User talk:Ricky81682/Archive 7

= March 2009 =

Croatia in Union with Hungary
I have asked Squash_Racket to remove himself from further discussion because he has been writing false statements which are in clear contradiction with sources which he is using.

Like evidence I will use his first statement in article Croatia in personal union with Hungary. My first statement is writen against copyright rules because words are taken word by word from his source. Second his statement which I have changed is again having smaller problem which has been discussed on pacta conventa talk page so again it is no mistake, but this is not important.

I do not want blocking or anything similar, but only that he is removed from futher discussion about this--Rjecina (talk) 16:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Rjecina completely removed the Oxford University Press, Manchester University Press, Cambridge University Press references and the country study of the Library of Congress. That was basically vandalism, that's the issue here?
 * If you cite several sentences, you have to change the text a bit to avoid copyright violation. The first sentence always contains the title of the article which Rjecina has just removed. I don't think I changed the meaning of the sentence at all
 * "The events surrounding the union of Croatia and Hungary" -> "The concept of " That's the big deal?
 * With the third revert he removed these:"Croatian historians argue that the union was a personal one in the form of a shared king while Hungarian and Serbian historians insist that Croatia was conquered. The significance of the debate lies in the Croatian claim to an unbroken heritage of historical statehood which is clearly compromised by the other claim." I found both of these sentences in the reference, so I have no idea what Rjecina is talking about. He only removed the Hungarian and Serbian point of view, because he didn't like it.
 * Further problems: R. added an awful lot of tags in the article Royal Hungary instead of adding a single "unreferenced" or "refimprove" tag at the top. Reason: R. is "tired of attacks by hungarian users on article about Croatian history", which to me seems like a classic case of WP:POINT. (Sidenote:I only remember editing the "Pacta Conventa" and the "Croatian in union with Hungary" articles, both of which are obviously Hungary-related.)
 * Further problems: Rjecina is systematically attacking every single reference that he doesn't like across pages, while treats every single book that contains at least a passing reference supporting his point of view with the utmost respect. For example that book is too "short" for him, although that is a 309 pages long Cambridge University Press reference and R. was even citing it to me(!) one and a half hours earlier.
 * And after all that Rjecina reports me? He adds requests about who should be "removed" and who not? Squash Racket (talk) 17:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * After seeing your "nice" work I have removed all your edits to situation of 10 March and then you have reverted and after that I have started to scream about false statement (short version of events)--Rjecina (talk) 17:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I think removing Oxford University Press, Manchester University Press, Cambridge University Press references and the country study of the Library of Congress without concensus is simply vandalism, so my edit wasn't a revert. What R. means by "nice work" is called copyright violation. Squash Racket (talk) 17:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

That's true, but I thought when an article was basically unreferenced, we'd just add the proper template at the top. We use inline tags for specific problems on some points of the article. And we don't announce on the talk page "Because I do not want to play defensive any more, maybe is time to solve few questions about Hungarian history:" which generates the "right" climate for a proper discussion. Squash Racket (talk) 05:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Seattle Sounders FC
Hey, no worries. It was a whole lot of silliness.Cptnono (talk) 03:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Evenmoremotor, Marino Mannoia and Gentile
Hi, thanks for your comments on Talk:Francesco Marino Mannoia. According to Italian law the copyright on the image has expired. In other words a link is legitimate. But I leave it up to you, I don't want to get blocked again for violating 3RR. By the way, I don't quite understand why I was blocked and Evenmoremotor not, that is not fair in my opinion. This guy is driving me nuts, yet another zealot on a crusade. He does not respond to anyone who is questioning his behaviour, just look at his Talk page -- or rather the history of his Talk page, because he deletes every criticism on his actions. Another issue I have with this guy is the reference to the date of birth and death of Nicola Gentile. I tried to explain to him that although this particular site might be considered self-published media, it is the only one that is available. It is there so that anyone can see the source and assess the reliability themselves and not let him decide for them. The date of birth and death have been the issue of debate, that is why I decided to put it there, although I am also not particularly keen on these kinds of sites. However, sometimes they do offer correct information. I would appreciate if you could restore the reference. Like I said, I don't want to be blocked again. By the way, please don't remove the information in Marino Mannoia now that it is unreferenced. It is correct and can be verified in the sources that are mentioned at the end of the article. Sorry for the long rant. - Mafia Expert (talk) 17:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI, User:Evenmoremotor is likely to be the same person as User:Mynameisstanley, who has been banned from editing. He is also likely to be be User:Madeveryotherday and User:Treesheads. I asked for a check at Sockpuppet investigations/Mynameisstanley and this is the result. - Mafia Expert (talk) 11:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

It took me a while to figure it out. The thing we should learn is that he will be back sometime somewhere. - Mafia Expert (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

RfA
Thanks for your message - hopefully I won't do anything to substantiate your concerns! Best, Martin  (Smith609 – Talk)  12:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

= April 2009 =

Tiramisoo sock
Since you blocked this user for sockpuppeting, I figured I'd bring it up that he's created another, self-admitted sock using the name TiramiNew. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 08:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Dan Schlund
The decision to delete the article Dan Schlund is now being reviewed. You have been sent this message because you have previously been involved in the AfD discussion(s) concerning this article. If you are interested in the review discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Deletion review/Log/2009 April 3. Thank you. Esasus (talk) 15:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * and more detailed information about off-line sources are now posted on the talk page. Hobit (talk) 15:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Lyssa Chapman
How can facts about someone be copyrighted. Also the text is not a word for word copy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.138.2 (talk)

Thanks for reinstating it. Now lets hope another administrator does not wield their axe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.138.2 (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

User:CharlesRKiss
Since you've blocked this user, you may want to also block, as this account, obviously an alt, is continuing to edit after your block of the primary.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  04:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Correction: the alt has (as of now) not edited after the block of the other account, but you may still want to block it. Awickert (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for you actions concerning this highly disruptive editor. --Skyemoor (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello, thank you for letting me know TruHeir (talk) 18:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message
Thank you for the message on my images. I was not the user to upload the top hat photo, but I did upload all the other images. I have permission for use of them all & I can send copies anywhere needed. I just don't know what I need to do in order to make them all OK.

I did not get written permission of use for the top hat photo, but I have spoke with the photogropher, Dirk Mai, and he has given permission for all of his work to be used on the Clint Catalyst article.

I am kinda taking things slow on here for now, I am sure you understand. But I do appreciate the help and I'll do what I can to keep the images up, just let me know. I think they are a nice addition to the article, most importantly, The Cottonmouth Kisses book cover. Tallulah13 (talk) 03:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Planecrash111
A more apt user ID, I have seldom seen. "Time to protect the talk page?" In my non-admin opinion... YES. Or at least disable the user's capability of editing it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 08:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * AGF here, I believe he was referring to Baseball games, as he was editing articles with information during an on-going game.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  08:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I would like to give him another chance, at least in terms of messages on his talk page. IMO, he needs to give a better explanation on why his edits are bad.  They're bad because wikipedia is not for play-by-play game info.  During or after a game, he needs to understand this, and right now, it doesn't appear as if he does.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  08:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Umm.. I can't..  I don't have that ability.. at least I don't have it yet.  Maybe some time in the distant future, but right now, I can't.  I'm just a user with rollback rights.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  10:15, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

If you check his contrib's list, you'll see that it's littered with pointy, snippy, personal-attack comments, such as calling established users "vandals". The core problem has been he's getting into blog-like minutia on these players, and of course other users keep reverting him, telling him why, and he won't listen. He's also branched into other areas. Look at the edit summary on this one. Here's a personal opinion, and you can call it a personal attack if you want, but I'm just quoting Barney Fife - "He's a boob!" Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Bosnian player's CoB "Yugoslavia
I've explained much earlier to the two or three editor's who are taking this way too far, that according to all diplomatic record's and valid/current documentation they were born in Bosnia and Herzegovina vice SFRY. While I understand their point of view, it is by any and all means incorrect in today's world. Furthermore, there are ten's of reference's if not hundred's indicating Bosnia and Herzegovina as their country of birth, I've provided the NY Times article as one of them. What's even more ludicrous that we've now come to this point about this senseless and oxymoron topic is that each player's personal website indicates their country of birth as Bosnia and Herzegovina vice SFRY. Lastly, the definition of country of birth does not only mean the federally controlled boundaries of a nation, but it is also defined as "... any state, ...".

Thank you for the message on my page and thank you for your time.--Alem Hadzic (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm glad that you took his point into account which might I add contradicts his stand in the first place. It was I who pointed out to him the Soviet Union issue and he basically regurgitated it on my page.--Alem Hadzic (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps your input at this point, can pull the discussion out of a stalemate. I've cited the rule now and that doesn't satisfy the one editor. Thank you for your contribution.--Stlunatic071 (talk) 22:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess ignoring the issue will solve the problem, is that your take?--Stlunatic071 (talk) 08:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Was I Hacked???
Hi, A bad surprise when I open wikipedia for consult and find a warn about a supposed vandalization did by my IP The problem is that I open wiki for the first time today and I'm sure that I didn't visit the Latin America page What it could be? 189.62.142.36 (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

RedRose333
continues to make unnecessary deletions, with no discussion or edit summary, including this one after your most recent warning. Ward3001 (talk) 00:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to report the same thing. I guess it's about time? -- Avant-garde a clue - hexa Chord 2  00:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess this is not what we wanted, is it? -- Avant-garde a clue - hexa Chord 2  14:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

X-Y relations
You contributed to, what do you make out of , especially this: ? -- Avant-garde a clue - hexa Chord 2  00:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Darren M. Jackson
Keep your alans on mate, i'm not ranting, I wrote the bloody artcile, not you, plus i'll write/edit where ever I feel thank you, and ranting is not a reason to block some one, if you keep threatening me, your find yourself blocked.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 15:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I've got a better idea. How about no one gets blocked and instead we write an encylopedia? Theresa Knott | token threats 22:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah thats a good idea, where shall we start, i'm up for it, any one want to help on some Romany projects, I have a project I would like to start on, it's Jimmy Stockin bare knuckle fighter.

