User talk:Reaper Eternal/Archive 8

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

File move catastrophe
Thank you for sorting that out for me, much appreciated! Why is it that when I attempted to move the original file it didn't appear to rename it? It *appeared* to be a page actually on Wikipedia, as opposed to on Commons, which I though were eligible for moves here... Cheers,  Nik the  stoned  14:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * This is what happened:
 * On File:Benedykt xvi-crop.jpg, which is on commons, a user created a page on the English Wikipedia page.
 * (del/undel) (diff) 14:26, 4 August 2011 . . Bright2011 (talk | contribs | block) (33 bytes) (←Created page with 'pope Ben your children loves you.')
 * You attempt to move the file to File:Benedict XVI-crop.jpg.
 * (del/undel) (diff) 14:29, 4 August 2011 . . Nikthestoned (talk | contribs | block) (33 bytes) (moved File:Benedykt xvi-crop.jpg to File:Benedict XVI-crop.jpg: Change to English spelling)
 * You then attempt to move the page again to File:Benedict XVI (2).jpg.
 * (del/undel) (diff) 14:32, 4 August 2011 . . Nikthestoned (talk | contribs | block) (39 bytes) (moved File:Benedykt xvi-crop.jpg to File:Benedict XVI (2).jpg: Move to unused name >.<)
 * You then seemed to get confused, attempted to move the page again, and then tagged your pages for speedy deletion.
 * However, all this time, the file was still on commons! :) I've deleted all the enwiki pages now. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! My issue was, once I did the first move, the page with the new name didn't show the image, all it showed was the text you mentioned above. The original named page still showed the image but had "Redirect page" at the top. Is this the way it works when the file is actually on commons? Thanks again,  Nik the  stoned  15:07, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It left a redirect behind, because only admins can suppress the generation of redirects. Thus the page only contained a redirect, hence the notice, but the commons picture still showed up. :) Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Greek gift checkmate
Do you want to reconsider you decison about declining the speedy on this? There is a Greek Gift sacrifice but I'm very sceptical that a) there is a player called Nomikos Spanos - indeed an article on him by User:Chess2011 was deleted under A7 and G3 earlier today, b) it's not the first hoax article this user has created and c) I can't find any reference on any chess database to this game. If you don't feel it correct to review, no problem I'll take it to AFD. NtheP (talk) 19:28, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I went through this user's deleted contributions, and he seems to have made a lot of articles describing how "Nomikos Spanos" made a fantastic new chess move, so I've deleted it as a probably hoax. Additionally, Greek gift sacrifice was the chess mov3e I had been thinking of. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, if it comes back to bite us in the bum, I'll buy you another drink like the one below :-) NtheP (talk) 19:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Something to quaff

 * *gulp* Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

User:RaúlLoveMiley
Can you do a few things for me to clean up after what this user has done? Can you restore the name of The Time Of Our Lives (Miley Cyrus) and my last reversion of Hannah Montana 2/Meet Miley Cyrus? Thanks. I've fixed the rest. ℥nding · start 20:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. I've moved the pages back and deleted most of the redirects. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Fix history in move & redirect
So I noticed on RC that this was created, I then moved it to this and reworked the redirect. I then BLP prodded the new article. My issue is that the edit history for the redirect is part of the prod. Can you split the histories so that the Dave Taylor redirect retains it's history? I also realized that Dave Taylor (guitar) IS Dave Taylor (musician) so the new article should be moved there after the histories are fixed up. Thanks! Crazynast 01:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Note also that is a vandal reversion, not vandalism.Crazynast 02:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Anthony Appleyard has already done this, so good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey
Congrats on adminship, I supported it. Anyways man you might as well protect Casey's page indefinitely, the vandals won't stop when given the chance. Just a suggestion bro. KING OF WIKIPEDIA - GRIM LITTLEZ (talk) 05:30, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'm not going to indefinitely protect pages except in response to continued, severe vandalism. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi
I wanna be sure that I filled this out right. I don't know if I have given a valid reason but I'm not sure. I'm still trying to get the hang of wikipedia. JamesAlan1986 (talk-Contributes) 16:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Whatever. I gave you rollback anyway. :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

LOL! Thanks. ^_^ JamesAlan1986 (talk-Contributes) 18:50, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Help
Hello I was wondering how to claim that a file is breaking copyright will you help me? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brunouvini.jpg The.aviation.expert (talk) 02:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It's already deleted. :) Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

