedia source, it still showed up as  instead of  . &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Oops. I forget to save my preferences before saving your user talk. Now it's fixed :). Either way, I never saw the bad font tags not working, so it's rather a non-issue. Thanks anyways!--Sean|Bla ck 06:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm glad it always worked in your browser, but keep in mind that not all browsers treat malformed HTML in the same way. As I mentioned, I only noticed it because two-thirds of the Village pump was green and it started at your signature. I don't know when you started using this signature, but if it was recent, the nice thing to do might be to fix all the broken tags to ensure this doesn't happen anywhere else. If you're not interested, that's fine; it's your choice. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, okay. I'm sorry if I sounded curt in that comment, I was just confused! Anyways, I'll go and fix it now. Thanks!--Sean|Bla ck 06:12, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Don't worry about it&mdash;now that I reread what I wrote, I sounded rather curt myself. I'm glad we got it figured out! Thanks for being understanding! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:41, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The problem is not with Sean's sig. This happened before. Tons of perfectly correct commands on people's sigs suddenly went wrong. (I was one of those who experienced it.) The problem, if I remember correctly, was that a bot had gone wrong and screwed up all the sigs. Report the problem to the village pump. Something has gone wrong across wp with some sigs. It is a WP-created problem, probably due to one of those infernal bots, not a mistake by individuals with their signatures, which had worked well for ages and then suddenly went wrong. FearÉIREANN \(caint)  22:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message, Jtdirl, although if you look at the history you can see that the faulty signature was added when he signed his comment and was not later changed by a bot. You probably realize this by now, but it is not a Wikipedia-created problem so much as Wikipedia is no longer fixing all the bad HTML people put in their signatures (and also a couple other changes). For those using raw signatures with standard HTML, signatures still look the same, but for those who did not correctly construct the HTML, Wikipedia is no longer "proofreading" each page before displaying it, correcting the HTML errors it finds. The result is that it's passing your signature on to the viewer exactly as you coded it; it's no longer fixing it. Please let me know if you have any questions, or if you need any help fixing your signature. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:41, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Whatever it is, it's driving me nuts, PS, Jtdirl, you're listed on the noticeboard for your colorful edits, laffo, I hope they fix this soon-- Hello  'from ' SPACE 00:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Whatever happened, it's fixed now, and I think we're all grateful for that! :)--Sean|Bla ck 05:31, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

other users' pages
Please don't edit others' user pages. This is considered vandalism. Messages to users may go on their talk pages. Please ask me if you have any questions. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:17, 16 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Huh? I do not believe I edited any user pages. I edited discussion pages.  Why did you imply that? Carrionluggage 06:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * In May, when I left you that message, two of the four edits you made that month were to Salva31's user page ( and ). I will assume it was accidental; if you have any further questions or do not understand, please let me know. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:53, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, sorry - I did not get your May message until Nov 15. Sure - it must have been a goof or beginner's luck that I edited Salva's page - meant to work on discussion. He seems like a decent chap (other than wanting to be like Pat Buchanan - but to each his own.) Nevertheless, his English is substandard. For example, the object of the preposition "like" is given as "who" in two cases, but it should be "whom": 'Who I want to be like when I grow up' is one example and 'Who I don't want to be like when I grow up' is the other. Perhaps as an admin. you might mention it to him. It may sound stilted to use "whom" anymore, but imagine retitling the well known book as For Who the Bell Tolls, or asking "To who am I speaking?". If he wants to avoid looking old fashioned (linguistically) he might say something like "Persons I (don't) want to be like when I grow up. Anyway sorry I edited the wrong pages. Carrionluggage 18:17, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorting med articles
Hello! Saw your message about IDing med articles that need work. I've been sorting articles related to pregnancy. Dev. biology, ob/gyn, anatomy, med. treatment, etc. Big problem!!! that articles don't have any references. If we could have a tag for this, it would be a big help.--FloNight 05:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Yes, it is true; a lot of articles need better and more explicit sources. At the WP:MCOTW we've been adding references, but of course we only tackle one article at a time. You may want to tag articles with unreferenced, and you can add a comment to any of the articles listed at WP:MED. I look forward to working with you! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:59, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND
Hello. Round four of Wikipedia Mind Benders will open on Thursday, December 1. This round will be drastically different from round three; part one will consist of a creative project, and part two will be developed from there. The full details will be released when the round opens. Time and speed should not be major factors in this round; thus, there is no exact opening time for the round as speed will not factor into the scoring. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 00:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Please add Mind Benders/to do to your watchlist to receive further announcements; the NotificationBot is currently down and all notifications will be placed on that page. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy. If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. Special thanks to Fetofs for helping distribute this message.