There is a list of bare knuckle fighters on wiki, with no bio, maybe we could work on that. Alans back on, dummy picked up and lets go to work lol.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 08:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I didnt mean you any way lmao--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 10:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If you didn't mean him then you shouldn't be saying on his talk page! Ricky has stated that he wants to step back, so it's best to talk to me on my talk page rather than his. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT
Yes you can delete that all. --Secaundis • (myTalk) • (myContribs) 08:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

!Xam Khomani Heartland
I need help to change the spelling of !Xam to /Xam - see note 1 in my recent edit of this page. ! is a particular click in the Khoisan languages which is different from /. ! is correct for !Kung or !Xun but wrong for /Xam. All the best Blarcrean (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Beach Strip.jpg
Sorry about tagging it again! I didn't see that you'd already deleted the local page as I was tagging it for deletion. I ended creating the page again. Radiant chains (talk) 04:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Free (Dani Harmer song)
✅ Deleted, thanks. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

ANI notification
Thank you for the notification. I'll keep an eye on it. Other than being mentioned in passing I don't see anything that calls out for my participation just yet, but if I'm asked anything or feel the need to clarify my edits I will, of course, jump in. Thanks again. --Captain Infinity (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

= May 2009 =

Country of birth
Thanks for your suggestions on my talk page. I haven't had a lot of time for wikipedia the last days (real life interfered). I've tried to ask before this edit warring about opinions on this at the WikiProject Football discussion page, but it seems that other editors as as sick and tired of discussing this over and over again. I've obviously seriously underestimated the nationalistic issues that come up with this. Thanks for your help any way. --Jaellee (talk) 08:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

KeltieMartinFan
Thank you for your input on ANI. I've actually found more examples and raised the issue of that user's non-constructive edits, as well as their repeated attacks on other editors here. Please take a look. 87.69.176.81 (talk) 11:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Rachel Corrie
Hi, you had earlier nominated Artistic Tributes to Rachel Corrie for deletion, although it resulted in a merge/redirect. An editor has made some changes to improve it, and it is now located at Public reactions to death of Rachel Corrie. I think the article has changed enough that it might survive an Afd, but MBisanz recommended that I notify you to see if you felt it was now acceptable, or if you wanted to re-nominate it for Afd. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 11:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Copied from User talk:Aervanath: As I said here, if he really intended to create a new article, why, from a March 22nd decision, the fight over merging here and here and only then we have the rename? I say either force a merge or another AFD.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe the "fight over merging" was due to a good faith inability to understand the lack of consensus for the outcome the editor desired. Once the editor started to understand that, he did make some efforts to improve the article.  In my opinion, the article is different enough now that a merge cannot be forced based on the previous Afd.  However, you are certainly free to nominate it for Afd again on the grounds that the new version still doesn't meet the guidelines for inclusion. Also, I have watchlisted this page, so no need to reply on my talk page. Cheers,--Aervanath (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * If I left the page as it is and create a new page, actually only that would be deceitful and cheating. I moved the page, and created a title in the main discussion page, letting other editors know what I am doing. That is how you or anyone else learned it already. If I didn't move the page with new content, and just create a new page, near noone would know it.


 * I let other users know what I was doing publicly in main discussion page, so I wasn't trying to hide anything from anyone in the first place. You try a bit hard on trying to make me seem bad yet at original deletion talk Articles_for_deletion/Artistic_Tributes_to_Rachel_Corrie majority of votes was in favor of creating a new Public reactions to death of Rachel Corrie page, including 2 of the dedicated page editors, along with some other editors, admins advised me the same. I may know rules more or less, but that was exactly what I was trying to do. The article still needs a lot wikifying, yet that work belongs to all main page editors too, not only me, and without collaborative work it cannot be accomplished. While the new article is still in progress, you and another editor acted so swift on getting it deleted without discussing with me, before even the article gets shaped by other editors. Kasaalan (talk) 00:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You do a lot of accusations repeatedly, but let me clear 1 part you have only edited the article 2 times in its entire history. Also you only barely contributed to the article discussions, and I have serious doubts if you have ever read the article completely even once. Kasaalan (talk) 10:21, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

BGT
Hah, don't worry man, I know how you feel. Personally I think Susan Boyle should have a page, just because she's been signed and has been referenced in lots of news articles and TV shows (ie. South Park) but the rest should just be deleted. I can see where they're coming from with the other 2 contestant pages, but consensus is consensus so c'est la vie. The thing that gets me about DJ Talent is that he hasn't even had the publicity of the other BGT contestants. If he hadn't been on BGT then there wouldn't even be any question, but ah well.

BTW, good work on the Contaminated haemophilia blood products blood products article, it's pretty good! If you need any help just give me a shout and I'll see what I can do. Ixistant (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Start anew? :)


Ricky81682, The Infamous Anonymous IP has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. I would like to take up this opportunity to sincerely apologize for not taking up your advice as for "letting go." I really should know better. It's just that I've never been as insulted on the web as I was by KeltieMartinFan's initial aggressive approach. I know I went too far with that and my block is probably justified. I can never thank you enough for siding with me (for the most part) throughout this poorly constructed comedy. Please try and understand why I lost it, especially after called me a "drama queen," told me all I do here is stir controversy and that I should "get lost" – all that after I've politely asked him to "at least try and wp:assume good faith." I'm not going to edit anything until my block has expired. I've changed the IP to restore my own comment on the talk page of the IP that got lastly blocked and to leave you this message. I sincerely hope for a positive reply. 87.69.177.26 (talk) 22:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. That's all I will say. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm still waiting for the IP to explain why he feels insulted by what Keltie said, given that he thinks being compared to excrement is somehow not insulting. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I never said it wasn't, I inserted it because it was referenced in a TV show watched by a vast audience. 87.69.177.26 (talk) 23:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Listen Ricky, I know I promised to stop editing but this is getting out of hand. Take a look at this please. Both Bugs and George caused two unrelated accounts to be indefinitely blocked based on their allegations. If that isn't bad enough, they (together with ) call me "irrational," "crazy" and "evil," not to mention raising false "evidence" to justify the block of the other users, and when I prove them wrong by simply answering Bugs' question they shut me up. Do you think it's OK to post false accusations in my absence and hide my answers? Man, I feel like I'm in the dark ages here... help? 87.69.176.215 (talk) 07:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * What the hell, I'll comment here. I'm not an idiot.  You can't admit you're screwing around here and then come here complaining about how things are getting out of hand.  If you care so much about these innocent editors, stop playing games.  Frankly, I don't care anymore for their insults to you, and will just say grow a spine.  I guess you'll continue attacks about how now I don't care for you or I'm now treating you meanly so go on.  The drama is tiresome and immature to the point of ridiculousness.  I'm not humoring you anymore.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No I won't. It's a pity you're ignoring my main point: do you think it's OK to post false accusations in my absence and hide my answers? Or, as CadenS has put it, to "kick me when I'm down?" If no one keeps posting lies about me I'll keep my mouth shut. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 09:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You had a mechanism by which you could respond. Instead of listening to people, you got yourself blocked.  You had a mechanism to remove the block (namely, stopping the drama and listening to people).  Instead you created the mess here and then get angry that people are commenting on that.  How about you stop this ridiculous feedback loop and try something different, like acting with an ounce of maturity?  There are ways to comment to people without being accusatory.  If you can't handle that, you aren't going to last long here.  Note: you aren't the first to act in this ridiculous manner and you surely won't be the last, so don't be shocked when people just ignore you and move on (i.e. revert, block, ignore).  If you want to escalate, there are mechanisms in place.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I obviously had no clue how to act and am still quite unfamiliar with admin board procedures. This is why I am sincerely asking for your help. I've explained it to you and extensively apologized. Meanwhile, two innocent accounts have been blocked indefinitely because of false accusations, and more fake "evidence" is brought up in my absence. Where's the justice here? 87.69.176.215 (talk) 09:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * First, don't do this. Both the screaming edit summary and throwing out Captain Infinity's name when discussing your conduct aren't helping.  Nobody has actually done anything beyond blocking your first IP address.  Everyone's just trying to figure things out and you sure aren't helping making that simple.  Now, you could always try ignoring every little comment that other people say about you and follow Bwilkins's advice but that's just me.  Of course, I really don't care about what random anonymous individuals on the internet think about me, so that's my issue.  If you want to keep up the victim game, that's fine with me, but it's not going to help get a lot of sympathy.  One suggestion: shut things off, get a good's night sleep and think clearly in the morning.  Also, my email is my name here at gmail.com if you want. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much, will do :) As for my edit summary, I hate to see Smedpull and Chingadiculous take the fall for my misbehavior. Any chance of reconsidering that issue? 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Since it's just a couple of users musing for the most part, is there a point to doing so? It's not like we're blocking or even warning them.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Check again: they've both been indefinitely blocked because of the sockpuppetry mistrial. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No, Sockpuppet investigations/Smedpull/Archive is why. That's perfectly fair.  You want to throw yourself into that mess, go right ahead, but the clerk was only able to confirm those individuals.  I would really, really suggest you not call it a mistrial.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Smedpull has publicly announced to have discontinued that account and moving on to editing with the Chingadiculous ID. That's perfectly fine. They got blocked because of me, period. I don't want others to suffer for my misconduct. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Your choice. I honestly don't care.  I generally don't argue for third-parties, because frankly, most people just do not care.  He can argue for himself, and unless you really have nothing better to do than more theatrics, drop it.   -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * They can't argue for themselves because they've been indefinitely blocked with no possibility of parole (creating an account, that is). I care because it's my fault and I'm the one that should be punished, not them. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * On you now. I'm not bothering anymore.  I've given you advice and you can continue to ignore it, using whatever justifications you want.  You're not my responsibility.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

KeltieMartinFan
I think this Keltie dude is an obsessed fan of Katie Couric's and his odd behavior in his edits reveals this. It does not help things around here now that Keltie has a new buddy (bully) called Baseball Bugs who's protecting him and of course looking to cause his usual trouble. Regardless, keep a close eye on Keltie since he's well known to attack IPs and new editors.  Caden  is cool  23:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * To my observation, it is you that does the bullying. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, don't think so. You're the bully man.  Caden  is cool  23:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Next comment, I'm archiving this section on my talk page and reporting both of you to ANI. Drop the comments and go do something else with the two million other articles out there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:51, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Followup...
No, you're not wrong. You're not doing anything wrong. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 12:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

YO... MELKY!!!
Hah! Apparently, I copied the standard boilterplate, etc. from a photo with an odd name, probably one which still had it's digital camer name of "000_045.jpg" or something, and didn't notice that come along with me. That's hilarious. I didn't even know it was there the whole time. That would explain why it came up on my page. Well, thank you. Now this whole thing is sorted out.

