User talk:Nburden/Archives/2007/November

=November 2007=

Abuse reports/JPS vandal
I don't understand why it was rejected, obviously the guy knows what he's doing. Look in the page history, see how long he's been doing it. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 21:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Per this there needs to be at least one full cycle of warnings. Per this there needs to be at least 5 recent blocks. This report met neither, so I refused it. Continue warnings and blocks for now. N b u r d e n  (T) 02:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * But the thing is, there is no time to warn him. (Look in the page history and see how fast he edits). Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 02:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * He edits fast, but one can still warn him. The only warning he's gotten is a 4im; take him through a full series once and one more block, and he qualifies. N b u r d e n  (T) 02:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thank you. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI
I'm an Admin, i just reverted to the wronge history page The Placebo Effect 15:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, an annon left me a warning on my page signed as you. The Placebo Effect 15:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Archibald Smith
Sorry, I didn't understand that ... Richard Pinch 21:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah I see, thanks. I disagree though.  What happens now: do we discuss or do you just go ahead and remove it?  Richard Pinch 21:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It will be reviewed and either removed or restored, based on the conclusion of the admins who review it. The discussion can be found here. Feel free to add why you disagree. N b u r d e n  (T) 21:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Whoops, my bad. You can add why you disagree on the talk page here. N b u r d e n  (T) 21:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks. Richard Pinch 22:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

There is no copyright problem with Archibald Smith. It is text taken from a nineteenth-century source. Charles Matthews 22:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I didn't see a date of publish on the source. N b u r d e n  (T) 22:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In Remembrance...
--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 02:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Abuse reports/216.20.33.67
I think you misunderstood my Abuse report. I didn't wish to have IP blocked I guess I should have added address after IP. I was reporting 216.20.33.67 for abuse, not the user IP. There are two blocks on 216.20.33.67's block log. So could we please reopen the case? Shootmaster 44 07:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The abuse report page requires at least five recent blocks. What you can do instead is report the IP at WP:AIV to get it blocked. N b u r d e n  (T) 08:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey
The Arooster Cats was made by a banned user, that's why it got nuked so fast. Kwsn  (Ni!)  19:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool, saw that after Twinkle froze on me. N b u r d e n  (T) 19:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, he settled down after we community band him, but he's still active it sadly seems. Kwsn   (Ni!)  19:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright issue
Hey man, you left a message on my talk page in regard to possible copyright infringement on the page Fool's Gold (2008 film). Just to clear my name, I didn't actual write the article, I had just moved in from its original location for classification reasons. The person who you probably want to get after about this is User:Djbj16 as he actual is the author of the stub. Thanks. -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 20:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification, it looks like the copyvio issue has been taken care of anyway. N b u r d e n  (T) 06:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Beatty Issue
Okay, well I know his daughter Kathlyn, how am I supposed to give a source for that?
 * It doesn't matter if you know Kathlyn (see WP:NOR). If you can find a source that refers to her as Stephen, you can add that source and your additions; otherwise, it has to go per WP:BLP. N b u r d e n  (T) 08:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

fine sorry, I didn't know, chill dude
 * I'm not jumping on you, but Wikipedia can incur serious harm if errors are made in the biographies of living people. N b u r d e n  (T) 09:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

53 Questions
I just spend quite a while preparing an article called "53 Questions" in relation to the published plans to restrict foreign travel for UK citizens, and whilst fetching some additional material the article was deleted, even though I entered the HANGON tag as directed? What gives?  BRIANTIST  (talk) 10:09, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't tell you, I just added the db tag. I'm not a sysop and didn't delete the article. N b u r d e n  (T) 10:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me
I strongly disagree with your claim of vandalism on the JHC article, it's well known fact that the removed information is in fact the truth, and you've just ruined the honesty and integrity of the article

And...

I would also like to point out your locality compared to that of my own, you do not attend this school? am i correct? Nor do you live in Southland (New Zealand) am i also correct? i don't believe an individual who dwells across the pacific can actually vouch what should be said about this school.

thanks panda


 * Given what the edit looked like (...those who fail at sports...) along with the lack of an edit summary, your edit appeared to be vandalism. Now if there is a class or series of classes called "Sports" that, if failed (in an academic sense) results in a student being moved to Block Z, then I'm sorry, I've made a mistake. Otherwise, perhaps you could change the wording to be more encyclopedic. N b u r d e n  (T) 10:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Hi Nick, I've noticed that you've been tagging articles for speedy deletion within a few minutes of creation. Could you please familiarise yourself with the advice at WP:NPP:
 * It is advisable to patrol new pages from the bottom of the first page of the log. This should give the creating editor enough time to improve a new page before a patroller attends to it, particularly if the patroller tags the page for speedy deletion. Tagging anything other than attack pages or complete nonsense a minute after creation is not constructive and only serves to annoy the page author.
 * My bad, sorry. N b u r d e n  (T) 10:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

do you know any admins?
can you give me there link?--76.164.193.90 (talk) 08:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Try posting here. N b u r d e n  (T) 08:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * thanks ^_^--76.164.193.90 (talk) 09:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Abuse reports/141.150.53.30
I've now updated this page so it shows the block log - I'll amend the instructions to make it clearer - please can you have another look at this report, thanks very much Tom (talk) 11:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I suggest opening this case again. Just make sure the blocks are showing up in the log. N b u r d e n  (T) 21:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

AWB
Hi, sorry if I seem a little pedantic for pointing this out, but I think you should read the AWB rules of use before making any more edits like this one, regards, King of the  North  East  11:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Got it, sorry. N b u r d e n  (T) 21:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thomas of Echternach
Sorry about that. Hope to add more soon. Fergananim —Preceding comment was added at 16:17, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Your Welcome
That has got to be the most interesting thank you I have ever received and you are whole heartedly welcome. Have a good day Rgoodermote   03:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

No, thank you! :)
Glad I could help! And I'm no angel. :P Cheers, Master of Puppets Care to share?  01:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Your RFA
Hey Nburden, I've never done this before, but you might want to withdraw your RFA. With less than 2 months of active editing (and the black mark of vandalism that you had 6 months ago) is going to result in a failed RFA. Most people want to see at least 6 months of solid edit history before granting the tools. With your past vandalism, that desire is going to be heightened. Also, before you go up for RFA, I would highly recommend going through RFA coaching. Get a coach to review your edits and help you develop, then when you go up for RFA you will have somebody to nominate you. Balloonman (talk) 03:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I also suggest editor review as a helpful way to improve the quality of your edits. Temperal xy 03:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I closed it per WP:SNOW. I know from experience that this can cause some stress (see Requests for adminship/Sasha Callahan), but I hope you aren't too discouraged and decide to stick around.  ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 04:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it; you're very welcome. I hope you take the advice given, but please be aware that adminship isn't everything (Although your edits tend to suggest that's what you're striving for). This is just an online encyclopedia and article building should always be first - Article writing is much more enjoyable than endless vandal patrols and a lot less stressful. If you ever need advice on anything, not that you would, but you can always contact me. I hope you stick around - we can always use eager editors like yourself, but even I have to remind myself that this site isn't a big deal in the scheme of things. Cheers, :) Spawn Man (talk) 11:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, and be aware that most people really don't think previous vandals should become admins - I prefer to give people a second chance, but the rule of thumb is to wait at least up to a year after any vandalism before going up for RfA. Cheers anyway. :) Spawn Man (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA
I have little doubt that you will become an admin. Don't rush. Savor the experience and enjoy the ride. If I can help you, let me know. Dloh cierekim'''  13:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note on my talk page. Majoreditor (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)