User:90.199.34.136
Having some civility and edit warring problems with the aforementioned IP. If you could review his edits to Fortran, and his talk. I'd appreciate it.  Falcon8765  (T ALK ) 00:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * He's already on WP:AN3, so there doesn't seem to much for me to do. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
...for the talkpage protection. Jarlaxle is such a little baby. Every time he doesn't get what he wants, he goes running to /b/ and says "waaah! Say mean things to the people who won't let me do what I want!"NawlinWiki (talk) 02:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * hehe, quite true. For the reason I came here, though...I was already impressed, but your deny at rfpp was quite the good idea. Cheers, and keep up the good work! ​—DoRD (talk) 02:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've noticed :P, and no problem! Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Fuck you.
You abuse the speedy deletion process as if you were some sort of god, but in fact are a lowly asshole like everyone else. Speedy deleting something after others have made arguments for noteworthiness without addressing them is unilateral, douchebag behavior. --X883 (talk) 23:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I suppose the nice way to say "we can't be arsed to be a trash can for your self-promotion" didn't work on you. -- Σ  talk contribs   23:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello
so it works like this? Corridor56 (talk) 01:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, that's how you edit! :) Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

ah good. I get it. A bit more. Interested to do some copy editing. Where to start? And thanks for the cookiesCorridor56 (talk)
 * Well, there's a large class of them in Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. I generally just pick a random one out and start working. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

grand. thank you. harder than I thought.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Nature's Army Page
The Nature's Army Page that you deleted was that of an NGO. Please revert it. It clearly mentioned that it was an organization (active), yet you say that there was no mention of it. I think, it should have been mentioned in the sidepane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitashsam (talk • contribs)
 * Could you please clarify which page you are referring to (perhaps by linking to the now-deleted page)? I cannot see any page that you have ever edited which I have deleted. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of article "Ruparelia"
Eternal Reaper, please justify the reason for the deletion of the article "Ruparelia". There was no good reason for it, please I ask of you to restore the page. Saxin00 (talk) 11:50, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The article was proposed for deletion seven days earlier, during which time no objection was made to its deletion. I then deleted the page because the PROD notice expired. As you are now contesting the deletion, I will restore the article. Please be aware that it may be taken to AFD to decide whether it is notable enough for Wikipedia. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey
Hey Reaper, do you know if I am able to remove my username change request and request a new one? Second thoughts. Also, is it possible to get a userpage back through Requests for undeletion? ℥nding · start 00:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've just removed it myself. Thought maybe it might mess up since a bot went through it. But then I remembered that users have to do it manually. xD ℥nding · start 00:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * What userpage do you want back? Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I just went ahead and requested it, and got it back. ℥nding · start 20:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

re User:Kg vasilev
Good block. I would have indeffed myself but figured it was bad form right after warning him, which I did before fully investigating his history. I agree that there's little chance of valid edits coming from that account. --Golbez (talk) 16:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Deleteion of WikiAlpha
Aren't you supposed to give the creator of an article a chance to contest deletion? I check my account prety much daily and by the time I read the message about it being deleted it was already gone. Thanks Alicianpig (talk) 12:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No. Actually, administrators are allowed to unilaterally delete articles per any of the criteria for speedy deletion. However, the way I found it was that, another admin, had found and tagged that page, which I then deleted. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed so. I could have deleted it immediately, but chose to invite a second opinion. As it turned out that second opinion agreed with my view. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually have a question on that. I don't tag articles perfectly 100% of the time and I have normally been of the view that if I was an admin, I would tag articles that I am not 100% sure on rather than delete them.  (My last few tags are reasoning enough of this)  Reaper stated that he tagged an article and it disappeared.  How do you tag an article for speedy deletion as an admin without the deletion actually being carried through.  Ryan Vesey  Review me!  12:42, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That was when Xeno flipped the bit while I was patrolling new pages, and when you are an admin, Twinkle has a little checkbox called "Tag page only, don't delete". I didn't know this, and thus summarily deleted the page. (Fortunately, it was a blatant A3 that had been sitting around for half an hour.) Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Was I right?
Hello, I noticed you blocked "The W Salon" for advertising etc., I don't know if ytou noticed, but I pointed out that he/she had violated WP:UP and may want to remove the adverts, just out of interest, was I right about it? IceHockeyHero (talk) 15:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, you were correct that the userpage was excessively promotional (which is why I deleted it). However, the user would have been blocked anyway because the username itself violated the username policy. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll keep up the hard work, and notify you if any other pages violate any policies IceHockeyHero (talk) 15:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the quick block of the editor and rev del of the lewd material from my page history. Shadowjams (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:06, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of KENI
From all indications, the spam which someone found objectionable had been in the article for years, until this person suddenly came along and decided something must be done now.