 * Thank you; no further messages will be required. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

FYI
I hope I'm not overstepping my bounds here. I moved all of the articles in WikiProject Clinical medicine/top priority to WikiProject Medicine, then redirected the former to the latter. Because of that, I then removed WikiProject Clinical medicine/top priority from Template:WPCM navigation. I wanted to let you know in the event you think that article should stand on its own for the time-being. Again, I think you've done a great job with the formatting of WikiProject Medicine! Edwardian 04:20, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't think you're overstepping your bounds at all, and in any case, the WikiProject Clinical medicine and its subpages long predate me. I think you've done a great job helping out WP:MED and I really want to thank you for embracing the project the way you have. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Emergency department
Many thanks for your support!--File Éireann 23:36, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!


— M o e   ε  18:33, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you; Happy Thanksgiving to you as well. Hope you enjoyed a nice dinner! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:56, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice
Thank you for blocking User:192.87.54.82. I was wondering, though, if you'd consider reducing your block from 48 to 24 hours. In general, I think that 24 hours should be the maximum block length for an anonymous user's first block, although the situation here may be more complex than I realize. I haven't modified your block. Secondly, I'd like to ask you to leave a message on the user's talk page when you block someone; the test5 template is commonly used. I placed it for you this time. This serves several purposes: one, it leaves a message for the user (the "you have new messages" alert still appears, even for blocked users). Further, it helps other users who are watching the user's contributions for further vandalism know that they can stop worrying about that user. Finally, should the IP vandalize in the future, it lets other RC patrollers gauge at a glance the type of trouble the IP has caused before. You are free to disagree with any of this; just thought I'd suggest it. Thanks, and keep up the good work! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I usually do put messages on their talk page. I don't use any templates, but I do usually warn them before blocking. As for 24/48 hours, I've seen alot of varience on that, but you are right. Generally, 24 is enough. Anyway, yes I will use that template from now on when I block someone. thank you. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 08:16, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Cheers
Thanks for the support on my RfA. I was very pleasantly surprised to see so much support throughout the week. Please do keep an eye on me and my logs, especially while I'm learning the ropes with the new buttons. I'm not sure we've met before, but if not I hope that's remedied in the near future, and if we have, forgive me my faulty memory Steve block talk 10:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


 * No, I don't believe we have interacted before, but I have seen enough of your work to be impressed and to be confident in my support. Congratulations, good luck, and feel free to ask me if you have any questions. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 10:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Sean Black RfA
Thank you very much for your support of my RfA. Thanks, in part, to you, I am now an Administrator, and I pledge to use my newfound powers for good rather than evil. Thanks again!--Sean|Bla ck 07:48, 26 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I was pleased to support your candidacy. I was impressed with your work before, and your politeness and quick willingness to correct misunderstandings in our earlier interaction sealed my support for you. Congratulations! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

re WP:RM
Hi, Rogerd. You may not realize, but voting on the entries listed at Requested moves should take place on the article's talk pages, not on WP:RM itself (see the directions at the top)&mdash;that's why you don't see anyone else's votes there. I removed your comments; you may wish to add them to the appropriate talk pages. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 03:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. I will heed your advice and do it the correct way --Rogerd 03:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear it. That way you can be sure your votes and discussion will be counted! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU
HOW ARE PEOPLE SUPPOSED TO SHOUT THEIR QUESTIONS REALLY LOUDLY WHEN YOU SWITCH THEIR STATEMENT TO LOWER CASE? IT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE Raul654 08:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

