User talk:Pax:Vobiscum/Archive 2

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Pax:Vobiscum! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 02:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
I fixed the approval bug from last night. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 15:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Gwern
While it could be seen that way, the user was obviously using a bot without a bot flag and all such accounts are banned until further notice so that the botmaster can contact the blocking admin. If you check the user's talk page and block summary, you'll see I welcome communication about getting the block lifted if the behavior really wasn't malicious in intent. ZsinjTalk 20:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

St. Patrick's Grammar School, Downpatrick

 * I have just reverted this article - the changes you made restored factual inaccuracies (eg the school does not play baseball and Pauline Lynch is a teacher at the school, not a former pupil). I have a son at the school and do know the facts. The internal headings were also to give structure to the article which it badly needs. Ardfern 23:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Pax:Vobiscum! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. A le_Jrb talk 21:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Bibliographies
The discussion has picked up again at Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Christian_Apologetic_Works. Thought you might be interested. --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 12:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD
Pax, I have put Articles for deletion/List of works by Neil Gaiman up for AfD. Could you include it in the list of Lists-related deletions?-BillDeanCarter 11:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks.-BillDeanCarter 11:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Adoption
Okay let me look into that a little more. I don't really know anything about that I just saw it while looking around the help desk and thought it might be a good idea. Marcus Taylor 00:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: AfD keep?
Sorry, my bad. It's now deleted. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 01:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

WZBH
You know nothing aboutb WZBH and should mind your own business. comment added by 12.219.92.201 12:52, 12 May 2007

List of the writings of William Monahan
Pax, would you mind chiming in with a Keep again? This list unfortunately 9 days later has been renominated for deletion.-BillDeanCarter 22:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

L&O plot insperations
Yea actualy my source is just TV.com' L&O episode guid and all they say is "This episode appears to be Ripped from the headlines." But is this site any help http://www.geocities.com/insufferablebratt/Ripped/ripped.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DanDud88 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC).

Smiley200
No problem, you probably finished it quicker than i could've... Smiley200 15:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Queensland Youth Choir
Thank-you for taking the time to justify your edits to this page. I've reverted the page back to your edition for you. Keep up the good work.

ChrischTalk 13:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: List of prehistoric structures in Great Britain
Sorry for the delay (taking a bit of time off WP). That change is fine &mdash; doesn't really matter to me what the article is called, just thought that the content should be there. Thanks for the interest! &mdash;Ryan McDaniel 22:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Adoption
Are you into sports? I'm kind of a jock so if you were to adopt me that would help. Marcus Taylor 20:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello
Hej! I submitted a request for third opinion and it was blanked. Then I submitted a request for mediation but the other person blanked out the mediation tag on their talk page. If mediation doesn't happen, I think I will leave wikipedia. If so, please look after Hurricane High School (Utah) to see that it doesn't get vandalized. I see that you made an edit to it before. I am the only one editing it nicely except some anonymous editors and some vandals. Tjadå Pipermantolisopa 06:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

rfa
I can see you're not on wiki at the moment, but I want you to get the orange bar when you log in again. There are questions awaiting your attention at your RFA. ··coe l acan 07:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA
Hi there; I have changed my vote to Support. A number of other editors have picked up my question and have opposed because of your error. I am truly sorry if this means that you do not succeed (although I hope that the closing bureaucrat will take everything into account). We have in the past seen applicants who truly did not know the difference between a ban and a block, and promotion of such a candidate would be disastrous. I seriously hope that this RfA succeeds. Good luck.--Anthony.bradbury 12:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I made a somewhat similar mistake in my first RfA. I misread an optional question late at night, gave a stupid answer and generated massive opposition. If this one does not go through, the next will.--Anthony.bradbury 16:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Ghostbook.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ghostbook.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Km tiar.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Km tiar.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Hello, this is a friendly notice that another user has started a thread on you at WP:ANI. You have been accused of using sockpuppets to help the chances of your current RfA succeeding. The thread can be found here. I recomend you respond to it soon.