My issue is that this same someone posted to the talk page asking for a proper history of the radio station. I responded by providing an extensive outline of such right before you deleted the page. So now, minus that content, someone else is just going to come along and recreate the page, and it will continue to remain devoid of meaningful content. The problem is not so much one of promotional spam as it is lack of willingness or of resources to properly locate information and write the article. In practical terms, more like The Story of Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody.

I certainly don't feel like going to the trouble of rewriting all that. Already had to do it on another article because an admin was busy "excercising their authority" and not paying attention first.RadioKAOS (talk) 15:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Just because a spam article has sat around for a while doesn't make it immune to deletion. You yourself state right here that nobody was going to rewrite the article! In any event, it would be easier to start from scratch using sources rather than trying to source and rewrite everything in that article. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I dunno if you glossed over the most important part of this accidentally or on purpose, that useful content was deleted and hasn't been restored to the recreated non-spam version of the article, so I took this up with deletion review:RadioKAOS (talk) 04:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for KENI
An editor has asked for a deletion review of KENI. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RadioKAOS (talk) 04:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Little Question
Hi! On your Talk page and User page, you have your online status, I was just wondering... could you add it to my user page for me? It'd be apreciated! IceHockeyHero (talk) 15:47, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ All you have to do is edit the status at User:IceHockeyHero/Status to "online", "offline", "busy", "sleeping", or "around" (minus quotes). Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank You! IceHockeyHero (talk) 10:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

My talkpage
Thanks for the comment - much appreicated.  Lugnuts  (talk) 18:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Need help re: images being uploaded over other photos
I just reverted this user as he had uploaded an image over this file File:I love lucy 1956.JPG. The file was just uploaded over the original image, leaving the original rationale, etc. A look at his contribs shows he's done quite a bit of that today. Shall I revert all of the uploads as we don't have any idea of where the files came from, free or non-free? Thanks, We hope (talk) 18:42, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that's necessary, since all the image uploads are unsourced. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Some have been marked for deletion already. I'll revert everything he did here today and remove the deletion notices as I'd believe they were fine before this.  Thanks! We hope (talk) 18:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Since both of you are now working at it, I'll bow out as I think I'm in the way. :-) We hope (talk) 19:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * All reverted and deleted. Regards,  F ASTILY  (TALK) 19:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I wasn't certain if deletion was necessary for old revisions. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletions
Hello, this user has been removing the speedy deletion templates from this article. I didn't want to report it to the AIV, so I want to let you know. Thanks. --   Luke      (Talk)   02:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Third version deleted, article title salted. I'll go leave a message for the editor. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, given that there was enough warning and the vandalism existed across multiple articles including the deleted one, I went ahead and blocked the user for 31 hours. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You may want to indef this sock too? - David Biddulph (talk) 02:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Already done--I indeffed AET East, and User:Acroterion upped the 31 hours on AET West to an indefinite (and deleted and salted the alternate name of GreenRay Disc. If you see any more pop up, let me know.  BTW, the comment on his talk page was hilarious--he asked for an unblock on AET West because the topic isn't a hoax, as proved by the fact that another person had just created GreenRay Disc.  Qwyrxian (talk) 03:44, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism
why do you continue to change DeStorm Power's info to false info? who is Derek Sebastian and where do you get your info to support such? This info along with your fake birthdate for him is completely false and we as fans would appreciate if you stopped vandalizing wiki pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by LAXpublisher (talk • contribs)
 * Huh? I only reverted this piece of vandalism which occurred during the middle of your edits. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I am new to wikipedia and created the page for DeStorm Power (real name)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destorm. Every time I open his wikipedia there is a new birthdate and name provided. I try and fix these issues, but when I return it's reverted back to these false facts. This article has him listed as being born March 22,1970 (41) which is also super false. He was born Jan 30th in the mid 80's. He's also not a DJ so why do they have him with an AKA of DJ Power? I see Demetrius Storm a lot and now the new name they peg him as, is Derek Sebastian Burch IV. He's a rapper from Baltimore, not a Knight from England. People continue to sabotaging his wiki listing and its not so funny anymore. I fixed it numerous times and you keep reverting it back then lock it on the false statements. It kinda make wikipedia look unreliable when hundreds of ppl making jokes about how screwed up this wiki page is. Can you please fix this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LAXpublisher (talk • contribs) 22:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The erroneous vandalism has been removed. My apologies, -- Σ  talk  contribs  23:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Centercode
Hi there, noticed that you deleted the Wikipedia page for the company I work for, Centercode, citing A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content). I'm not familiar with the contents of the page off-hand, since I didn't write it, but I'm confident we could made revisions to establish significance. We're a growing company with a long list of major clients like Adobe, Logitech, etc.; we recently acquired another company in the beta management space; we maintain a community of over 50,000 beta testers from all over the world; and so forth. With a little guidance on what would satisfy A7, I'd be happy to make some changes. Thanks. Awright415 (talk) 19:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know what page you are talking about, as this is your only edit. Did you perhaps have another account? Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the confusion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centercode Awright415 (talk) 15:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, would you like me to restore it as a user subpage for you to continue working on? You can then use Requests for feedback to get feedback on when your article meets the notability guidelines for corporations. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:57, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be appreciated. Thank you. Awright415 (talk) 19:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ It is now located at User:Awright415/Centercode. Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Help with Reporting
I understand that I was warned for a report I have made, but the current system is not allowing me to upload an image that I have intellectual rights to since another user filed a false report. I am asking for help with this issue. Xenoranger (talk) 18:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason you cannot upload the picture to which you own the intellectual rights is that anything uploaded to Wikipedia (with the limited exemption of fair-use images, and images of living persons do not have this exemption) is irrevocably licensed under the GFDL and CC-by-SA 3.0 license. This is done to protect your copyright, as anybody could claim to be you. However, if you do own the copyright, and you are willing to irrevocably donate the image, you can follow the directions at Donating copyrighted materials, specifically, the section on "Donating your photographs". Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. My friend (the real Dan Severson) said that he has had issues uploading images. Would the best course of action be to just upload to the donated images and use those on Wikipedia? Xenoranger (talk) 20:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The directions are on the page I linked to, and I have copied the relevant section below. If these are not followed, people will not know whether or not you are the person who owns the copyright and the images may be deleted again. Alternatively, you could just take another picture of him and upload that so you won't have to deal with all this rigamarole. Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Send an email, ideally using the language from the template at WP:CONSENT, from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-commons@wikimedia.org permissions-commons@wikimedia.org]. Then upload the file to Wikimedia Commons and place OTRS pending on the image page. Someone will reply to your email, indicating whether the content and your license is acceptable and update the page to indicate that the confirmation of the license has been received.