At first I thought it was because with the new starter at center this year has caused it to change to "YO... BRETT!!!" --The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 18:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Arbitrary breaks in AFDs + ANI
Just an FYI, adding subheadings in AFDs tend to screw up how the article looks at pages like the deletion sorting and the AFD logs. I've removed it from this page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe. I don't know. But it also helps to edit this and to improve the easiness of the discussion.
 * I don't have time to look for but I am sure I have seen this several times.
 * Sad that you warn me of this but didn't warn me you accused me of some sort of canevass 4 days ago.
 * Ceedjee (talk) 11:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I abandon.
 * There is a discussion on this page. But the way things evolved don't fit your mind.
 * So, you decided to make the discussion stop. You accused people of canevassing. You complained on wp:an/I presenting things as if you were a good faith guy, ready to sacrifice yourself.
 * Is this another "tact" as you wrote recently in a summary diff... :-)
 * Congratulations. You won. No time to lose.
 * Note one very important thing that you don't understand. An AfD is not a vote. So, how would it be canevassed ? Unless closing sysop is just as you and doesn't read the argumentation.
 * Ceedjee (talk) 18:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Judicial corporal punishment
Hello, You made 2 major edits (and one less significant edit) without discussing them first. I have reverted them and explained why on the talk page. If you still think those parts should be deleted, could we please discuss it on the talk page rather than making big unilateral cuts. Thanks, Alarics (talk) 07:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, I can be bold without prior discussion on the talk page. However, since you did revert my edits, I have responded at Talk:Judicial corporal punishment. We don't require discussion prior to every edit because otherwise the entire project gets mired down. Normally I would discuss it on the talk page, but, to be honest, I wasn't sure you would still be here. A lot of articles are written by an editor in one fell swoop who never returns again. It's somewhat refreshing to have someone else interested. Please, let's continue at the talk page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You say you weren't sure I would still be there, but the article had only been created 3 weeks previously and the article's history page shows that I had done further work on it on several occasions since then. In those circumstances, unilaterally cutting half the article seems to me to be taking "being bold" a bit far. Anyway, I have now answered all three of your points on the talk page, I trust to your satisfaction. Alarics (talk) 08:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Triple Goddess
You're probably away, but next time you are online could you look at this? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 12:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ricky- I've posted a (rather lengthy) reply on the Triple Goddess discussion page for you to peruse whenever you have time. tcob44 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.19.97.110 (talk) 23:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Article Qamishli
Assyrian (Assyria) just relegins (Christian) it’s not nation

We know as a Arab people there are no nation called Assyrian it’s false name, we know there are few hundred Christians living in Qamishli ,and they came from Greece and Turkey as asylums and  Syrian government give hem full right in Syria ,and most of them they went to Europe and America, Canada .we never hearted about Assyrian in Qamishli ,maybe a few people left in Qamishli not more than 200 people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.109.84.9 (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You learn something new every day
Re this: I had no idea blocked users could upload files. That seems. . . weird. Rivertorch (talk) 07:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not even messing with anything anymore -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordvader2009 (talk • contribs)

Clint Catalyst article
Hello, I wanted to thank you for your help with cleaning up peacock language on the Clint Catalyst article. It's nice to see a helpful, unbiased editor on there - I've been trying to improve the page, but it's a hard job when there's a tendentious editor continually shredding it to bits. Anyway, I digress - I was wondering if perhaps you could please take note of the edits I've made to the page since yours. I'm still new to Wikipedia and have a lot to learn, but in these edits I have followed WP:ASF, as well as WP:NPOV (particularly the part about weasel words - in this instance, the general public wouldn't understand what is meant by "a property", so I added the simple fact as stated by the cited article - the edit I reverted was clearly "made to look...more dubious than a neutral view would present," as per WP:NPOV.) Thank you also for opening the RFC...I appreciate your efforts. Granny Bebeb (talk) 04:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have stated on the talk page on this Clint Catalyst article my objections to that person making changes to the page. I am no expert on Wiki but I've been watching the situation for a while and it seems pretty ridiculous that this person hasn't been banned from editing the page. And the way this whole thing works is enabling him. It helps no one to have someone defacing pages, I need some of the information I am getting and I love it to be reliable - but I will accept ISBN numbers as references, I can use that to buy the book and make sure his story is in the book in question. I salute folks like you, who are trying to keep things straight - but this guy's been deleting references and then weeks later deleting the same thing for having no reference. Nobody is doing anything about it. Thomas Jefferson Crowley (talk) 01:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Peter Deyell article (AFD)
Personally, I favor deleting the article, since it seems an exercise in fantasy and/or self-aggrandizement. I wouldn't want that to happen with no input from anyone else, but as I understand AFD, that wouldn't happen anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.229.174.239 (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

LOL!
I guess it's someone with a deep-rooted hatred of magnetic fields. :) Seriously, I can only recall one vandal who had even a modicum of imagination in all the years I've edited this site.  All the others have been woefully uncreative, borderline illiterate or both.  Oy vey.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks


CardinalDan has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

For your help with the IP vandal. CardinalDan (talk) 04:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Permission to Provide Relevant Information Regarding A Dispute?
Hi There,

Apologies in advance if I'm not following the correct format. I joined Wiki mere minutes ago, and am contacting you because of a muddle of activity that's been brought to my attention.

As the activity is on/about a page where I am the subject, I neither want to join in any "edit wars" regarding content, nor is it in any way appropriate.

Instead, I have a single piece of information that I think you might find relevant--especially as an admin. As it appears that you are the moderator dealing with, well, an embarrassing amount of bickering, is there a means by which I can communicate a simple fact that might potentially be considered libelous if posted publicly?

I hope you understand the unusual situation I am in, and that my only interest is to communicate one tidbit of information that might perhaps aid in resolving a COI-dispute. Is it inappropriate that I interact with you on this matter (since you are already well-aware of the situation/history)? Or should I contact another party regardless? Thanks for your help.

Wondering About Wiki (talk) 06:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.
Recent discussions elsewhere on Wikipedia have reminded me that you were, at the time, the only one who noticed and supported my efforts to improve articles with information taken from bilateral relations articles sent to AfD, specifically here. I wanted to thank you for that. -- Blue Squadron  Raven  16:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

New Kadampa tradition
Please just read the thing I posted before you take sides???I think youll find that if numrous editors report these people for the same thing, there is a chance it might be happening. Remember what they say,'Just because you have paranoia it doesnt mean that everyone isnt out to get you! best wishes Yonteng (talk) 21:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Please Check Your Email.
Thanks, Wondering About Wiki (talk) 04:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

It was brought to my attention that the email address previously listed in my preferences requires one to fill out a "spam-blocker."

Apologies for not remembering that annoyance; hence, I have replaced the address with another.

Best Regards, Wondering About Wiki (talk) 21:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Sec Navy Wilbur
File source problem with File:Sec Navy Wilbur.jpg Thanks for uploading File:Sec Navy Wilbur.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 10:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I got the photo of Secretary of Navy Wilbur from the page in Wikipedia on Admiral Yamamoto. The photo is copywrite Navy Department photo.Ustye (talk) 05:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Description Yamamoto-Wilbur.jpg English: Source: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/prs-for/japan/japrs-xz/i-yamto.htm Captain Isoroku Yamamoto, Japanese Navy, (left) with U.S. Secretary of the Navy Curtis D. Wilbur (right) Photographed at the Navy Department, Washington, DC, circa 1925-28, while Capt. Yamamoto was serving as Japanese Naval Attache to the U.S.

Source Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Scooter using CommonsHelper.

Date 2007-04-23 (original upload date)

Author Original uploader was The Mystery Man at en.wikipedia

Permission (Reusing this image) PD-USGOV-MILITARY-NAVY. Ustye (talk) 05:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ustye"

New! Pakistani military history task force
&emsp;&emsp;

I am contacting you because I see you have contributed to articles about the military history of Pakistan or its armed forces. To help improve Wikipedia's coverage of this important topic, and to provide support and coordination of individual editors, the Military history WikiProject has now set up a newPakistani military history task force.

If you would like to join up, as a founder member of this important new initiative, please add your name to the Participants' List. Thank you for your time. I hope you can help. Roger Davies talk 06:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

You have failed to bring any arguments on the Edin Dzeko talk page about the place of birth. This not the way an administrator should act. Please provide clear arguments for the blocking of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.68.219.224 (talk) 23:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Administrators noticeboard COI_User:Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AN#COI_User:Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz I know "COI" is the new buzz phrase but I truly think this is the case here. I'd like you to see this as a neutral third party. As you and I do not know each other, correct? thanks in advance, Xtian1313 (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

What to do
Look here's the deal. Xtian1313 will not out me but I will say this. Isn't it against wiki policy to out users? I am not a sock. I am a person. I don't really know the people's pages of whom I'm editing. I just know that some really unfair stuff has been going on here. I am not a member of Scarling. I'm not a family member. I do not know Clint Catalyst. I barely know anybody in this city. What I do is google the sections that User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz has blanked. If there's a ref link, I add it. Constructive? YES! I like the work of the artists that User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz is removing.

I'd really like to sign up and have a real account but I honestly think all people involved esp. Xtian1313 who has been very honest, have been treated unfairly.

So what now? I can just change IP addresses as I'll have a new location in a few days.

You are an admin. Tell me what I should do. 69.238.165.217 (talk) 03:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC) I'm just so tired of watching this back and forth and people getting accused.

Souvlaki Album
Hi Ricky81682,

You said I think we should copy anything new over and make it a redirect.

Yes, that's a great idea. I went ahead and added the information to Souvlaki_(album) Go ahead and clean this up, but please retain all the factual information. You can set the Souvlaki_(2005_Castle_Music_re-issue) page to redirect there. Thanks for asking! J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 17:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Diamonddannyboy and Darren M. Jackson
Hi, has returned and your input on his additions would be much appreciated. One of the main issues is Jackson's claimed relation to Henry Jackson, who is claimed (see a pattern here?) to have been regarded as the "King of the Gypsies". From the previous discussion, it seems he concludes they are related by following birth-certificates which seems very much like OR to me. Cheers, -- aktsu (t / c) 06:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Understandable, but I figured I might as well ask anyway :) -- aktsu (t / c) 10:26, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Theophilus Thompson
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that, regretfully, I've quick-failed Theophilus Thompson's GA nomination in accordance with the quick-fail criterion, which prohibit the presence of cleanup/stub tags. It is indeed a nice article, but please ensure it is comprehensive. Regards, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Maury Markowitz
Since you commented in the Great Clay Belt deletion review, you may be interested in Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Feel free to ignore or remove this if you're not. --NE2 13:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Pyraechmes
Hi! It is not my attention to defend Pyraechmes. It is clear that many of their comments are unacceptable, and various edits of theirs problematic. Nevertheless, especially after this last comment of the above user, I felt the need to contact you. I regarded the block as excessive from the first moment. It is characteristic that another adm moments after the ind block did what to me seemed the most rational measure: issued a straightforward last warning.

In any case, it is also true that Pyraechmes' immediate reaction after the block was even worse: creation of a sock; this nonsense etc. Nevertheless, I now see a different attitude from Pyraechmes: a) removing of inappropriate comments, b) calm response (see above) to the rejection of his request to be unblocked. This is a different approach, and an outright rejection does not seem to me the most adequate response.

My proposal is the indef block to be reduced to 1 week block, accompanied with a straightforward warning that any further misconduct would entail an indefinite block. Let me also comment that "Take some more time off, and learn why the copyright violations are also unacceptable" does not make any sense to me either. Pyraechmes is a new user, and this partly applies in their case. How is Pyraechmes going to learn being blocked and inactive?! And, when you tell them to take some time off, what do you mean exactly? Do you have a timetable in mind?

These are my thoughts and my proposals on the matter. Thank you for your patience to read them!--Yannismarou (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oups! Sorry, I should have checked it out. I don't know why I assumed that the declining adm is the same with the blocking one! Well, the endorsing of the block by another uninvolved adm makes think twice about what I should do from now on.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a side note, it was actually me who explicitly advised Pyraechmes to remove those "I hate Jews" comments, which I'm pretty sure were just a poor attempt at being sarcastic, and then to request an unblock. I'm a bit in two minds about this case; on the one hand his editing was quite disruptive prior to the block; on the other hand the immediate indef for that one comment was perhaps rather on the harsh side. But of course I won't be taking admin action here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal of 10ds redirect
Hello Ricky81682. Thanks for your help on my deletion nomination (sorry for putting it in page deletion, rather than redirect deletion). Could you please take a look at Redirects_for_discussion and see if my comments seem reasonable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.233.106 (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Jacen Tan
I have begun working on this. There are language problems. CSB is to be considered. I believe I have made a good atart and will continue going through the article. If you might AGF withdraw the nom, I promise to AGF keep improving. If my work does not come up to par, a renom is fine.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

= June 2009 =

CITY College, Affiliated Institution of Sheffield, Thessaloniki
Hello and good day!