(PS, that was a joke). Raul654 08:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Hahaha&mdash;funniest thing I read all day! I tried to think of something suitably witty to respond but failed. I don't know if you saw it, but I was very amused by this anonmyous user who at least has the courtesy to leave an edit summary of "page blanking" when he blanks Talk:Main Page&mdash;that way, we know it's been vandalized without even having to load the diff! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 20:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

sig
Hi,

hope you are enjoying your wikibreak. You advised me before about my sig. I cannot get any sig working. No commands, including the set you suggested, seem to work. I've left with this extremely boring sig. (aaaagh!) FearÉIREANN 00:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Certainly! Is there any example of your old sig you can show me? Is the one earlier on my talk page how you'd like to have it? &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 20:47, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks mate. The old one above would do fine.  FearÉIREANN  [[Image:Map of Ireland's capitals.png|15px]]\(caint)  22:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC) FearÉIREANN 21:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC) (Oh wow. The old one when cut and pasted actually works!)


 * Can you try putting the following text as your signature, and checking "raw signatures?  If it doesn't work, show me what the signature looks like. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Halibutt's RfA
I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works. As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibutt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your gracious message. Adminship qualifications aside, you are a very valuable Wikipedia editor and a credit to the project. As you know, the important business of Wikipedia is writing and editing articles; I'd rather see a user focus on editing rather than doing administrative tasks any day. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Asking for some mentoring
Ed, I implore you to stop before you do any more damage. Regardless of what Duncharris may have done, you know that you are not to block users with whom you are in conflict. If he had done something blockable, report it on WP:AN/I and let someone else take care of it. You can't just throw around your administrative powers to get your way. I don't see how you could possibly think these highly controversial blocks would last, and they just serve to get people upset with you. Please stop, before you lose all credibility. Now might be a good time to take a short Wikibreak. If I can help you figure any of this out, please leave me a message. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 20:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm currently on Wikibreak and would like some help figuring all this out. Obviously what I'm doing is not working: it's even backfiring. What should I do instead? Uncle Ed 04:14, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your very gracious message. The good thing is we all share the same goal&mdash;to improve Wikipedia. I definitely think a short Wikibreak&mdash;at least a couple days&mdash;will be helpful. If you do edit, keep it low-key, and stay away from stressful or controversial pages. And if you don't mind the impertinence of this relative newcomer, I'll leave a couple suggestions in the next day or so. I'm glad to see your change of heart, Ed. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Working perfectly
Hey, excellent work. Its working a treat. Here have a Wikipint on me. FearÉIREANN \(caint) 12:53, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Excellent! Glad I could be of service! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:26, 2 December 2005 (UTC)



DYK
[]


 * Thank you, and thanks for letting me know! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Please add David Hager to your watch list
Hello! Could you do me a BIG favor and put David Hager on your watch list. A few weeks ago, during a bout of Insomnia-Induced Insanity, I did a major expansion of the article about David Hager. Hager is the controversial physician that Bush appointed to the FDA committee on Reproductive Health Drugs. (Self-disclosure: We both live in central Kentucky and our paths crossed through our professions from mid 80's - mid 90's.) Being a controversial figure, I was prepared to deal with POV crap. However, I never thought anyone would put him in Category:Rapists, a list of convicted rapists. Of course, I immediately took his name off the list. He was on the list for less than five hours, from Dec. 1 00:58 to 05:19. Hopefully, Answers.com or another web site didn't download during this time. But now I’m paranoid that it will happen again and I'll miss it.--FloNight 03:36, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I added it to my watchlist yesterday, but haven't seen any activity so far. Don't worry too much about the vandalism&mdash;it's just a part of the way Wikipedia is. It's always a risk that a mirror will access an article while it's vandalized, but the chances are small and at worst, it'll be fixed at the next update. Not much else you can do! In any case, I'll keep it on my watchlist&mdash;another pair of eyes always helps! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 09:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello KnoledgeSeeker
You may not be aware of the three-revert rule at Wikipedia. If you revert an article more than three times in a 24-hour period, you may be blocked. Please feel free to ask me if you have any questions. Also, when adding new sections to a talk page, please add them at the bottom where they are more likely to be seen. You may use the "+" tab at the top of the screen for this purpose. Thanks! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:02, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for showing me the three-revert rule, and correcting my grammor. My whole point or revision to the Evolution article will forever be made not known. []