A brownie for you!

 * Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Reverting link deletion
I am reverting the wholesale deletion of potentially useful information listed in External links.

What is your problem with that? Why don't you have a problem with the editor who went to all of these articles and deleted the information? 71.169.189.170 (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:ELNO - those links are essentially spam. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I've been to WP:ELNO and not one of those 20 criteria apply. These are design notes, a.k.a. "white papers" that happen to have a commercial source.  The devices used in their examples are only those that the company sells (which is understandable) but the design principles apply broadly to outside of the scope of the company.  Your reference to WP:ELNO does not apply. 71.169.189.170 (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for this. Time to increment the vandalism counter! TJRC (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's some long-term troll. You're welcome! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Autoconfirm
Hello there, I am a retired user returning under a fresh start account, would you mind raising my user right status to autoconfirmed? Editing is becoming rather cumbersome without it activated. Thanks for considering, Atomician (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I changed your usergroups to . Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello again, I've returned to inquire about how much time you think I'll need to be given rollback back and about whether I could get straight back into reverting vandalism with Huggle like I used to, or if I'll have to climb a ladder to get to it? I made over 20,000 edits with Huggle assistance in my past account, perhaps a test run or somesuch, if I abuse it take it back? Throw me a stick on what could happen, cheers and thanks for taking time out to help me! Atomician (talk) 21:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You took a WP:CLEANSTART for a reason. Wearing "I have a clean start" on your sleeves is just going to encourage someone to find out what your old account was. Best keep a low profile for now. -- Σ  talk  contribs  22:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair, I'll just have to do a little extra work and apply the usual way. Thanks for response ;) Atomician (talk) 22:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to give rollback because I have no proof of who you were beforehand. I confirmed your account because your contributions merited it. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand perfectly and expected it, but hoped. Atomician (talk) 01:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