I am registered under name Floropoulou at Wikipedia, and in the behalf of CITY College, Affiliated University of Sheffield, Thessaloniki I was in charge for main information about CITY College at Wikipedia.

I approached the page 2 weeks ago in order to see some information and everything was OK.

But now I can see that the page is not longer there, it has been deleted, but without any information nor any explanation.

Please can you help me with this issue in order to bring back the page of CITY College, Affiliated Institution of Sheffield, Thessaloniki? Please, be kind to reply me ASAP, because this is of high importance for our university.

Many thanks in advance and sorry for disturbing but this matter is very important for our University.

Best regards, Floropoulou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floropoulou (talk • contribs) 10:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

in case we forgot
Hey, remember that awful discussion between me and ceha about that map stuff? See again, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rjecina/Bosnian_census#in_case_we_forgot ,a new chapter has opened up. New maps have been posted on the serbian wikipedia which are totally accurate. Now that we have accurate ones, we can move on to get rid of the bad ones, I hope. Could you give some input? (LAz17 (talk) 05:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)).
 * Where are you man? :( (LAz17 (talk) 22:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)).

Ramu50 Again/ANI Post
Since you are one of two blocking admins on the Ramu50 account, I bring an ANI post about Ramu50 to your attention. You can see it here. Thanks... NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 02:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Swancookie matter at AN/I
In yet another Clint Catalyst/buzznet related dispute today, User:Swancookie rather gratuitously impugned your good faith and insinuated anti-"LGBT" bias. Being fed up with the series of hit=and-run SPAs (named and unnamed) who attack rather than discuss, I've raised the incident at WP:AN/I. I doubt you want any more involvement with this tarpit (who would?), but I thought you should be alerted to the situation. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

For the record- I NEVER insinuated an anti-"LGBT" bias! Hullaballoo Wolfowitz that's a complete lie. I take great offense to this accusation! I need to discuss a LGBT matter that's separate from my issue with HW. Swancookie (talk) 17:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

LGBT Question
I'd like to start a new article about a LGBT artist, and before we start no they are not from LA nor (to my knowledge) friends with Clint Catalyst. The only problem is a lot of the press I have on them is in actual magazines. How does one prove notability if a lot of the person's press (40%?) is in actual gay publications/magazines not online press. What would you suggest I do? Thanks. Swancookie (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Lordvader2009
Hi, just asked for an unblock (via text) at his talkpage. Though I'd let you know in case you don't have it watchlisted. Cheers, -- aktsu (t / c) 18:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Bosnia map dispute
Please help with the bosnia map dispute. I got new maps, correct ones, and ceha has agreed that the maps are pretty much correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALAz17&diff=296730859&oldid=296535043 Please help to move this on. (LAz17 (talk) 00:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)).

= July 2009 =

You've got an impersonator
Presumably one of our buzznet friends at work, probably the one who's been hounding me for the last two weeks, but who "disappeared" yesterday after accidentally editing without logging in, linking himself to one of the active IPs. Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Heads up


Given the text of the user page and the fact that it has reverted you on at least one occasion, I'm assuming that this is not an alternate account of yours? Also see: this.

CIreland (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Forget it, I see it's already been addressed; I must learn to type faster. CIreland (talk) 00:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Dissidia
Just a note, here's a very recent chain of events that is basically what's been happening since the first English trailer for the game was released. It's quite ironic that I'm seeing this debacle from so many angles, I'll do a timeline of it to show you.

7:14 PM - I upload English gameplay footage to YouTube. People quickly decide who the VA in the video is (in this case, apparently the Emperor is Quintin Flynn)

8:08 PM - A user on the Final Fantasy Wiki (of which I'm also a member) edits the Emperor's article to say his VA is Quintin Flynn.

8:21 PM - A YouTube user remarks, on that original video that I uploaded, that the VA is confirmed as Quintin Flynn, as it says so on the Final Fantasy Wiki, but it has not yet been added to Wikipedia.

So now, in just over 40 minutes the video will have been uploaded for exactly 2 hours. I'm waiting to see if (pardon the french) anyone has the balls to add Quintin Flynn to the article and cite some website or another with the video as the source. Seriously, every time I've uploaded English footage, from YouTube to Wiki to Wikipedia, often a few times over and not in that order, this is what I've seen unfurl. Fun, huh? The Clawed One (talk) 00:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Who was
the recently returned Admin you mentioned? I can't keep up with everything no matter how hard I try! Thanks.

Hi
Hey, my response is posted here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Topic_ban_anew

(Interestedinfairness (talk) 22:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)).

I have responded you you at two other places, the Adem Jashari talkpage, and admin notice board page.

Please respond to me as you demanded I do to you. (Interestedinfairness (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)).

Please Return to Simple English Wikipedia
Hello, ! We at Simple English Wikipedia would like to invite you to return to being the valued editor that you once were here. Simple English Wikipedia is a thriving and useful Wikimedia project that has grown to include over 55,000 articles. Whatever the reasons why you left, we'd like you to consider returning to our community. Simple English Wikipedia is a closely knit community where editors get to know each other and act as a real community. We would like to invite you to take a look at what we've become! Thank you for your former contributions to our project and please consider rejoining our family! Thank you! Pmlin editor  13:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:Jewish Inventors
Thanks for the pointer. I think that this entire structure is of concern to some users and they want to get then removed no matter the cost. The fact that previous closes are being reverted and ignored does not help reach consensus or allow for rational discussions. With any luck, this will quiet down over time and maybe in the future we can find consensus someplace. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:27, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

an opinion on a batch of templates?

 * CharmedSeeAlso, specifically, the 15 such as:
 * BilleJ

I noticed your TfD re LithuanianSurname and expect the above batch is about the same deal; they seem to only be used at Charmed (season 8) (didn't look at them all). I believe they should be subst'd and deleted. You comments would be appreciated. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * our template fiend, er, friend

The key thing to understand about this mess is that it was about creating a custom language with templates. The typing shortcuts and boilerplate text are the edge; the core are those that build tables via templates. Those will not be mechanical substs, the tables will have to be recreated with wiki-syntax. Or, and I think better, deleted to avoid the work and to purge the excessive content about hillbillies in the Thirty Years' War. This mess is, of course, impenetrable to most editors and I have a hunch that that was the plan; a way to build a walled garden that would deter others from messing with it. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Good job on Surnames
Noticed you've actually been finding real references! The few existing references are often rather poor web references.... I've been leaving them in place, as they might be better than nothing (mostly there's nothing). Thanks for a job well done! -- watching here --William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * In case you are watching, I wouldn't leave poor references in place. I'd remove them, place cite tags, and remove them from all surnames by language categories, putting them into the main surnames cat.  I see that Category:Hebrew-language surnames is legitimate and as such, should be kept and worked on.  Others, not so much. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Ldsnh2
Hey, just saw your note over at User_talk:Shadowjams and I just wanted to note that I'm one of the other men mentioned on the page in question. And, yes, I too consider it an attack page, though so far I've taken not action on it. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 00:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Shadowjams (talk) 08:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

ANI
Hello Ricky! Would you have a look on this? It looks like no admin is interested in it (yet). THX!-- B@xter 9 15:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 1632 institutions
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is 1632 institutions. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/1632 institutions. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

= August 2009 =

Transformers movie character page move request
Hi, could I please request a page move proposal? I'd like to move the sections of Optimus Prime (other incarnations), Megatron (other incarnations), Bumblebee (other incarnations) and Starscream (other incarnations) on the Michael Bay film characters to their own pages, such as Optimus Prime (Transformers film series). Could you please help me with how to request the move? Thanks, I'd appreciate any help. --Eh! Steve (talk) 15:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

fyi
You applied a fact tag to the Stephen Henley article.

Some people think that every single sentence that makes an assertion should have numbered reference(s). Some academic journals follow this style. But I believe most people think those journals' readability is reduced, and the use of that many footnotes or references makes the material intimidating.

I think that almost no wikipedia contributors follow this example on the wikipedia. I think most wikipedia contributor follow the same convention I do, that no reference should have more than one instance per paragraph.

The quote you applied the fact tag was a direct quote from the third paragraph of this link. And that link was referenced in the first sentence of the paragraph.

Thus I removed your fact tag. Geo Swan (talk) 21:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Your templates
Thanks for the heads-up about this. Frankly - I think templates with the 'real' potential to be used by other people should be left where they are (even if they're not used much). That's why I put them in template-space, and not in my user-space. However if the consensus is to delete - then that's fine by me. If they're deleted from template-space, I won't be moving, nor replacing them in my user-space - thanks again WikiWriter (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Charcoal and barbecue
I'm not sure why you removed some (more than half) of contents from the Barbecue chicken with a refimprove tag and image that I just freshly put. I don't think I have any bad interaction with you in the past, but I guess your "partial" removal is a result that you saw the ANI complaint filed by Tanthalas39. If you think that uncited information should be taken out per the policy, just remove all uncited content, so that take it to AFD or merge or whatever, feel free to do so. Regards.--Caspian blue 04:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * A ref improve tag says unsourced material can be challenged or removed. It doesn't say it can be challenged or removed after a set period of time. I removed specifically the regional variations section only as I thought that would likely be the kind of section that lends itself to OR and edit-warring. If you want to put it back, fine with me, but yes, I saw it from ANI and no, I don't generally care to edit further than that. It really doesn't matter to me since it's clear that tag can be there for quite a while with no real effect. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation, but I respectively disagree. Well, I know you would not care about the article after the discussion, but if I put them back, sources would be accompanied. So no worries, I just wondered why you removed them just like removing charcoal from being grilled barbecue. As for the prediction, you would never know the future since the article got attention at least more than 3 people from today. :) Besides, nobody knows about their fate even tomorrow. Regards.--Caspian blue 04:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Daryl Mundis
Hello Ricky81682, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Daryl Mundis has been removed. It was removed by Thomas.macmillan with the following edit summary ' (remove prod. Notability extends beyond Milosevic trial. Bring to AfD if you feel differently) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Thomas.macmillan before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hello, Ricky
I appreciate the help you have provided. I just wanted to let you know that I replied to your question on Talk:Clint Catalyst providing one of the secondary references that mentions him as a "WGA screenwriter". I'm not sure if it's working though since I used a ref tag on the Talk page...but here's the URL: http://instinctmagazine.com/celebrity-interviews/clint-catalyst-takes-our-pop-quiz Granny Bebeb (talk) 02:22, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Break a Leg (sitcom) ineligible for PROD
I have removed the prod tag from Break a Leg (sitcom), which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-proded, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! —C.Fred (talk) 03:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo article you gave a second opinion on last year
Ricky, I'm going through and cleaning up the mess I made of Jetsunma's article. I wasn't straight with you guys, though my spin-doctoring against Jetsunma was pretty obvious to the Wiki community I'm sure. I did not have scholarly integrity in how I wrote the article about Jetsunma, cherry-picking negative information to put together as negative a picture as possible -- even more negative than the most critical materials out there. I knew what to use because I was one of the main sources on the book, The Buddha From Brooklyn, which is major conflict of interest as well (especially since I didn't admit my involvement and presented myself as an outside party and then used that book extensively for the article). In fact, my real name is Michelle Grissom, formerly known as Ani Dechen, and am actually a student who broke with Jetsunma in 1996. I was one of the main reasons the book was so slanted against Jetsunma. I was not honest in that book either, slanting information exactly the same way I did here on Wikipedia: I used things that weren't really a problem for me because I knew they would upset non-Buddhists. Describing a confrontation where -- after 8 years of my rebelling against the monastic community and my breaking my monastic vows -- she yelled at me and swatted me once, I called it a "beating," simply because the police term for any kind physical contact is battery. I swept my own behavior that led to this under the rug. Jetsunma has been divorced several times, to men who either were or later became her students, and I used that in the article to make her look like she was sleeping her way through her students. I also used the generosity of her students as a way to paint her as being very greedy, even though she's never even asked for a salary, and blamed her for the ongoing struggle to build a monastery, even though the main reason the monastery hasn't been built is that the land bought for it doesn't perk. I've taken all the spin-doctoring out of the article and I am very, very sorry I abused Wiki for my own personal vendetta. Longchenpa (talk) 22:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents
As you participated at the above discussion, this is to let you know I've proposed an alternate wording (for reasons stated there). However, it is essentially the same proposal. If you have any objections to it, please note them down. Thank you, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