 * You're very welcome; I'm glad to help. I'm sorry that your edit was reverted, although I agree with the editors who removed it. If your goal on Wikipedia is to make a lasting edit somewhere, then perhaps editing the first sentence of the introductory paragraph of a prominent and controversial article is not the best place to start. Sticking to subjects you are familiar with is always beneficial, too. Finally, from your comments, it would appear you have not actually read the article in question. If you wish to pursue further edits, I'd advise you to take a look at the rest of the article before you continue. I'd be happy to assist you if you so desire. Also, please sign your talk page posts using four tildes, like this: . &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:57, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

DYK
[]


 * And thank you again. Flutamide's exposure on the Main Page was indeed useful, with several improvements including a molecular illustration by User:GeeJo. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 06:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome back, mate!
Glad to see you back! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:21, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Jesus, how on earth did you know I was back? Thanks for the welcome, makes me feel wanted, like. Seems like you blokes have survived in my absence... good, good. Well, I won't be editing much, but a nip here and there won't hurt anything. Man, I needed that break. Well, take care, laddie, I'll see you around! Blackcap (talk) 07:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Let's just say I have my ways...anyway, yes, we're barely getting by, but I'm glad you're back, in whatever capacity. I've been staying relatively low-key, myself. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:43, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Ed Poor's comments
May I ask why you moved User:Ed Poor's comments to the talk page? Just curious. Thanks! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It appears, from viewing the previous revision of the AFD, that Ed's comments were not part of the discussion, and thus would more appropriately exist on the talk page.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
 * If in fact his comments are supposed to be part of the discussion, they should be placed inside the light blue div box with the section header removed. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( TALK )  07:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You're right. As Ben mentioned (thanks!), the editor placing the closing templates accidentally excluded Ed's comments, but Ben fixed it before I had a chance. Thanks for being on top of this. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm an admin now!!
Thanks a ton for your support on my rfa, the final tally was 50-0-0; I'll try and live up to the expectations of others and do my best in maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia. Looking at your talkpage, i guess you must be the guy behind lot of medicine related FAs these days. Great work!! --Gurubrahma 14:28, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You're welcome; it was my pleasure to support you. As for the medicine articles, I'm doing my best to do my part, but I've had little time to work much on articles these days. Several other editors, especially User:InvictaHOG and User:Rewster, have really taken the lead in bringing medical articles to featured status. Enjoy your new role! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 03:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Chiropractic (disambiguation)
Hi, Doctor. Would you mind taking a look at this when you have a chance? Thanks! Edwardian 21:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking, Edwardian. I agree with its deletion and have voted accordingly. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I just want to say...
I love the name :-D lol Knowledge Of  Self  |  talk  05:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hehe yes&mdash;I remember when you joined Wikipedia (a few months ago, right?) and I saw your name start to pop up more and more frequently on my watchlist...I keep seeing it and wondering "wait, did I edit that page?" Great minds and all that... &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes I do believe it was September 24th of this year that I officially signed up. I just keep seeing your name while on RC patrol and I keep thinking there's a man that has good taste! :-D Cheers. Knowledge Of  Self  |  talk  17:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * P.S. Enjoy your wikibreak!