FP Republican Party
I was curious why you protected the Republican Party for a whole week, as such a high profile article it seems like keeping it +sysop for a week, even to stop an edit war might be a mite bit excessive. Unless you think the editors involved really need a full week to calm down an reach a consensus. (logged as part of an experiment of mine). Crazynast 21:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I suppose I could have waited for 3RR violations to occur and just blocked them, but that seems rather dickish. Obviously, if they come to consensus before the week expires (or just give up and drop the issue, which seems to be what is happening), I will unprotect the page. However, I've noticed that those 24 hour protections usually don't do a lot of good. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Your block
For, could you disable talk page since the IP is abusing his talk page? Ebe 123 talkContribs 15:17, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks.  Ebe 123  talkContribs 15:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:21, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

(Moved from above)
Hey. Why you removed my article Peter J. Lucas? He is notable, check it on Internet. I don't understand that what you have done. You have removed my work.

Tea who you yeah bunny.

ArkadiuszEurope (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I deleted the page as it was proposed for deletion for 7 days without objection. As you are now contesting it, I have restored the page. However, be aware that it may be taken to AFD unless the issues are addressed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock
What about Markschmitz? Does he still blocked? Phanuruch8555 (talk) 15:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * He's still blocked.  Ebe 123  talkContribs 15:25, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't unblock you&mdash;jpgordon did. I blocked the other account. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Is this your test account?
Noticed that you were doing some edit filter tests, so I thought I'd ask before swinging the bat. Favonian (talk) 19:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but now both accounts are locked by the edit filter for repeatedly triggering it, so it doesn't matter. I was trying to find out why all those edits were blocked but this was allowed. :/ EDIT: Actually, they were blocked by . :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:13, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No point as there used to be two filters for him but he got around them somehow. Just ask Prodego via email. --Bsadowski1 19:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'll ask Prodego. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:25, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I blocked Soap-laws-08 and User:Reaper's test account before realizing what was going on. I have unblocked them now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Huggle
Since you're an administrator, could you give me my Huggle privileges back?  Wayne  Slam  01:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I could, but I think or  should be asked first, as one or both was your mentor. Personally, I think you would do fine, but just ask them. Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I will ask one of them. Thanks!  Wayne  Slam  01:36, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, Wayne's ready for Huggle, but I would recommend keeping an eye on him for a while after he gets it back. The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 01:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I could always be kept an eye on when I get it back.  Wayne  Slam  01:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Unsalted. Please go slowly though. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:44, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yes I will.  Wayne  Slam  01:46, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

re: Small Soldiers / Small Soldiers (Video Game)
Can you take a look at the history for Small Soldiers and Small Soldiers (video game). How would I go about requesting a block of anonymous ip editing? Would something like that be appropriate here? Thanks! —Tgeairn (talk) 01:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've protected them. In the future, you can request protection at WP:RFPP. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I need a change to a DYK hook
Can you change the DYK hook for HMS Phoenix (N96) in Queue 4 to

... that HMS Phoenix (N96) (pictured) fired upon multiple ships in World War II before she was sunk, but didn't hit any of them?

Relevant discussion can be found User talk:Crisco 1492. Ryan Vesey Review me!  02:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 04:08, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for deleting the article, it was exactly what I wanted, thanks for indicating your huge support for Destroyers Dynasty Incorporated! You have been added to the advertisers list with a link to your Wikipedia user page! Have fun vandalising Wikipedia with DDI content!! http://xat.com/ddizone | http://ddizone.com

TheDarkOne70 (talk) 02:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

user_talk:TreasuryTag
Please explain how my attempt to remove an unhelpful rant triggering an abuse filter was not an example of a false positive? 94.2.177.166 (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The edit filter is designed to prevent the removal of large amounts of content from other editors' userpages, so it correctly disallowed your edit. If you don't like it, don't look at it&mdash;it's only on his userpages. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, so if I designed an edit filter that filtered every edit that attempted to use the word "and", and it correctly prevented you from making an otherwise legitimate edit, would you say the same then? My suggestion is that whilst the current filter did indeed prevent the removal of a large amount of content, it may wish to be better programmed to take into account what that content is. Also it is absurd to suggest I should simply "not look at" things I think should not be there. If I add a giant image of a human penis to the top of an unrelated article, should it be removed or simply not looked at? 94.2.177.166 (talk) 16:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Your edit would not have been legitimate. Peoples' userpages are subject to the userpage guidelines. See especially: "The best option if there is a concern with a user's page is to draw their attention to the matter via their talk page and let them edit it themselves, if they are agreeable. In some cases a more experienced editor may make non-trivial edits to another user's user space, in which case that editor should leave a note explaining why this was done. This should not be done for trivial reasons." As to your next point: "If I add a giant image of a human penis to the top of an unrelated article, should it be removed or simply not looked at?" That's the fast track to getting blocked for vandalism. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "That's the fast track to getting blocked for vandalism." - thankyou for proving my point. 94.2.177.166 (talk) 17:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Reaper, removing TT's rant is not vandalist per this on 3rr:


 * Reverting edits to pages in your own user space, so long as you are respecting the user page guidelines.