= September 2009=

Pinoy Roadies
Ricky81682, you have nominated my entry for deletion. I will no longer contest that, but once the other press release has been aired, may i re-post this article again with proper sources, or will it violate rules in wikipedia?

Thanks! User:Janixpacle —Preceding undated comment added 06:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC).

I will just userify it into my subpage until there are adequate sources. Thanks! User:Janixpacle —Preceding undated comment added 07:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC).

I got this message after i moved it: This template is being used in the wrong namespace. how do i fix that? --Janixpacle (talk) 07:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

More deleted article archives needed
I am confused about where to request deleted articles. BigTimePeace was the concluding "delete" post on the afd of Grantville IV thru something. However, after you told me to contact "the admin", it was plasticspork who provided the pages to me. Right now I'm seeking the 1632_writers article, which was concluded as a "delete" by Spartaz. I've posted on his talk page. Is there a hidden method to find out who the actual admin was? o.0 Tkech (talk) 09:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

STOPPING DESTROYING GOOD WORK.

Rachel shall be vindicated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.157.54 (talk) 02:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request
Hi Ricky, how are you? I recently received an unblock request, and at first approached Xeno (here) because I was familiar with him having worked with him before. Basically, I had once offered to assist relatively new user: User:ObserverNY (about 2k in edits) in getting acclimated to WP. She was eventually blocked, (indef'ed at the present time), then had her talk page privileges revoked. This morning I received an email from her which stated:


 * If you are so inclined to request a reinstatement for me, I would be very appreciative. You can tell them I promise to "behave".

I did not want to simply unblock without discussing the matter with the admins who were involved, but I was wondering if you had any input on the situation. As I understand the block log, you were the "original" blocking admin., and User:Gamaliel simply modified the block to include their talk page in the restriction. I would be appreciative for any input you could provide. Thanks, and Cheers. — Ched :  ? 18:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ched asked me for my 2 cents and here it is: this one's your call as you are the original blocking admin, and if you decide not to unblock Observer can take it to ANI or ArbCom via email. Gamaliel (talk) 19:10, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much Ricky, it is greatly appreciated. — Ched :  ? 23:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Moving files
Hi there. I noticed you moved File:Street Fighter IV character select screen.png. Please remember to remove the move request template if you do it manually. Alternatively, you might want to use User:Splarka/ajaxfilemove.js that automates both the moving and the removal of templates (great script, really^^). Regards  So Why  08:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Disruption
Hi Ricky, I thought I'd bring this to your attention as you've shown an interest in overlording over Balkan issues on previous occasions :). The issue is . User:Imbris is a disruptive Croatian ultranationalist account that has managed to seriously damage a huge number of articles through relentless edit-warring and fanatical persistence. Literally ALL the account is used for is edit-warring, talkpage disputes, and nationalist POV-pushing. I thought I'd draw-up a summary of all the disputes he's been involved with but there's just too many. Just a cursory "Imbris" search through WP:AN/I archives reveals all the complaints and reports by many users from Imbris' "battlegrounds". The sheer damage he's managed to inflict is staggering.

Recently, his hostility has reached a "climax". He's completely demolished the Hey, Slavs through six months of continuous edit-warring and disputes. He's simply refuse to accept university publications as sources o the NDH article, and he's begun WP:STALKing me to five other articles. I left him alone and moved on, frankly exhausted and sickened by his behavior - only to be followed again on the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia and Triune Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia once more. Now I think I ought to do my best to prevent anymore damage.

I'd better stop right there. One could write an article about the huge extent of disruption this user has been the cause of... (just look at this talkpage) I guess I'm interested if you'd be willing to put a stop to this. I honestly think User:Imbris has managed to evade sanctions long enough. Regards -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 20:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well ok, could've simply told me you're not interested in the whole matter... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 22:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand completely, I wouldn't bother with him myself if he wasn't following me around. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 08:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Francis Reynolds-Moreton, 3rd Baron Ducie
Hello Ricky81682, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Francis Reynolds-Moreton, 3rd Baron Ducie has been removed. It was removed by Youngamerican with the following edit summary ' (deprod, add source that he was an MP (and passes WP:POLITICIAN, add cats) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Youngamerican before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

= October 2009 =

Peregrine
Hi Ricky: If you're going to insist on reinserting all the "cultural references" that were cut during the FA process, please at least put them into paragraph format. A list of trivia (and let's be honest, that's what this is) is going to get the article de-listed. Thanks, MeegsC | Talk 20:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Advice re: civility & User:ObserverNY
Hi! Could you please review this discussion between ObserverNY and other editors. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, should have given you the specific diff. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Ricky81682. I see Truthkeeper beat me to it to request you review ObserverNY's lack of civility and general lack of good faith. --Candy (talk) 16:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: User talk:138.88.226.42
It's definitely User:Velebit. Notice he repeats the term "editorial rule" as he did in User talk:Historian35 recently. And notice the frequent use of hyphens (" - ") in his messages (see these unblock requests for example: ). Also notice his repetitive use of questions ("???") or exclamation marks ("!!!"):  He's also used, , , , , , , , and. He's been socking for years with over a dozen unblock requests under false pretenses. He's just throwing an "innocent user" facade and hoping someone will fall for it. Unfortunately, it may have been you in this case :P Spellcast (talk) 08:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

ObserverNY vandalizing and sockpuppeting?
Hey. There's another longwinded discussion on IB Diploma Programme going on, and Observer is unhappy with how the prose is being presented. An anon IP added this bit of vandalism. Looking at the anon IP's edit history, they also made this edit - and signed it as ObserverNY. And then there's this comment Observer left on the talk page, where she writes "My "silly game" was to point out to you how completely biased your insistence on keeping this WP:Listcruft in prose form is". That seems like some kind of sockpuppetry to me, but I'm wondering how to handle this. Should I take this to WP:SPI or ANI or somewhere? &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: Observer admitted that she had forgotten to log in, and while it's great to have a sense of humor and whatever, I'm not sure that adding a section that says "For example, a perfect 45 at the University of Tehran will not only earn a student admission, but a camel and three wives. In Afghanistan, IB students are housed in luxury at the newly excavated cave dorms. ... actively seek to recruit IB students with ambitions of becoming explosive experts and chemical engineers" is funny. Or acceptable. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am pretty sure ONY did not forget to log in but rather intentionally edited as an IP address to vandalize the article and then pretended that some "little vandal" did it, only admitting to being the author of the vandalizing edit after being caught.Tvor65 (talk) 16:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I also find the whole issue pretty disgusting. ObserverNY hasn't learned anything from recent bans and in addition is now becoming even more obnoxious and disruptive on the IBDP pages. Whenever the editor is active on the talk pages they become rather like a chat room and there is no time for reflection or discussion. It's a barrage of aggressive commentary including goading, offensiveness and downright intent to disrupt us from trying to work in a collaborative manner. From my perspective, ObserverNY thinks the whole thing is a joke and a personal playground for themselves. --Candy (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * If ObserverNY is indefinitely banned, how is he/she able to still make edits to the Glenn Beck article as of this moment? SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 00:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You know what? I think I may have jumped the gun, here - I took note of dates and times of ObserverNY's last edits - while I looked at the times, I think I was actually noting the times of someone else's edits.  My apologies if I'm wrong here - but you might want to check it out anyway.  Sorry for any confusion. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 01:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Just thought you'd need to know
[] Your mentioned. Abce2 | This is not a test 19:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

re:
Hi Ricky, thank you for asking. I responded on my talk - basically it says that I appreciate you letting me provide a second chance to someone. If there's still a problem, please ... feel free to do whatever needs to be done to protect our project. I trust your judgment, and never even said your original block was wrong - I was just asking for a second chance for someone. I appreciate the fact that you let me do that ... thank you. You're more familiar with the situation than I am I think, so I trust your judgment. — Ched : <font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0000fa;"> ? 21:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

User:77.83.164.111
Hi! Please have a look at the history of Economy of Greece. Could you help? Thank you!--93.45.123.133 (talk) 04:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah! That was what I was thinking, anyway
(But I've a feeling you feel differently, right?) ↜Just  M &thinsp;E here&#8202;,&#8202;now  06:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks! ;^) ↜Just  M &thinsp;E  here&#8202;,&#8202;now  06:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Email
Hi there. I just wrote you an email. Amsaim (talk) 20:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Update
In light of this warning of 2 October 2009, which I personally percived as serious, I thought I'd give you an update on the effect your post has had. User:Imbris is currently engaged in (ultra)nationalist POV-pushing and edit-warring on as few as five articles: Hey, Slavs again (five reversions so far    ), Socialist Republic of Croatia (yes, the same edit you warned him about,   ), Foreign relations of Serbia (history), Flags of Croatia (history), and Maltese (dog), where he's engaged in another talkpage argument (take a gander at this for example, one day after the warning about his talkpage "comments" had been issued).