--- BH  (Talk) 01:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Please note that the suspicions are already hurting your RFA. Fun  pika  01:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You were cleared by checkuser. apparently a well-known vandal was behind this.  check the thread for more info.   BH  (Talk) 03:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

You're an Admin!
It is my pleasure to inform you that you are now an admin. Congratulations. You can feel free to do everything you're supposed to do and nothing you're not supposed to do. If you haven't already, now is the time look through the Administrators' how-to guide and Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Administrators' noticeboard. Best wishes and good luck, -- Cecropia 23:55, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA
Let me be the first to congratulate you on a well-deserved promotion, which I am truly glad that i did not spoil for you.-- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 00:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll be the second then: Congratulations Man.  BH  (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations!! Well done, and from the logs, I can see you're off to a great start - A l is o n ☺ 11:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Page protection of Negima!?
Hello. I'd just like to ask why you protected Negima!?, given the fact that it hadn't been edited for five hours before it was protected? How can you be sure they didn't just give up trying to vandalise? --ɐuɐʞsəp (ʞɿɐʇ) 15:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Judging from the blocklog the vandal(s) have been extremely persistent, and the content of some of the edits make it pretty clear that the vandalism would continue if there were no protection. Pax:Vobiscum 15:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've seen plenty of people say stuff like that then give up once you've blocked them. Given the fact that it wasn't vandalised for five hours before you protected it, how can you be so sure they'd be persistant given that they'd not vandalised? --ɐuɐʞsəp (ʞɿɐʇ) 15:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Look through the history and check the edits made when the article has been unprotected (April 21-22, May 6 and May 28-29). Since he's obviously returned once again I see no reason to believe that he will quit. Pax:Vobiscum 15:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Redirects
Hi Pax. The reason I redirected the first page was a way of salting it, since it had been recreated several times. Of course, standard procedure would have been to replace the page with the impersonator template. However, this vandal is clearly looking for as much recognition from Nate1481 as possible. By redirecting the pages to the user's page, I felt that this would deny recognition as much as possible. Not standard policy of course, just a different method of ignoring the vandal, since they are clearly going to carry on creating new socks. However, I feel, that your course of just using the template is probably more sensible :P. ck lostsword•T•C 12:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Mujahideen article
Hey i would just like to thank you for protecting the article and I would like to ask since you have protected it can you pls revert it to either mine or Angus Lepper latest version so you can remover the vandalsim of that user, and do block him becuase he has been in violation so so many rulesKlass 12:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but the admin should not revert protected page in case of content disputes. Pax:Vobiscum 12:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * come on man, mine and Angus Lepper article is fully cited and sources and its not vandalism, his one is pure deletion of an article its not fare, you are an admin and you have to keep the articles clean of vandalism and as you saw the article me and Angus Lepper edit is fully related and sourced and good information. Please try and do something about it.
 * user:Klass is a suspected sockepup of indef banned . --noclador 12:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The first thing that should be done is to try to establish consensus on the talk. Then we can unprotect the page and let the editing continue. Pax:Vobiscum 12:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

about the sunage redirect
Thanks :). --SkyWalker 17:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Shia Islam
Thanks for semi-protecting this article. However, even in-between your two edits a mysterious editor turns up and does a revert on it. This was his/her second contribution and I suspect is the user behind the IP address, in which case they would have violated WP:3RR. I have already made 3 reverts today and not sure if reverting this vandalism would constitute a breach on my part. Would appreciate your intervention, if you feel it appropriate. Thanks. → AA (talk • contribs) — 15:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

On RFPP
That's fine then, since you've made that decision; I'll still watchlist his pages in case his talk page gets trolled. Acalamari 22:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Help with deletion?
There are two revisions of my user page in a vandalized state which I would prefer deleted. According to WP:UP, I could use to have my entire user page speedily deleted, at my request. Unfortunately, I only need these two revisions deleted, and there doesn't seem to be a clear process to accomplish that. Could you assist me with the deletion of these two revisions?


 * one, diff
 * two, diff

Thank you! j   talk   00:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Turk American
Hi the anon is still adding the information I am getting tired of removing it, I suspect he cannot speak English what should be done? --Vonones 18:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Vonones 21:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Still adding it with different Ips, --Vonones 21:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Kyrklig förnyelse
A template has been added to the article Kyrklig förnyelse, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Pastordavid 16:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Vonones
Per your July 17, 2007 post on Vonones talk page, Vonones remove a next update post for the Main Page here, as discussed here. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 02:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Apparently, this was discussed and resolved here and here. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 03:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Unusual Adoption Request
Hi! Im an English teacher in Toluca Mexico (west of Mexico City). My Advanced B classes will be contributing to Wikipedia as the focus of their English course for Fall 2007. I am looking for people who would like to mentor my students (who will be working in groups) as they do the following assignments: Edit and article (adding a citation), writing a stub with a citation, translating an English language article for Spanish Wikipedia and for the final project, writing a full article for English Wiki (they can expand on the stub mentioned previously). What I would like to do is put a list of "mentors/adopters" on my talk page as a kind of short cut for my students, who have limited time to get things done. The semester begings Aug 6, but the real Wikipedia work wont begin until the beginning of Sept. If you would like to add your name to my list, please go to my talk page and add it there, perhaps with a short introduction, if you like.