Admin
Do you have any advice for becomming an admin? I want to eventually become one. Any comments or hints would be greatly appreciated. 03:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hey buddy, good to hear from you. Well, of course all the stuff I wrote you in March when you asked me before still applies. However, I assume you want more specific comments and that's why you're writing again. I think the biggest key is getting involved. Why do you want to be an administrator? If you can't demonstrate the benefit you'll derive (and the community will derive) from your adminship, you probably won't get much support. Even nice, highly prolific editors may not get adminship if they don't participate much in the "janitorial" side of Wikipedia. They'll want to see things like vandalism reversion, participation in policy and such (grossly manifested by edits to the Wikipedia: namespace, such as AfD participation and so on), perhaps dealing with conflicts, and such. I've only taken a cursory glance at your recent contributions, but people might object that you don't really do too much that needs admin tools, you know? Also, more article editing and writing might help&mdash;right now, a high proportion of your edits seem to be to things like Mind Benders, your subpages, and to people requesting they vote in your poll. All of these are good community activities, but they are peripheral to the purpose of building an encyclopedia. You can and should keep doing all these things, but voters would probably like to see you put some more time into keeping Wikipedia clean, and working to improve it. Finally, there are a few relatively minor aspects that people often oppose over. One is that you rarely use edit summaries. These are considered at the least a courtesy to others, so that they can at a glance see what you've done when they're viewing their watchlists, and especially to RC patrollers so they know what you've done. As most administrator candidates are expected to be active in fighting vandalism or somehow demonstrating their need for administrative tools, courtesy to your fellow patrollers is often expected. Secondly, using images in signatures, and especially using an unsubstituted template for one's signature, is frowned upon (see WP:SIG for more information). And consider using the "show preview" button more frequently; perhaps you can avoid taking so many edits to accomplish a task (for instance, your recent work on Featured picture candidates/Flamethrower). This is all just off the top of my head. Please don't interpret any of this as criticism&mdash;you're doing a great job, and fulfilling an important role. It's just that serving as an administrator is a different role, so you may have to adapt. Also, take my suggestions with a grain or two of salt&mdash;I never intended to run for adminship but was offered a nomination out of the blue, so I never really did anything special to prepare for nomination. My suggestions are a combination of how I work and what I use when evaluating administrator candidates, plus observations of what others use. Finally, realize that WP:RFA seems to have gotten quite a bit more stringent since March when I became an administrator, and it can be quite upsetting to receive criticism or to be carefully scrutinized. Requests for adminship/Standards has rough standards contributed by many Wikipedians; that may prove helpful to you. You'll also have to be familiar with Wikipedia policy and what administrators do before running. Hope this isn't overwhelming, and I hope it helps. Let me know if I can be of further help. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

My RFA
Hi there Knowledge Seeker, I havent heard from you in a while. I was wondering if you could vote on my RFA here. Thanks in advance! — M o e   ε  21:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hey, SWD, sorry I didn't respond earlier&mdash;I've been on a bit of a Wikibreak. And I'm sorry to see that your nomination did not succeed. RfA can be quite a harsh place, but I'm glad you were able to take criticism well; we all benefit from feedback and hopefully you can pick up a few tips for next time. I'll send you a more detailed message later, but I just wanted to say you're a good editor and I'm glad you're still contributing to Wikipedia. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 21:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind words, they are always appriciated from you. — M o e   ε  21:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