In addition, he's begun attempting to gather support on the Croatian Wikipedia among his nationalist buddies to get me blocked. (hr:Wikipedija:Kafić "If this I.R.Bab [i.e. DIREKTOR] could be shown to have a sockpuppet, that would be a good thing"). That post also reveals he's been disclosing my real-world identity (initials), again probably to his buddies (WP:HARASS), which was brought to my attention by User:Ivan Štambuk. His inflammatory accusations of sockpuppetry also included User:Crotchety Old Man  who he is trying to get blocked. That's it for now... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 22:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Deeply thanks for understanding and reinserting of interwiki. Wertuose (talk) 06:31, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Come agian?
You want to retract that? I never reverted anyone. I tagged a section. Also check the talk page history. --Crossmr (talk) 03:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Circumventing a Ban?
I'm not sure where the right place to voice this concern is, but I have reason to believe that User:Spotfixer who was banned for disruptive edits with his sock puppet User:TruthIIPower, is editing once again under an IP address 69.121.221.174. I came to you, because I know you were somewhat involved with banning the user before. My reason for suspecting this is that the IP has been making edits nearly identical to the those TruthIIPower was making (for example insistently changing all instances of the word 'mother' to 'pregnant woman' in abortion articles). Much earlier he also made edits on Spotfixer's user page. Thanks for helping me out. --Twinkie eater91 (talk) 14:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the ITN FYI
Thanks for notifying me that a user Yousaf465 made a complaint about my "disruptive edits". It was a mis-pasted URL, a mistake that I corrected promptly. I don't know why, but user Yousaf465 seems to want my edits to be "monitored" on an ongoing basis. I made a note for him on his talk page. bostonbrahmin 17:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bostonbrahmin20 (talk • contribs)

Anxiety disorder
Rick, I noticed a surge of the abovementioned in some of Wikipedians who had edited here for a long time, with issues from their real life being allowed to manifest itself here on WP when they return to edit. One good example is a particular person, whom I shall not name, it's not his time suspecting or accusing someone of being a sock... it's like trying to catch his shadow with his barehand, he clearly needs some professional help. That much I can tell, cheers~! --Dave1185 (talk) 08:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up, I'm definitely steering clear of that quagmire in ANI, I really don't wish to be suck into it along with someone else for his own chasing of the shadows act. Cheers~! --Dave1185 (talk) 23:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Admin assistance needed
Hi. Your admin assistance is needed here please. This article is being IP-edited, and unsourced data is added to the article. I have once reverted such an IP-edit, and added WP:V in my revert edit summary. The ip-edits come right back and add the same unsourced information into the article. As you know, wikipedia does not allow original research, which is exactly what this ip edit is adding. The article has 4 reference, and none of these 4 references confirm the data from the ip-edits. Could you please revert all the ip-edits, and semi-protect the page? Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Changing name of entry
Hey, as you made a helpful comment about the racquetball entries I've written about I thought I'd ask you this question. One of the players I wrote an entry for has changed names; she's no longer married. How did I go about changing the entry to reflect this change? Trb333 (talk) 05:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Blaž Kraljević
What is your problem with that?? He is native of Ljubuški (the city which is undisputed 100% Herzegovina)Añtó&#124; Àntó (talk) 07:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC) Exactly, the country name is Bosnia AND HERZEGOVINA!

There is not such country named Bosnia so can't be Bosnian.Your threat of blocking is quite innapropriate.--Añtó&#124; Àntó (talk) 06:51, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

= November 2009 =

Deletions
Bear in mind that "not yet notable" is not the same as "notability not asserted", and that neither is the same as "not notable".

"Notability not asserted" means that there is nothing in the article to show why the subject should have an article. I'm passing judgment on the article, not on the subject of the article.

"Not yet notable" means that I am passing judgment on the subject of the article, and that my judgment is "not yet; try again next year".

I don't bother with the CSD criteria. I use what they mean.

Process is important, but it's not all-important. If you concede that (x) will not survive AfD or PROD, then restoring it is pointless, and a waste of effort.

If I restored that image and then transferred it to Commons, it would be deleted as "out of scope". Again, pointless and a waste of effort. DS (talk) 21:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Bowin Koala
You may wish to comment here. --Falcadore (talk) 03:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:
''"Why use anti-WINEP sources"? Because we want neutrality, not just positive views. WINEP does not deal only with the Israel-Palestinian conflict (as noted in the policy orientation section), so if you want to change the wording in the lede to recognize that, that's a valid point, but demanding a removal of all sources that disagreed with what you want it to say is inappropriate.''

Never have I ever said, indicated, hinted or suggested anything close to what you just said.

As to using anti-WINEP sources, they must be treated as such. It's one thing one a NPOV source says something and another when a POV source says it. You do not get neutrality from anti-WINEP/opinion sources, you get them from neutral sources (your sentence above seems to suggest it is all either pro or anti). Apparently you need some reminding, so I will repeat myself: if sufficiently notable then a POV source must be regarded as such. Interestingly enough, you made no reference to the point I made about the NY Times. --Shamir1 (talk) 08:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Few words
Hi, Ricky. Has it occured to you that you've overreacted in the case of user:Aradic-es.? Just because he insisted on the term "Herzegovina Croat" instead of "Bosnian Croat"? That claim is not some kind of Croat POV. It's a normal thing. Same classification of persons and cities, villages etc. is also known and used (!) among Serbs and Bosniaks. Please, let's not be silly. People in Bosnia and Herzegovina (all nationalities), as well as in neighbouring countries are mocking at books in English in which they've seen the city of Mostar described as "Bosnian city". I've seen such tourist guides. BTW, Mostar is Herzegovinan city. Regarding the contributions of user PRODUCER, I do not trust him. Especially when I see userbox like this one on his userpage "This user supports the reunification of the Serbo-Croatian language.". To you this means nothing, to a Croat such message means "I want you, Croats, back in chains", "I'm fighting for Serb supremacy over Croats", "I want you, Croats, again in submissive position". So, please, Ricky, have that in mind when considering PRODUCER's arguments. If Aradic-es was too persistent in reverting, if he violated 3RR rule, than it's not the reason to block him forever. Not at all. Maybe a week, but - forever?? Finally, he hasn't told a lie. He said the truth. And Croats and Serbs and Bosniaks 'll confirm that. Are you blocking forever someone for writing the true information? Sincerely, Kubura (talk) 03:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Regarding PRODUCER's userbox, that's his choice. I dislike that. However, that may show PRODUCER's biased attitude. But, enough about him. "this attitude is entirely inappropriate ". Do you know how many times various users wrote such accusations ("you're a vandal", "you're edit warrior"), without losing a single hair afterwards, unfortunately? I'm the admin on hr.wiki. As we have experiences with Aradic-es on hr.wiki, he's not making problems. We can say that Aradic has lost his temper a little here. Therefore he could have been blocked for 3 months, in worst case. I'm saying this because I've seen the case of user that contributes through IP, that never contributes on the mainspace, exclusively on talkpages, and uses Wikipedia as forum. Not to mention that that IP-user ( 24.86.110.10, he appears through four more IP's, 24.86.127.107, 24.86.116.250, 24.80.118.62, 24.86.124.155...) has used blatant inflammatory derrogatory terms against me and some other Croatian users. I've reported him, and he only got few weeks of blocking. Only few weeks for "you're sick in the head, poor powerless retard, all your BULLSHIT, brainless creatures". Please, see Talk:Dalmatia, Talk:Croatian_language. I've reported him 30 November 2007 to admin Joy. He hasn't blocked him. Later to admin Steel Steel (section Abusive language). Admin Steel blocked him on three weeks. Those IP's weren't blocked on the term of infinite for blatant inflammatory behaviour. Are you going to leave those IPs intact? On the contrary, I haven't seen Aradic using such terms. Compare Aradic, and compare those IPs. I hope you understand me now. Bye, Kubura (talk) 05:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your attention. Kubura (talk) 23:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Khachkar article
I have started a RfC about the issues involved in the locking of the Khachkar article. <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS, verdana, sans serif; color:#0088BB;">Meowy 22:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Wikipedia:How THIS IS TO to start a page
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Advice
Hi Ricky81682! I have seen your name appearing in couple of disputes, concerning Balkans related articles. I have some problems with user Toroko's edits, most recently within 1102 and Personal union articles. He has been warned and reverted by several other editors, but without any success. He don't want to discuss the problem on the talk pages, instead he appears every now and then, revert text, and disappear from wiki. I know that personal union between Kingdom of Croatia and Kingdom of Hungary is touchy matter, so I was wondering if you could give me some advice. Should I report him, revert him again, stop editing on these (and other related) articles, or you have some better idea? Thanks, Kebeta (talk) 13:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * O.K. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 09:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As you very well know, we had lengthy debates over that with User:Rjecina. According to one theory, Croatia became part of the Kingdom of Hungary, according to other - mostly Croatian - historians after the conquest there was a personal union under the Hungarian Crown. User:Kebeta only wants to add one side of the story.
 * You may also remember that the majority of English sources claim that the Pacta Conventa was NOT concluded in 1102, but centuries later, so Toroko's edit there is OK (his edit summary less so).
 * Should we really repeat the same old debates now with Kebeta? Squash Racket (talk) 15:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Ricky81682, please help! We are getting nowhere like this. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 14:43, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I moved the page Croatia in personal union with Hungary (Croatian POV) to History of Croatia (1091 - 1526) (Neutral title) and User:Kebeta started a war over this edit that we had discussed before (see talk page). So administrative intervention is needed, because he can't stop himself from pushing only one POV. Squash Racket (talk) 14:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

ARBMAC decision
Hello Ricky, I have a small request if I may take a moment of your time. As it is, I believe, a matter to be handled by an admin, I would be grateful if you could formally draw the attention of User:Mir Harven to the ARBMAC decision. Briefly, the grounds for this request are his/her comments during a conversation today at Talk:Bleiburg massacre, specifically this. Under WP:LIBEL I have made three amendments to his/her comments. I should also draw your attention to various other remarks ("This page is a product of Serbian sickos"; "crap "invented" by Serbian psychos"; "Serbian malignity"; "nothing but Serbian concoction and a sign of idiocy" and so on ad nauseam), now to be found at User_talk:Mir_Harven Many thanks for your attention, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:41, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of the talkpage
Hi, Ricky. Recently I've been trying to help to resolve misunderstandings on the articles/talkpages Talk:Personal union and Talk:Croatian–Hungarian Agreement. There I've seen arguing of users Kebeta and Squash Racket. I wrote few things. I also remembered that I wrote previously few lines about that topic. So, why should I write same thing hundred times, so I went to search for my edit. Nowhere to see it. Where it disappeared? Then I've encountered into this blatant action on the talkpage where I've contributed. I was badly surprised when I've seen this. Is that allowed? I remember that I was editing on that talkpage. And there it was. Please, see previous version. There it was the version (article had other name at that time) with my comments. User DIREKTOR has blatantly ignored all the discussion on that talkpage. He simply inserted "redirect" and who cares for idiots that lost hours of their free time to search for sources (first the book, then the page) and then in shortest form possible type it here. That discussion was work of all of us users that contributed there. You were also contributing on that deleted talkpage (you've tried to mediate several times ), just type your username. Generally, noone complained on the existence of the article, there were some disagreements between some users about the articlename. For DIREKTOR that wasn't important. He selfwillingly decided to merge articles by redirect and delete all discussions with that redirect. Fortunately, I've noticed this. So, basicly, we have two problems here: - blatant removal of discussion - blatant removal of article ("Croatia in personal union with Hungary"). The topic is so wide that it cannot be encompassed by single article ("Kingdom of Croatia (medieval)". (To make things worse, the title isn't correct now. Union lasted after Middle Ages, so it doesn't refer to "medieval"). DIREKTOR ignored that. He self-willingly redirected. I believe that no user is allowed to behave like that. Sincerely, Kubura (talk) 01:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I know what redirect is :) Problem is that he redirected the page without consulting others for the opinion; selfwilling action. Thank you for the attention. Bye, Kubura (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Alleged personal union
Hello Ricky81682. I've already said on Talk:Personal Union, that books from Cambridge and Oxford University Presses and other reliable sources pointed out that there was no personal union. I think it's not the best solution to ignore it, to delete only my edits and refs and keep the Croatian POV, which is very questionable. As somebody said earlier on your talk page, the theory of the personal union is supported mostly by Croatian historians. I think articles should not be so one sided, at least it should be mentioned that it is very questionable. Toroko (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Ricky81682's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