It's also dis-allowed by WP:UserPage#Polemic. Just sayin..... Forgot to sign again damn, I'm getting OLD @-Kosh► Talk to the Vorlons► Markab -@ 18:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If the discussion on WP:ANI resolves to remove the rant, I don't care. If it doesn't, I still don't care. It doesn't really violate WP:NPA or WP:POLEMIC, and, frankly, all it makes him do is look dumb. However, this dramafest over a retiring (or not) editor's parting rant is ridiculous. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Need help
Curious if you could point me in the right direction.

I'm looking for a 3rd party to put up a page on wikipedia. I'm the lead editor of Autisable.com, and would like to make sure that the article is cited and put up in an unbiased fashion.

I've asked around outside of wikipedia, but would like to seek someone a bit more knowledgeable of the process.

Look forward to your response. Edlives (talk) 15:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Joel

Template:Cleanup-link rot
Thank you for keeping the discussion on this subject open for a full 13 hours before closing it. The way wikipedia discussions go, half a day is certainly enough time for people around the world with dissenting opinions to FIND the discussion and have their say. If you don't get my sarcasm, this is why wikipedia decisions are always made by the tight knit small community of insiders who know where things are. Hurry up, cut off debate, before the general public finds this. Ask the same people with the same mindset and you'll always get the same results. Trackinfo (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you seriously think that the result of that TFD would be closed as anything BUT keep? Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Ctwomen
It may not be vandalism, but can this user just be blocked since it is only used for promotion and adding copyvios? Joe Chill (talk) 17:40, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That is not the only issue. The editor's user page and sub page was deleted for copyright infringement. An admin told the editor that she could ask him for help and the editor blanked his comments and the previous warnings. I have been removing links to the organization's website and a link to the copyvio article. It is a promotion only account. Joe Chill (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed your block. Thank you. Joe Chill (talk) 18:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Wow.... Somehow I missed that the username is "Connecticut Women's..." was obviously a promo and that all the contributions were promotional too! I had looked at the diff linked to by Jeff G. on WP:AIV, which happened to be the removal of their own speedy deletion contestation! User is now indefblocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:11, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Reaper, I think an indef block (user:Ctwomen) in a marginal case is over the top. There's been zero attempt to engage the editor, other than by me. Why are we trying to drive off a potentially valuable contributor? I think a better action would have been to report the name as potentially concerning, and if the consensus is that it is a problem, explain politely to the user. It isn't a slamdunk case, and we are woefully short of AGF with this editor. -- SPhilbrick  T  19:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that a spam block was over the top. Considering just the username, yes it would be OTT to indefinitely hardblock the account. However, there was this spam/copyvio userpage, followed by multiple copyvio/spam pages, followed by blanking the user talk page (including your offer of help), and culminating in a rash of spam edits. All this taken together appears that the user is unlikely to contribute anything other than promotion. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:25, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I see it differently. I see a person, possibly closely associated with the Hall of Fame, possibly just interested in it, noticing that we do not have an article about the Hall of Fame, and deciding that such an article belonged in Wikipedia. So far, I agree. Many members of the Hall of Fame already have articles, some do not but are notable enough to deserve articles. The type of people in the Connecticut Hall of Fame are representative of the very best that the encyclopedia has to offer. Adding an article about the Hall of Fame and about some of its member should be applauded, and mentored, not thwarted.
 * Yes, the editor, like most editors, was unaware of copyright rules. The editor, like most editors, did not study the page about what belongs on a user page, and made the mistake of adding something that they were interested in.


 * The editor chose a username that wasn't blatantly promotional, but probably indicated a link to the Hall of Fame. It is not unreasonable to think that this should actually be encouraged. We do have a rule against it, but it is hardly obvious that one should hide a potential conflict of interest, rather than being open about it. In many case, we support transparency. In this case we do not. I accept the rule, but it is understandable that a new editor might not realize that fine point.