Thank you!

Thelmadatter 20:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Thelmadatter

Churches of Christ protection
Thanks. Would you mind adding the tag that says it protected? I've noticed that if things are protected, but dont have the tag, they disappear from my watchlist. And it probably needs a tag anyway. Thanks. i (said)  (did) 21:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * My bad, thanks for reminding me. It is now tagged appropriately. Pax:Vobiscum 21:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks much. i  (said)  (did) 21:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Dear Pax:Vobiscum,

The sitaution on Rorschach inkblot test was unbearable after this edit war.

Thank you to having lock the page, as i required.

Ah, i dunno, but I wrote here the request, was it the correct place?!?! i don't know it! :-/

ok, thank you again, bye and pax vobiscum--to you too!:)--DrugoNOT 21:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Pax:Vobiscum...
 * Unlucky Tworth continues his trolling. He probably registered his account only to make a mess....he just edits to cause problems with Rorschach inkblot test ...
 * Here you can read his version of the facts... but damn...he's a troll, i don't want waste my time with him. So, can you intervene with him, and ask him to stop... ?
 * I'm agree if someone wants put boths image (even the full-black picture), but i am not agree about removing the origianl picture from the page. Tworth wants remove the original picture and let ONLY the not original! lol
 * Thanks. Bye!:)--DrugoNOT 15:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Ottoman Armenian casualties
The article Ottoman Armenian casualties is locked after it was corrupted with Armenian POV editing. Because:

1) The Turkish-Armenian conflict ended in 1921 with the Treaty of Kars. The Armenians purposefully want to extend the date to 1923 so that a connection can be established also with the present-day Republic of Turkey (founded in 1923).

2) American historian Justin McCarthy is listed as a "Turkish source", which is complete rubbish and clearly Armenian POV, just because he estimates a lesser death toll than the one which pleases the Armenians.

3) I also wrote detailed information (completely from Encyclopedia Britannica's website, including resources and links) regarding Arnold J. Toynbee's research, but the Armenians are deleting it because it doesn't suit their POV.

Now, is Wikipedia a neutral resource or not? Flavius Belisarius 22:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:PROTECT does not allow admins to edit protected pages: "Admins should not edit pages that are protected due to a content dispute, unless there is consensus for the change, or the change is unrelated to the dispute". What you have to do is work with the other editors to reach consensus and then request unprotection. Pax:Vobiscum 07:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of BravePoint Page
Hello: I am confused as to why the parent company page Chesapeake Utilities of BravePoint did not get deleted but the BravePoint one did get deleted. Can you please explain how to edit the article to avoid future deletions?

POV pushing
Hi can you indef the user now? he has used more 5 sock puppets and ips or he has meatpuppeted he does not respond despite warnings there is no point to take this on anymore, thank you. --Vonones 20:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Mujahideen
Could you unprotect Mujahideen? Its been about a month. It should have been semi protected (not full) to protect it from the anon IP's that were edit warring. From that article I wanted to remove the Islam category, as its a top level cat.--Matt57 (talk•contribs) 22:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It was fully protected since the edit war involved registered editors as well. I've now changed the protection level to semi, so let's see how thing turn out. Best wishes/ Pax:Vobiscum 07:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Zero Emissions Climate Goals
Hi, I didn't appreciate that you deleted my page on Zero Emissions climate goals... In Australia we have quite a debate around this and the world's leading scientist is calling for zero emissions and the drawdown of atmospheric carbon

You could have just eliminated the links to our not for profit climate campaign organisations.. both of which are different in that beyond zero emissions is politically active while zero emission network is relatively benign.

So please I would appreciate it if you would reinstate the page. Our group has held Australias first zero emissions conference where Dr James Hansen spoke, amongst Australian Academics etc. We're hooked in with politicians on different sides of politics and the major international green groups.
 * Hi, and thanks for your message. I'd recommend working with the many articles that already exists on the subject. Individual and political action on climate change, Emission standard or Mitigation of global warming for example. If you want to start a new article it is important that it uses reliable and verifiable sources (Verifiability). Best wishes/ Pax:Vobiscum 09:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)