= December 2009 =

ANI
Hi Ricky, just to let you know that I've mentioned you at an ANI thread, Balkans related of course, and your input of whatever kind would be welcome. Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Thanks, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Tito (and Balkans) ANI sympathy
Good lord&hellip; maybe I shouldn't involve myself in Balkans stuff if this is what it does to you. I just got involved because I figured I should try to help out on an ANI thread (since I had just posted one, creating work for others, I figured contributing to another would even the scales). Anyway, I was just stopping by to express sympathy for the frustration this invokes. I think I'm starting to understand what topic bans are for. Previously I'd divided the world into vandals and non-vandals. Topics like the Balkans (and I assume other contentious issues like religion and the Middle East conflict) seem to bring out the "vandal" in otherwise decent editors. Thanks for commenting, sorry for the bitter memories brought up. &mdash;ShadowRanger (talk 23:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Dear God ShadowRanger I am not a vandal. I am not. I have various DYKs under my belt. I've got a clean record in all the years I've been here. But I've pretty much dumped article writing now. Like Ricky, I don't see the point. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Jagex
Thanks for informing me. I've unprotected it. It's been a while now (almost two years, goodness gracious!).  bibliomaniac 1  5  05:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If you apply common sense to IAR and be bold, there's no reason to fear! Be careful, but don't let the stress of having to keep up with a rotten atmosphere prevent you from opening access to others to edit. If what you do is right and in line with common sense, you won't be in danger. This is the free encyclopedia after all, my fellow Wikipedian. :)  bibliomaniac 1  5  05:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * As a rule of thumb, I think that unprotecting semis is pretty uncontroversial. Full protection is a bit more sketchy.  bibliomaniac 1  5  06:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Your advise on the Administrative Noticeboard
Hi Ricky, you just left a message on the administrative noticeboard which said "Two choices: either file an WP:SSI right now or the next time I see a sockpuppet or outing attempt, you will be blocked. If it's true, we'll deal with it. Otherwise, it's nonsense that disruptive. Repeated on the talk page.". Who was the message intended for? It's not clear whether you were writing to me (the person who's complained about the "attempt to out") or the person whom I've complained about (user Makrandjoshi). Wireless Fidelity Class One (talk 10:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Ricky, perhaps you're mistaken. You left a message on my talk saying "If you are suggesting someone is a sockpuppet or guessing at people's motivations". I want you to kindly correct your statement. I have never even remotely suggested anyone is a sock puppet or have I guessed people's motivations. My complaint against user Makrandjoshi was that he kept on assuming everybody around is a sock puppet and he kept on assuming everybody's motivations. Kindly don't get me wrong, but I need you to realise I am not the one saying everybody is a sock puppet. Thanks Wireless Fidelity Class One (talk 10:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. Got it. At least a short term block would have been good after so many instances. But thanks for the reply. Tc Wireless Fidelity Class One (talk 11:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh no. Didn't mean to go against policy. But when I saw this link on harrasment here, it said that "attempted outing is grounds for an immediate block". So was surprised you are still warning a user who has been requested by me so many times not to accuse, told on Wikiquette's twice not to accuse, and also told by an administrator y'day on the noticeboard complaint (Dmack), after which he again said I was a sock. That's why I was wondering. Wireless Fidelity Class One (talk 11:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Alex Jacobowitz
Hi! If you ever close an AFD again, could you please remember to also enclose the heading within the closure tags like this? It may be different for other processes, but that's the way it's done at AFD. - Mgm|(talk) 10:46, 9 December 2009 (UTC)erboard.

Your decision on the ANI
Read your comment on my talk-page. I realize I probably went overboard and violated WP:OUTING. You said I should start an SSI immediately. I wanted to ask you about another choice. According to BLOCK, "accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization" can be blocked indefinitely. I think based on User:Wifione's history, he clearly falls in this category. Every edit is aimed at reducing the negatives and embellishing the positives of IIPM. I can provide a long list of diff's if necessary. How do I go about making the case for such a block and at which noticeboard? Makrandjoshi (talk) 11:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe the policy says "sole or primary purpose". A few other pages linked to doesn't take away from the primary purpose, which is to promote IIPM, IMHO. Anyway, I defer to your judgment on this. Makrandjoshi (talk) 12:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I got it. When I said "I defer to your judgment" I meant I am dropping it. I don't blame you for being testy about me. I did do something stupid I should not have. If you knew the history (including legal and death threats against me on wikipedia, not that it excuses my stupidity), you'd kinda get where I am coming from. But yes, I am dropping this and focusing on just editing. FWIW, your latest edit at the page where you ask "what does India's plans for accreditation generally have to do with school?", the answer is "nothing". It's information put in there by wifione to somehow undermine the fact that those accreditation bodies have taken action against IIPM. It is one of the many many examples of wifione reducing the negatives and promoting the organization that I spoke about earlier. Makrandjoshi (talk) 12:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have done steps of dispute resolution before, done SPI before, and been on other noticeboards too. In each and every instance on a dispute (except for this stupid outing thing I did), admins or other editors have found me to be among the editors who are right. I have also repeatedly asked for semi or full protect for the page. I don't expect you to go through the past talk pages of the article (it'll take ages), but as stupid as what I did was, you should realize, it's an aberration. My editing is by no means disruptive in general. It's good that you'll be watching the page. You'll realize who's what very soon. Anyway, this is all I have to say on the matter today. Have a great day. Makrandjoshi (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * hi. Just left a continuing message on the admin noticeboard with new past instances of user Makrand's outing efforts. You might be interested in seeing it to consider my request for a block for corrective action . Wireless Fidelity Class One (talk 05:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

IIPM lead
You cited WP:LEDE as justification for reducing the size of the lead of The Indian Institute of Planning and Management, but you went too far, violating WP:LEDE again. Please work on restoring the lead so that it provides an overview of the article as required by WP:LEAD, rather than consisting of just one sentence that says nothing about the article. Thanks. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Mass killings under Communist regimes
Just wanted to come by and say thanks for your input at Mass killings under Communist regimes and talk. I couldn't agree more with everything that you have said regarding the situation, including you pointing out Making a comparative evaluation between sources not grounded in an RS is SYNTHESIS and OR. It has been a known issue, please see the talk FFI. If you can help with this further it would be nice. But in case not, no worries, I completely understand. And things are going to work out eventually, there is no hurry with fixing this article since we don't have a WP:deadline. All the best!--Termer (talk) 02:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Erik9bot category
I migrated those articles that were relatively new to the unreferenced article categories. I have also done some ad-hoc migration, partuicularly of unref'd album articles. I now have a BRFA agreed, and will migrate the rest of the non-stub articles to the unreferenced structure, the stubs to a new parallel structure. Rich Farmbrough, 22:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC).

Beyonce I Am... Tour
Hi, did you put the protection on the I Am... Tour page before? If so can you do it again please as since it has been announced the tour will be going to South America Beyonce South American fans have been editing the tour dates like crazy adding in too many false dates. Ive added/kept in the dates I could find sources for. Wneedham02 (talk) 16:23, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Malvern College
Hi ! Malvern College, an article you have edited or contributed to, concerns an important school. It still needs some urgent  attention. If you can help, please see Talk:Malvern College  regarding  how it  may  be improved. --Kudpung (talk)

= January 2010 =

Kshatriya Wiki Page
Hello. I'm working hard to maintain this page in a proper way (with the help of few other people). It is a sensible topic and some people are continuously vandalazing this page. It is particularly the case of some people (without user name) who are continuously adding the false info "vanniyar". We told them not do so because the info they are adding is false (we proved that in the talk page). But they continue. Yesterday it was user 122.167.97.83 who did that. I don't know what to do. Is there any possibility to block IP users from editing this page. This page is not here for self promotion. Please help me to maintain the reputation of wikipedia. Thanks.Rajkris (talk) 01:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Emu War
The article Emu War you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Emu War for things which need to be addressed. Cnilep (talk) 21:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Ricky81682! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Winston Smith (athlete) -

One more OUT
Talk:Amir Vahedi, toward the bottom, he alleges my name is Shirley. I hope you will remove that entry. Thanks. 2005 (talk) 08:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Outing and Poker-Babes
I was not aware of the outing rule, I apologize for breaking it and will not do so again. That said, 2005 has stated a number of times that I am the owner of ThePlayr.com. Kindly remove all of those statements from Wikipedia and reprimand 2005 in the same way you have reprimanded me.