AOL Block
It appears User:Pathoschild unblocked your IP address. Are you still having difficulties? By the way, you may wish to reconsider the tone of the message you leave administrators. Your message seems to imply that you got blocked out of carelessness or that an AOL IP address was deliberately blocked. Merovingian is a longtime administrator and the suggestion that he desires to punish all AOL users isn't very nice, especially since it is just speculation. Please assume good faith. Perhaps you don't realize, but if you look at the block message you received, you will be able to see that Merovingian did not directly block the IP address, but rather blocked User:Kkkboi. He would not be able to know that Kkkboi was using AOL, as administrators do not have access to registered users' IP addresses, for privacy's sake. The way MediaWiki is configured, when someone is blocked, the IP address they are using is also automatically blocked. For instance, if someone were to block me right now, I would not be able to circumvent the block by logging out of Wikipedia and editing as an anonymous user or using a sockpuppet account. If the blocking administrator (or anyone else) examines the Special:Ipblocklist later, he may see autoblock entries (under his name!) although a code number is displayed instead of the IP address. So in short, we have no way of knowing what the IP number is unless the user tells us. When Merovingian blocked Kkkboi, he would not be able to know that Kkkboi was using AOL, and if he were to later examine the blocklist and notice the autoblocked entries, he would still have no way of knowing what the IP addresses were, much less determine their origin. Rather than suggest that the blocking administrator is incompetent or out to get AOL editors, you might consider leaving a polite message thanking them for helping to fight vandalism, but that you are using AOL and were caught by one of their autoblocks; would they mind unblocking the address? A similar message would suffice for a different administrator. Not only might this produce faster results, it will also help keep Wikipedia a pleasant place to edit. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 07:17, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'll take your note of chastisement under advisement -- be aware that the note you piggybacked on (whether on my talk page or a friendly admin's page) is less "polite" than the note I left the admin who initiated the block. Keep in mind that this is not a new experience for me.  Also I have an entire archive of AOL blocking problems, none of them directed at me.  See User:WBardwin/AOL Block Collection.  The IP address I am most often assigned has been included, at my request, on "the list" that should not be blocked for any length of time.  I have had several helpful adminstrators intervene for me as we have tried to make the system/AOL interaction more efficient.  However, vandalism gets more attention than regular editing and so AOL users are punished, no matter what polite wording we want to use.  A couple of admins tell me the training they received in this area is minimal and that they only learn from interacting with users with problems -- like me.  But, thanking them for using up the time I can allocate to Wiki?? -- well, I'll think about it.  Thanks for your willingness to respond, at any rate.   WBardwin 07:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your response. I realize this must be frustrating for you. Several months ago, while I was temporarily using dial-up before my cable modem was installed, I kept getting hit with a block intended for a problem user who also sometimes used my IP address&mdash;of course, since I am in administrator, the only incovenience to me was that I had to unblock the IP and report my actions on WP:AN/I, whereas you have to find someone to unblock you. I'm sorry you have to deal with this. That being said, I'd like to ask you not to take your frustrations out on well-meaning users. It's good that you got the IP address listed on the block page, and of course new ways of dealing with vandalism from AOL users will always be welcome, due to the unusual way AOL assigns IP addresses. But that's not really relevant here&mdash;I'm not sure you fully understood my message. Merovingian did not block an IP address, AOL or otherwise. He blocked User:Kkkboi. Unbeknownst to him, Kkkboi was using AOL&mdash;indeed, there would be no way for Merovingian to know this; administrators do not have access to registered users' IP addresses. Later, Kkkboi or someone else (possibly you) tried to edit from the same IP address (logged in or anonymous). The software recognized the IP address as one used by a recently blocked user and so it automatically blocked the IP address. There is currently no way to disable this. So at this point Merovingian has no idea that an IP address has been autoblocked under his name. Even if he for some reason visits the IP blocklist, he will see something like (for example) "07:49, December 15, 2005, RoyBoy blocked #68550 (expires 07:49, December 16, 2005) (Unblock) (Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Hiveman". The reason given for Hiveman's block is: "Spam".)". Note that the IP address is not visible. At this point, aside from the blocked users, no one has any idea that an AOL IP address was involved. There is no way for them to know. Even if Merovingian was wondering "Hmm, I hope Kkkboi wasn't using AOL to edit and I hope the software didn't then autoblock an AOL IP address", it would not be possible for him to find out. This has nothing to do with punishing AOL users. The point is, Merovingian acted absolutely appropriately. A user was creating problems and he blocked him. We can't stop blocking people because there is a possibility they are using AOL. Unfortunately, the only recourse is for you to ask to be unblocked. There is no easy solution to this, and it will happen again. It might happen the next time I block a registered user. And you'll have to go through the same thing again. But it's not the blocking administrator's fault. As Bishonen remarked, it is the fault of the software for not letting us disable autoblocking and the fault of AOL for continually reassigning IP addresses. You can thank the administrator for doing his job properly. It's not his fault you got autoblocked. Accusing people of ignorance or deliberate overblocking is counterproductive, since there is no behavior the administrator can modify for next time. And again, it does little to promote a productive atmosphere on Wikipedia. I realize the concept of autoblocking, and that administrators aren't necessarily deliberately blocking your IP address, might be difficult to understand. Please let me know if you have any questions. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 08:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * In general terms, I do understand this process. Programmers (one on wiki, two elsewhere) tell me that the "bug" would not be that difficult to fix.  But it would require time and attention, and is so "unseen" that it is unlikely to occur.  I'm probably reflecting both personal frustration (its a very busy time of year for me) and the frustration that comes from seeing vandalism, in its many forms, get more attention on Wikipedia than productive work.  Fighting vandals is worthwhile, but the encyclopedia grows from other activities.  So any action that punishes productive editors and has relatively no effect on vandalism (Kkkboi has long ago moved on to another set of proxy numbers) should be a source of frustration to us all.  I, in general, do not take the blocking personally, but it does take rewarding and relaxing editing time away from me.  So, I'll apologize for my tone, if it offends, but not for my frustration.  These blocking problems come in waves, so it is likely I'll have an easier stretch in the future.  Best wishes.  WBardwin 08:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your well-thought-out message. You're absolutely right; there are many of us who wish we could disable the autoblocker, especially for specific blocks, and if there is some way I can assist in promoting that change, I would like to. You have every right to be frustrated by being hit with blocks not intended for you. And it may very well be that some of those are by administrators blocking an AOL IP address for too long. I just wanted to make sure you realized that not all of these blocks are of AOL IP addresses, that an any administrator, including those you contacted for assistance, might be the one inadvertantly blocking you next time&mdash;and calling them a "dingbat" likely won't be productive. Incidentally, regarding your comments on User talk:Bishonen, you are correct: when I checked my watchlist and noticed a user leaving comments with the edit summary "Release me!" on multiple administrators' talk pages, naturally I stopped by to see if I could help. The problem had been solved by that point, but I hoped I could help clear up some misconceptions&mdash;Merovingian's an easy-going guy, but there are many users who might get upset at being insulted or criticized at something they have no control over. Incidentally, it is quite difficult to get on my bad side: I am certainly not angry or upset with you, and I apologize if my tone was overly censorious. The next time you get inadvertantly blocked, you may contact me as well, if you wish. A couple other options: check recent changes and leave a message for an administrator you recognize, or perhaps better would be the block log (or the IP block list, although you should of course ignore the autoblock entries, since there is no guarantee that administrator has been on Wikipedia recently). Another option is the IRC channel, although I've never used IRC and am not familiar with how it works. I hope you don't encounter this problem too often, and please leave me a message if you run into any trouble. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 21:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Test
Should we use the test template if there is a user without a user page that has just added a article or done an edit that would be considered vandilism?


