User talk:Phearson/Archive 1

RfC
I have moved and edited the RfC you created. Please see Template talk:RFCUlist for details. Peter 19:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. Phearson (talk) 23:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Asgardian
According to his talk page's edit history, it has not been edited by him or anyone else since April 30. Although that was about 20 days after he was ban, blocks will only prevent a user from editing their talk page if the block settings are specifically specified to do so. I don't know if editing one's user page is prohibited for a banned user, but if you feel this is a problem (or if you're referring to some evidence of more recent and more grave editing by him than just his talk page), then you should alert someone in Arbitration, since I believe they enacted the block. Let me know if you need anything else. Nightscream (talk) 05:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Interesting..
I find it rather amazing that there are now people on Wikipedia who specialize to one article. Additionally I find it pretty interesting that you are trying to connect a form of religion with a multilevel marketing scheme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.246.53 (talk) 12:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The rumor actually came from members of whyweprotest.net. That Cutco is a front for Scientology because of the unethical behavior the the sales arm, Vector marketing performs. Also, I appreciate you fixing a minor error on my user page, but please do not do so again... which reminds me, I'm not a specialist anymore since I've edited a variety of articles... might as well change it. Phearson (talk) 13:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Abuse response
It states on my user talk page that the case is under investigation. However, while editing the page, it states that the case was rejected. What is the current status of the abuse report? Immunize (talk) 13:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strange, from here it says it's still open, did you have another case? Phearson (talk) 13:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not to my knowledge. On an unrelated note, please sign your posts on talk pages. Best wishes. Immunize (talk) 13:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry to butt in, as to Immunize question, I noticed Here that it states "Awaiting human Response" time stamped "3 June 2010 (UTC)" and at the same time below in the case log it shows "Investigation Complete" on 3 June 2010 (UTC), this can be confusing. This is how I see this information. It does show that the investigation is done, but still awaiting a resolution. And with this post I hope I'm not committing Abuse response/Nominate suicide. If I'm correct in my assumption, this can be confusing.  Mlpearc   pull my chain   'Tribs  14:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you VERY much
I guess that school would rather not deal with that IP, it would seem. :)

Could I impose on you to look into the antics of this guy? This and other IPs in Florida come back almost immediately after long-term blocks to perform subtle vandalism on the facts and figures on black colleges. Weird. Can do, or what would you like for me to do to get this ball rolling? Many thanks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Only happy to help. Please feel free to go through the process, and if we find your report is valid, we will investigate. Thanks again. Phearson (talk) 01:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You got it. I don't have time now, but I'll submit this IP and at least one or two others. All are clearly the same individual working out of the same general area. All of the targets are basically the on the same subject and he/she goes in and makes very subtle edits to the facts and figures with no explanation as to why. Never responds to comments, either. Weird. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Account creation request
I have requested access to the account creation tool. Thank you, have a nice day! Phearson (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I regret to inform you that your request to join Account Creation has been declined at this time. Right now there is not really a backlog of requests and generally we like members of the project to have a variety of experience. Your recent changes patrolling has been wonderful. You could patrol the user creation log and get involved at WP:UAA as one way of demonstrating your knowledge of policy related to Account Creation. Please feel free to request a review of your application in a few months once you have more experience. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~talk to her~ 11:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Abuse response/91.110.236.9
Hello. I've just looked around and found a bit of information that was lacking in the report. It looks like Orange also operates as a broadband isp in addition to their mobile phone offerings. I saw your note on the project page & found this new information. Just passing this along. That's all for now. Thanks! Dawnseeker2000  03:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello
Would you like to comment here about the user who vandalized your user page? RG (talk) 04:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Phearson (talk) 04:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Chowder Episode List
You noticed that IP user is at it again on Chowder Episode List. If you're quick, you can help me report him to Admin. My last attempt for what he was doing to the List of The Simpsons episodes was instructed to "seek dispute resolution". I'm sure a new voice would help. KnownAlias  contact  01:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * If I catch him Again, I will report. Phearson (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...
... for reverting the nastiness on my User page. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Sexual Capital
Phearson:

I'm not sure why you deleted new passages added to the sexual/erotic capital article, when the additions I made are referencing published work in esteemed social science journals that advance that concept and are directly relevant to the subheadings of the article.

"Vandalism" has nothing to do with the entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.77.58.178 (talk) 01:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that, someone had changed the beginning of the paragraph from Sexual Capital to someone's name, making me think it was a libel attack. Sorry for the confusion Phearson (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, no worries, I'll "undo" the delete and make sure that the entry reads properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.77.58.178 (talk) 18:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * One other thing: I note that in the "sexual capital/ erotic capital" entry, a subsection was created called "ECONOMIC". The one work cited here to support the "economic" thesis is wrong. In that cited article, Michael's concept of sexual capital has nothing to do with a rational investment in attractiveness; it is, instead, about acquiring sexual safety skills, such as the ability to use condoms. This is why it is an extension of "health capital" as the title of his article indicates. In fact, Michael's work has no relationship to "economic" versions of sexual/erotic capital;  it's a totally different conception of sexual capital.  Someone needs to go in and change that...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.77.58.178 (talk) 11:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 01:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Recent UAA reports
Re this and this UAA report: Please review edit histories before you make reports like these to make sure there is an actual connection between the name and the edits. It doesn't take too long. Daniel Case (talk) 01:33, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Alright. Phearson (talk) 02:32, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Against Pending Changes
Add this userbox to your userpage to advertise your opposition to WP:Pending Changes-- Gniniv (talk) 07:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

User:164.58.74.2
Since filing the abuse report, this editor has vandlised File:Pro Tools Logos.png.  McLerristarr /  Mclay1  10:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * More today. I assume you have something up your sleeve, so I have not reported him at AIV. Cheers. CliffC (talk) 18:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Vector Marketing
hey, no problem. was just going to tag it and move on like i do many other articles, but it was quite blatant promotion of their jobs. cheers WookieInHeat (talk) 03:16, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)