Second, I find it very relevant if a person lobbies very hard over a long period of time for inclusion of specific links and references from a single source, whether or not that person has a vested financial interest in that source. Without breaking the outing rules I'm sure you can understand what I am getting at. I would like now to bring up the discussion of whether so many poker-babes.com links should be on Wikipedia and in doing so, would like to know how to go about brining up potential conflicts of interest without breaking Wikipedia rules. I would also like to know specifically where on Wikipedia I might start such a discussion. Thank you DegenFarang (talk) 15:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

User:DegenFarang
You previously gave this user a final warning, which he has ignored. Please take a look at this ANI notice. User:DegenFarang has a long history of abusive edits, particularly BLPs, and has stated that the only rule he will abide by is ignore all rules. He violated 3RR today (two different articles), and abused another BLP. Additionally he has attempted WP:OUTING me twice today, this time even as a different person than before. His abusiveness needs to finally be dealt with. 2005 (talk) 01:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks,
I did know they often used wikipedia, but didn't realize the WP indicated that. I very much suspect the article is a hoax. Hobit (talk) 07:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Equus (play) as metaphor for horse and man
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. <b style="color:#3773A5;">Cyber</b> cobra (talk) 10:22, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

No
No just reason for remove those sources regarding Broz massacres: I know other sources too and in discussion there is consensus for put those sources! Now I have short time and I will discuss at next days--ANTE RAKELA (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand: why DIREKTOR removes valid sources inserted by me? May you restore those? I have discussed in talk:Josip Broz Tito--ANTE RAKELA (talk) 16:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you very much for attending my concern. <font color="#000">Erebedhel  - <font color="#000">Talk  10:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Stir on the Tito page
What do I do with this guy? Apparently I have a "hysterical and absurd mind"... Do I report the guy or would you like to handle the issue? The account is a standard-issue Croatian nationalist - if experience has taught me anything its that he's not going to stop adding his personal musings and unsourced/unrelated nonsense. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 09:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

= February 2010 =

Thank you
For the warm welcome and the informational links. I will read them. --Jonno888888 (talk) 19:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of David Brown (Massachusetts)
Hello! Your submission of David Brown (Massachusetts) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harrias (talk) 12:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for deleted page
Greetings. I'd like to request that a copy of the recently-deleted essay Plaxico be restored to my userspace. I'd like to rewrite an essay about "shooting yourself in the foot" that doesn't carry the issues that led to its deletion (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Plaxico (2nd nomination)). Thanks in advance. <font face="Century Gothic"> Equazcion ( talk ) 21:09, 14 Feb 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome.
Ricky, thanks for your welcome message. I was only adding references to the "Ian McDonald (writer)" page  as there was a warning on that page that it would be removed if someone did not add references. Since I met Ian once, I felt it was my duty to do something about the lack of references. Outside of my job (electrical industry) and my hobby (historical society of my township), I don't have much to offer Wiki. John John-Ont (talk) 02:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that Wiki should not reference itself
I must have missed that in the reference guidelines. Your reference is much better, thanks.John-Ont (talk) 11:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation
A request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Washington Institute for Near East Policy has been filed with the Mediation Committee (MedCom). You have been named as a party in this request. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Washington Institute for Near East Policy and then indicate in the "Party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate in the mediation or not.

Mediation is a process where a group of editors in disagreement over matters of article content are guided through discussing the issues of the dispute (and towards developing a resolution) by an uninvolved editor experienced with handling disputes (the mediator). The process is voluntary and is designed for parties who disagree in good faith and who share a common desire to resolve their differences. Further information on the MedCom is at Mediation Committee; the policy the Committee will work by whilst handling your dispute is at Mediation Committee/Policy; further information on Wikipedia's policy on resolving disagreements is at Resolving disputes.

If you would be willing to participate in the mediation of this dispute but wish for its scope to be adjusted then you may propose on the case talk page amendments or additions to the list of issues to be mediated. Any queries or concerns that you have may be directed to an active mediator of the Committee or by e-mailing the MedCom's private mailing list (click here for details).

Please indicate on the case page your agreement to participate in the mediation within seven days of the request's submission.

Thank you, Shamir1 (talk)

= March 2010 =

AfD nomination of Tom Papania
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Tom Papania. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Tom Papania. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Off the Wall (radio)


The article Off the Wall (radio) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * no attempt to show notability through reliable third party coverage

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Theserialcomma (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

= April 2010=

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

= May 2010 =

DYK nomination of It's So Funny
Hello! Your submission of It's So Funny at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Joe Chill (talk) 00:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I found two sources that you could use: this and this. Joe Chill (talk) 00:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems like it's going to be hard to expand it since North Korea is pretty much isolated because of their government. Sorry that the sources were the same thing. Joe Chill (talk) 00:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Mitchell Joachim
Man, that article was messed up, I thought I had a clean revision, but the opposite was the case. Thanks, Amalthea  20:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

= June 2010=

There is a sockpuppet problem that would need to be extinguished quickly
Hi there,

I espied that user:Samofi having been indefblocked by you, attiring in a disguise of MarekSS returned to the wikipedia. In my opinion, a quick disposal of this problem would be necessary as he is a definitely disruptive one with strong warlike conduct and in addition he already left some pestering messages on Hobartimus' talk page as well.   --Nmate (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not Samofi. I haven't even made edits on articles where he had conflicts
 * Nmate, you are, unlike me, a very "peaceful" editor:   . I am not against a SPI, but it is not necessary, because there is no clue that I am his sock  (MarekSS (talk) 14:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC))

There is also in the article a small paragraph copied word by word from Britannica:

The population of Hungary, even excluding Croatia, had never been purely Magyar, but the pre-Magyar inhabitants of the plains and the newcomers to them (outside the towns) had quickly become Magyarized; and, while this was not true of the peripheral areas, their populations were relatively sparse

Should I rephrase that in order not to break the copyright rights? (MarekSS (talk) 08:57, 3 June 2010 (UTC))
 * Please note the above posts of user:MarekSS were confirmed as a sockpuppet of the indefinitely blocked user:Iaaasi, while user Iaaasi is tagged as sockpuppet of user:Bonaparte. Hobartimus (talk) 14:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You say you are not Samofi, but you never say that you are not a sockpuppet. Do you claim that your account is not a sockpuppet account? Are you a sockpuppet or not? Please answer that question. Is this your first account? Hobartimus (talk) 09:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Paint Crew Page
How is the official website for the Paint Crew not a credible source and the websites where the quotes came from not credible sources as well. The blog is the official blog of Mark Titus and when quoting Mark Titus off of his blog that seems to be credible. Also, quoting two news articles are not credible? Does that mean the news is not credible? Also, if other student sections can have their own page such as the Izzone (Michigan State), Grateful Red (Wisconsin), and Nittany Nation (Penn State) why can the Paint Crew not have their own? You said "I'm not sure this is a notable sports section." Last I checked every nationally covered game at Purdue the Paint Crew is mentioned and the student section still exists. In my opinion the page should remain separate from the men's basketball page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Golferhoops32 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC) I added my comments there because wikipedia told me to comment there if I disagreed with the merger. I can prove that the do mention the paint crew but I am not rich so I cannot buy copies of each game let alone one copy of one game. I was not talking about the sources talking about the paint crew I was talking about the quotations. Also you said it is known as THE paint crew but it is the paint crew as much as THE izzone is know as the izzone (which does not have the at the beginning of the wikipedia page btw). You come off to me as a stuck up person that just hates Purdue. Oh and I removed your dumb comments (Golferhoops32 (talk) 04:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC))

McCoy Talk Page
Your welcome btw for my correction to your user page where I corrected a mis-spelled word or typo for you. I was just getting ready to contact you about your nominating for deletion one of my uploads, which held the information that you are calling me incivil about. The dates are within the very documents that have been removed by Memorex3300 and you want to flex your muscles as an admin because of a revert and delete war that I am trying to prevent. Also, where you placed the nomination for deletion has a problem with either my browser or an internal error because when I go there, my user name turns red and does not keep the edit record in my contributions list. Is there a way you can send the link to me without my user name turning red? Thanks in advance! Victor9876 (talk) 03:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Here is the document that has the dates, amounts and other information that got deleted, and started the edit wars. I thought it was still there. Wales brought up the deletions as being manufactured and original research along with privacy issues, so I redacted them and re-uploaded it. After it was removed, Memorex3300 went to work eliminating the information from the article. There is something very strange going on. There are other missing references that were there before the revert war, I will find them as well. Victor9876 (talk) 04:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Another: Victor9876 (talk) 04:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Now commons category problem
I created a tracking table for the year 2010-2002 at will this help?--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 09:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2010
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2009
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2008
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2007
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2006
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2005
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2004
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2003
 * User:IngerAlHaosului/nowcommons2002

SuperTux
Hi, there is a content dispute on SuperTux and the other editor insists on people who edited the page to get involved. I saw you had edited, so could you comment on the talk page discussion? Thank you. Hekerui (talk) 10:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Peter Hayes (sculptor) article
Thanks for raising the absence of references here. I'll address this on the article talk page. Hugh Mason (talk) 06:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

= July 2010=

Signature
Ok, Thanks for the tip. --  <font color=#00D800>水の男の子  <font face="Comic Sans MS "><font color=#008900>chat 16:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Lord Chaitanya knows everything that happens in all three phases (past, present, and future, of time. He knows that in the future some demoni people will serve Lord Advaita.

Text 123

They will refer to Lord Advaita by the name "Shri Krishna". In this way they will reject the words of the true Vaishnavas.

Text 124

These sinners will thus disobey the devotees who affirm that Advaita is "the greatest Vaishnava".

Text 125

Many persons will consider themselves the followers of Lord Advaita, but they will not have the power to see how in the future they will be punished.

Text 126

Lord Chaitanya, the crest jewel of they who know everything, knew all this. Therefore He did something to try to stop this from happening.

Text 127

By punishing His mother, Lord Chaitanya showed the result that comes from offending Lord Advaita or any other Vaishnava.

Text 128

No one can protect a person who has offended a Vaishnava.

Text 129

Therefore one should avoid persons who offend Vaishnava.

Text 130

One should avoid an offender, even if the offender is otherwise very qualified. A little association with an offender will make one fall down.

Text 131

Who has the power to understand why the Lord gives punishment? By punishing His mother, He taught everyone.

Text 132

Anyone who blasphemes they who use the word `Vaishnava" to address Lord Advaita will be punished. He will perish.

Text 133

Lord Chaitanya is theSupreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all. To be called His follower is very great praise.

Text 134

Without any intention to deceive, Lord Chaitanya openly said that Lord Nityananda is the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself.

Text 135

By Lord Nityananda's mercy I know Lord Chaitanya. By Lord Nityananda's mercy I know the Vaishnavas.

Text 136

By Lord Nityananda's mercy offenses are destroyed. By Lord Nityananda's mercy one attains devotion to Lord Vishnu.

Text 137

Blasphemy directed to Lord Nityananda's servants never enters my mouth. Day and night I happily sing Lord Chaitanya's glories

Text 138

I carefully serve Lord Nityananda's devotees. Lord Chaitanya is the life and wealth of Lord Nityananda's servants.

Text 139

A person who has only a little good fortune will not become Lord Nityananda's servant, for Lord Nityananda's servant is able to see Lord Chaitanya.

Text 140

Anyone who hears this story of Lord Visvarupa becomes a servant of the limitless Supreme Personality of Godhead. He feels that Lord Nityananda is his very life.

Text 141

Lord Nityananda and Lord Visvarupa do not have different bodies. This Mother Saci knew. Some other great souls also knew.

Text 142

Glory to Lord Nityananda, who takes shelter of Lord Chaitanya! Glory, glory to Lord Nityananda, who is thousand-faced Ananta Sesha!

Text 143

O Lord Nityananda, O king of Gauda-desa, glory to You! Who can attain Lord Chaitanya without first attaining Your mercy?

Text 144

Anyone who loses Lord Nityananda will not be happy in this life.

Text 145

Will I some day see Lord Chaitanya, Lord Nityananda, and their associates all thogether in one place?

Text 146

Lord Chaitanya is my master. With great faith and hope I meditate on Him within my heart.

Text 147

I bow down before Lord Advaita's feet. I pray that he will always be dear to me and that He will always stay in my thoughts.

Text 148

The two moons Shri Krishna Chaitanya and Shri Nityananda are my life and soul. I, Vrindavana dasa, sing the glories of Their feet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.82.156 (talk) 11:21, 2 July 2010 (UTC)