 * Yeah, you should go ahead and use it. Looks like you're doing a good job, by the way. Regardless if the user has a user page and/or has a talk page, you should add the (substituted) template to the talk page, just as you're doing. Also, I don't know if you're familiar with it, but User:CryptoDerk's Vandal Fighter is a great program to help patrol. There's also the Conter Vandalism Unit, although I am not familiar with their work. Let me know if you have any more questions; I should be around a bit more now. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 22:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the good advice
Please don't edit others' user pages. Messages to users may be placed on their talk pages, which you can access by clicking the "discussion" tab when viewing their user page. The title will be something like User talk:Snowspinner. Please feel free to ask me if you have any questions. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * There's so much to learn, even after months. 'Preciate it. -- Tenebrae 05:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You're quite welcome. If you ever have any questions, don't hesitate to drop by my talk page. Incidentally, it is also generally considered poor form to remove (selectively) remove comments from one's talk page without archiving them, especially if they are comments critical of the editor (mine wasn't). Just something to keep in mind. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 09:43, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. I appreciate your taking time and effort to help a total stranger. It took me a minute to figure out "archiving them," but I guess the archives are those upper-right-hand boxes I've seen on some pages. I'll do a search on Wiki and see if I can dig up instructions, or just look at someone's edit mode and try and figure it out myself. Thanks again! -- Tenebrae 15:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry; I suppose my last message was not very helpful. There are some good instructions at How to archive a talk page, and I'd be happy to assist you if I can. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 19:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Please! No apology necessary! You've been great, and a welcome antidote to less civil sorts. Happy holidays. Oh ... and the seeking is good, but you are a knowledge GIVER! -- Tenebrae 21:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Why, thank you. I love sharing the knowledge I acquire as well which is why Wikipedia is such a great place for me. And I try not to be a User:KnowledgeLoser. Happy holidays to you too! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Changing username
Welcome to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the name you have selected, User:GroundZero, is very similar to an existing Wikipedia user, User:Ground Zero. Please select a new username. Your existing edits can be reattributed at Changing username; however, be sure not to register the new username first. Please feel free to ask me if you have any questions. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi, I don't known how to procede. I ask sorry if I disrespect rules, I can't predict that another user already using this username. --GroundZero 14:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Instructions are available at Changing username. If they are unclear or you have any specific questions, I would be happy to answer them, but that page does a better job of explaining than could I. I didn't mean to suggest that you disrespected the rules; in fact, I don't see anything in my statement to you that implies any wrongdoing. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:34, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
I would like to wish you and your family all the best for the holidays and the New Year. Guettarda 15:24, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Guettarda; a (belated) Merry Christmas to you as well. Hope it was enjoyable! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Question?
How do I check my e-Mail on wikipedia? &mdash; Hurricane Devon  ( Talk, e-Mail ) 16:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You can't check your e-mail on Wikipedia. If someone sends you an e-mail through Wikipedia, it will go to whatever e-mail address you specified in your preferences. You can check that account as you normally check your e-mail. I just sent you a test message; let me know if you get it or if you have any questions. And happy birthday! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:51, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Larvatus
This Rfc is a serious one. It involves child rape allegations, a US civil legal case, CEOs of international corporations, and a famous German band. It needs input from a broad range of Wikipedians. Before I removed the crime categories and POV content several weeks ago, I looked at Larvtus's blogs, the cited CA court cases on line, and Larvatus's entries on other websites. It was replaced and I was scolded (my perception). I've asked him to step back and let the community decide. I'm willing to step aside and let other Wikipedians make the decision, in fact I would prefer it.--FloNight 17:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Wow&mdash;quite a tricky situation. I'll take a closer look, but this issue may prove to be too complex for me. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