 * The editor added link to the Hall of Fame Induction for some members. This looks like what we would encourage, if a subject were on the cusp of notability. Membership in a Hall of Fame is explicitly mentioned in the discussion of notability of athletes. Are we suggesting that Athletic Halls of Fame are good things to mention, but Halls of Fame to commemorate improvements to society are bad? Calling them spam edits is over the top. As for removing information from the editors talk page, that is explicitly allowed.


 * In summary, the new editor made some newbie mistakes, is trying to do some positive things and getting banned for it.-- SPhilbrick  T  19:53, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Sphilbrick, you are not isolated to these impressions. I fully concur with the rational you have brought forward. My76Strat (talk) 20:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I see an editor who violates WP:UPOL (I would request a change of username if the edits weren't so promotional), creates a spam userpage, adds copyright infringing content, gets warned about it, blanks the warnings (thus acknowledging that they have been read), adds more infringing text, gets warned about that, and then goes on a spree of adding links to the infringing page. Then I blocked. You are welcome to request a block review on WP:ANI if you wish. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Reaper. Is ANI really necessary?  I agree with Sphilbrick that this is a potentially salvageable editor. What harm is there is seeing if he can help them get oriented properly? --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:47, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The timing doesn't work. I'm out of the country, starting tomorrow, till the end of the month, and not sure about internet access. I don't have the time to sort out what should happen. Plus, I'm angry enough that I might say something I regret, so let me drop this now, and when I return, maybe we (not you and I, but the broader "we") can have some serious discussions about how we as a community treat new editors. We aren't doing very well, IMO. Let me add, that my anger isn't directed primarily at you, but our processes. However, I think calling a link to an induction into the Connecticut Women's Hall of Fame a spam link is frankly, mind-boggling. Please go block whomever added that Micheal Jordan is in the Hall of Fame, and test the reaction.-- SPhilbrick  T  21:02, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * (e/c)In that case, if you don't mind me trying, Reaper, I'll volunteer to try to help them get oriented. I'm one of those weasel non-content-creating admins, so I won't be able to help with writing, but I can try to help with non-templated explanations of how WP works, human-to-human. However, I would love to be able to do this while they are not blocked, instead of having the block hanging like a sword of Damocles over the conversation.  --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked the user. However, please try to get them to change their username to a more appropriate one. I wish you luck, and my congratulations if you can succeed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks much, Reaper. Although I personally am not convinced it's a problem, I'll respect your request, and try to get them to change it.  Just let me make some kind of productive contact first.  --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:19, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've requested a review of my block, since I still don't see it as incorrect. Additionally, if it is that inappropriate, I should possibly be desysopped. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be fairly drastic. I don't think you're doing anything different than many others would do.  It's not a criticism of you, so much as a criticism of how we handle things in general.  I'd like to try another way. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:11, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Re desyopping, absolutely not. A good case can be made that the user was probably closely connected to the Hall of Fame, and or was a group account, so it may well be the right action, ultimately. However, I just feel that we could handle this better. Thanks Floquenbeam, you hit the nail on the head. It is more a case of flawed processes than a specific criticism of this action.-- SPhilbrick  T  21:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not even remotely a consideration for desysoping. I simply believe editors are beseeching upon strengths they perceive in you to endeavor to the point of effort to assume good faith when reasonable. That you have show such a capacity to reconsider your own actions only strengthens your abilities in administrative regards. I apologize if any of my comments were not well received as my intentions were never malicious. My76Strat (talk) 22:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 09:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia editors
Delete the comment I posted on my talk page all you want. It will not change the fact that Wikipedia is dying as noted here and in various other sources: http://gawker.com/5827835/wikipedia-is-slowly-dying 86.141.252.138 (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Interesting article, but I don't believe it. The necessity for editors goes down as the completion level of Wikipedia goes up. We've reached a point in which around 99% of the articles that we really want and/or need are made and so a lot of people feel as if they are not contributing as much and leave due to lack of feeling worthy (which a recent study showed was the main reason for editors to participate). Personally I think the rude editors who contribute to thousands of articles are more damaging than all the vandals put together. A really terrible user who gets away with it will probably drive away approximately 20 to 30 users in his time, to which the sum of their edits is far greater than that one editor. If we want to keep our users we need to be less lenient on the "do-gooders to articles and the bastards to people" and encourage active socializing on talk pages so that it becomes a social experience that ties people in and holds them. You make friends, you don't want to leave. There will always be bitter editors who leave the project disappointed because something of theirs has been deleted, if you want to edit here you have to face the fact that one day something of yours will be deleted, which means you just need to suck it up some of the time. Atomician (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I deleted the comment on your talk page because you were spoofing Jimbo Wales's signature. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hanged, drawn and quartered
You have protected a version of this Featured Article which is most likely incorrect. The lead was left deliberately ambiguous, because after researching the article's source material I could not, with any certainty, say exactly which territories the original 1351 Act applied to. Anyone now visiting this article will presume that the original Act applied to Ireland also, a conclusion not reached by any of the expert sources I've read. Not to mention that this "new" information is not replicated in the article's body, or the badly-formatted citations. Parrot of Doom 17:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know, I managed to protect the Wrong Version&#153;, which doesn't surprise me since no sysop has ever yet protected the Right Version&#153;. Please discuss on the talk page. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Utah numbered highways
That navbox duplicates the system links from infobox state highway system and infobox road. It is no longer needed.  Imzadi 1979  →   19:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but one of the requirements for T3 deletion is that it be unused. This template was still being used on List of Interstate and U.S. Highways in Utah when I declined the speedy deletion nomination. Now that you have removed it, it can be subject to T3 deletion. Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:56, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Need help with file tag reverting
the uploader of these three files continues to revert or change the SD tags on them:


 * File:Micah Schweinsberg.jpg history


 * File:3PObandMicahS.jpg history


 * File:Crabbrevival.jpg history

Since this is a very new user, not sure if he/she doesn't understand how to appeal SDs, but don't want to get into 3RR with the files. Thanks, We hope (talk) 15:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I told him/her how to contest the deletion. Replacing speedy deletion tags removed by the creator is also 3RR-exempt. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks much! We hope (talk) 16:03, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Reaper Eternal/buttons
I'm letting you know that I've created some of them. -- Σ  talk  contribs  06:37, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice, how do you find it? :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Recent delete
Man! You deleted a page even before I tagged it for speedy! Kudos! Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 12:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ruparelia Page
Thank you for maintaining the Ruparelia page. It means a lot to me as I am one of the Ruparelia people. Thanks again. --92.10.157.42 (talk) 13:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

203.14.52.47
has hardblocked as a proxy, when all I can see is a educational IP. Could you please provide some detail as to why this is a proxy because I have a user requesting unblock via unblock-en-l because of this. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  16:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I blocked it as a proxy because according to this, it is a confirmed proxy server. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Please, never ever rely on that for confirmation of proxy status. We have our own local service which does a much better job and knows what to look for. I'm looking at this right now and see no indication of a proxy what so ever. I could be wrong, though I am interested in what the person who requested unblock is talking about on unblock-en-l. I will hold the block at what it is for now. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  17:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I guess I'll point this out to the CU/Arb who told me that was how to find proxies next time I'm on IRC. Good luck. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:12, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. We all can only do as how we have been informed. I am actually really surprised that a CU/Arb told you to use this to confirm proxies. (feel free to forward them to me if you wish) It can be a tool to possibly identify a proxy, but that should never be used alone, multiple other things need to be looked into. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  17:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Equitable building moves
Hmm, I think I may have phrased my request wrong, or maybe you misunderstood. But either way, the page currently at Equitable Building (New York City) should be moved back to Equitable Life Building (New York City). Thanks for the help and sorry for the trouble.--Yaksar (let's chat) 19:59, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha thanks. I guess I should probably redirect Equitable Building (New York City) to  Equitable Building (Manhattan) now.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Are all the pages back in the appropriate locations now? :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, looks like it (and I managed to also pull off the valid changes I should have made from the start!)--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Zeibak
Reaper Eternal,

The article "Zeibak" recounts a historical fact, but is not properly categorized. This is a story that should be attached to a topic such as the opression of Arab Jews, rather than attached to a single surname. I am not familiar with wikipedia and made the mistake of trying to blank it out and was looking of where else it could go.

What process can I follow to make the information better?

szeibak — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szeibak (talk • contribs) 01:40, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, you can add and change the categories that an article is in by editing, adding, or removing the  tags at the bottom of the article. Help:Category will give you more in-depth information if you are interested. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you, Reaper, for the reverts on my talk page! :)  Wayne  Slam  00:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

related to the dodo-case
This came up at the HelpDesk. I am not sure if it is related to the dodo-situation, but it looks bad enough to me (no wiki-things on the top). Could you check if it would be caught by your filter (+ revdel if suitable), and if it is something else; take some action? L.tak (talk) 20:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That's unrelated, but I've fixed the "fixed position vandalism filter". I've also disabled my filter due to false positives. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:33, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! L.tak (talk) 16:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)