request for info
i started "kalenderhane" title...and i have added an external link.Now i can edit the external link but not the main page...

Can u help me about that? Sezgin


 * Am I correct in assuming that you were able to solve the problem? It looks like you've been able to continue your work on Kalenderhane. If not, let me know and I will help you find the problem. Incidentally, may I make two suggestions? One is, to sign your name, please use four tildes, like this: . This inserts the time and date as well as your username. You can also customize it later if you wish (for instance, a link to your talk page or something like that). Also, when you ask someone about an article, it's nice to link to it by putting brackets around the title (e.g.   = Kalenderhane) as a courtesy. That way, those reading your comment can simply follow the link to the article. Make sense? &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Wishes
I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. --Bhadani 16:45, 25 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Merry Christmas to you as well! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Veterinary medicine
I just wanted to say I'm sorry that the WP:MCOTW was not able to help with Veterinary medicine. Unfortunately, it's just too far out of our fields of expertise. There must be veterinarians on Wikipedia though who would be willing to tackle it! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hey, no problem, I've put it on WP:AID, so maybe it'll catch on there. Tuf-Kat 05:14, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Excellent...good luck! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Format
Just wanted to remind you to be sure to close your tags if you're using HTML (for example, tags). Otherwise, the effects may overflow to the following text. Let me know if you have any questions. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry to bother you about this again&mdash;not sure if you saw my previous message&mdash;but if you have time, you may wish to consider going to all the talk pages you left messages on recently and repairing the HTML, since it appears the example above was not the only time you didn't close the  tag. If you don't understand this, please ask me on my talk page. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi KS! Thanks for the notes. Sorry for not being able to fix that on time. Everything is fixed now. It was due to a rush by copying and pasting. No problem for the the majority of the user talk pages. Cheers -- Szvest 05:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up&#153;


 * Oh, no need to apologize. I wasn't sure if you were familiar with HTML or if I was just confusing you with my tech-speak. And that explains why when I checked a couple other of your messages they were fine already. Anyway, congratulations on your new adminship! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 05:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for your understanding and courtesy. Actually, I found HTML so boring and for a few years I've been into the N-Tier architecture (dealing most with .NET platform). I am not sure if you'd be interested in having a look at WikiProject .NET. Cheers -- Szvest 05:45, 28 December 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up&#153;


 * It looks like your tech-speak is more advanced than mine. Good luck and happy editing! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 04:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Semi-automated template substitution

 * This page was modified to semi-automatically substitute templates using Pathoschild's template list. // Tawker 11:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)