User talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/11

TMZ
Is TMZ a reliable source, this was in the madonna article which is currently on GA reassessment. Personally I think its a little tacky to say the least, they dont have the best rep. Reply at your talk page if you like, im watching. ;-) --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 18:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't give it too much cred, it seems to be just a celeb gossip-mill of the tabloid style. They may not exactly lie, but the may make up the truth, if you see what I mean. I'd look for a better source for a GA nomination. -- Rodhull andemu  18:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers ;-) --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 19:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * But hes insulting you. ;-( --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 21:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Rod, you need to keep an eye on the Beatles article if you want to see it get to FA. Im not going to get into an edit war with uber beatles fans but snopes is not reliable and I dont like being reverted when im trying to keep an article I have zero interest in above water. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Your call if you dont have the time, but Kodster is actualy trying to sort the article out, other editers are blindly getting in the way. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It wont get through FA, I had snopes removed like 7 times on the MJ article at the last review. Still if it takes a failed FA for them to get that no problem. But failing a FA is a brutal, misreable process trust me. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Its a draining task, Im only going to try and get MJ and "Thriller (album)" to FA and then thats it lol. Im getting stressed about the MJ article, I promised myself id run again soon but im to scared. I dont like my work put under that strong a microscope. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles
The lead section for this article is quite inadequate both for an article of its length and in conveying basic facts. It still doesn't even mention that the band broke up. I just had to add the members of the band, which is very essential information. Check out FA lead sections in The Smashing Pumpkins, R.E.M., or Metallica for the sort of information that needs to be covered in the introduction to a band article. I'm of the opinion that that lead could use a drastic overhaul. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe so. It took about three days just to reach consensus for "The Beatles were a rock and pop group from Liverpool, England", so it's a difficult process. Now, what't your source for 1960 as the year of formation fo the band? -- Rodhull andemu  00:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I went with the one listed in the infobox, because I figured that had been hashed out as a result of consensus. We could always cite Allmusic if need be. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess they're as reliable a source as any, but with The Beatles, someone will always come along and try to argue the toss. -- Rodhull andemu  00:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * WOW, what happened to discussion? --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 02:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, night night, understand completely. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 02:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The idea is I'm operating under WP:BOLD. The article needs definite cleanup and even some rewriting, so even if some of my changes are undone, hopefully it will start some discussion that will improve the article. Don't worry, I have a degree in English and have written three FA band articles (The Smashing Pumpkins, Joy Division, and R.E.M.), so i have a general sense of what I'm doing. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Talking about blocking an editor for attempting to boldly improve an article is wholly against Wikipedia's ideals. We're here to encourage contribution (from one of the finest music editors we have, I might add) to articles, not discourage them. CloudNine (talk) 19:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe so, but I distinctly got the impression that he was attempting to take ownership of the article since he didn't seem to be cooperating with the other editors whom, it has to be said, have already put in a lot of work. Apologies if I misread the situation. -- Rodhull andemu  19:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Naming articles with the same name.
Hi

What happens when a football player has the same name as another and the article has the title 'Players Name (footballer)'?

--TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 14:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier. Apparently people name the player e.g. David Beckham (footballer born 1975) if they have the same name. That seems a pretty good idea. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 22:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Name change and redirect please.
Hey these two articles are exactly the same, only ones better and has more detail than the other. The "Michael Jacksons Music Videos" article is the same as the "filmography" only it has the extra stuff on MTV and his affect on the Music video at the top. Its much better. The filmography page is inferior. Would it be possible if you could delete the "Filmography" article and change the name of "Michael Jacksons Music Videos" to filmography please. Take a look at the too article you will see what I mean. . Cheers. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 20:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, yeah, ill get around to it in 2011 mate, im overloaded as it is. ;-) --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 20:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

University Challenge userbox
If you're interested, I've created a University Challenge userbox. Visit for instructions on how to use it. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 02:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Its Britney Bitch!
This is SOOO funny. I still love this. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 16:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

JJ wikiproject
I am gay 07-08 style="color:#EF9B0F ">Come Speak To Me ]]) 03:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

James Stewart (actor)
Discussion moved to /Harvey_Carter, please make additions there. -- Rodhull andemu  22:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: My talk page
Yeah, I will keep my head. I will revert edits of that variety, but I'm not going to go crazy blocking people (I can't I'm not an admin ;) ) or preemptive strike-reporting to AIV. But thanks for letting me know. Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  17:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * heh. I didn't take it that way at all, but thanks for the reassurance. ;) Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  17:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

WarAgainstRugs
I see you agreed I was correct in my ID of this account, but I still worry if it was appropriate to revert so quickly (which I screwed up in any case, due to weird edit conflict I guess--he is quick!). Would it be better just to lie low and watch? Is there any good way to alert the admins to keep an eye on a user without alerting him too? I know you are on the case, but everybody gotta sleep sometimes. I was too sleepy to be reliably rational myself last night. Thanks ! Wwheaton (talk) 18:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Law Project
That's great, thanks for the pointers. I am new to writing for Wikipedia and so familiarising myself with the conventions of it. I guess once I have written a page I submit it generally under an article head or do I submit it to anywhere specific if it is concerned with the project?(Willrgby (talk) 22:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC))

Re: The Beatles
Yeah, I did that to start with, and I'll spend a while cleaning it up - I did it pretty quickly, as I find it easier to look at it in context and amend from there ...... Dendodge  .. Talk Help 23:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents
I know we'll both go to hell for it, but I couldn't help but laugh at your comments. Corvus cornix talk  06:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I've had the same feeling for a while. Corvus cornix talk  15:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Question
This IP address, (my address), is registered to Opal Telecommunications, and may be shared by multiple users. If the organization uses proxy servers or firewalls, this IP address may in fact represent many users at many physical computers.

i have no idea wtf u are on about i never even went on that page so piss off —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.113.255 (talk) 15:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied on IP talk page. -- Rodhull andemu  15:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I see you replied to the user at the same time as I did :).  [Jam] [talk] 15:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, the joys of edit conflicts! -- Rodhull andemu  15:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That or not knowing that the other editor is going to reply at the same time. I wasn't sure if you were around, saw the comment and so decided to be bold and go for it. I've removed my comment anyway since yours has dealt with the issue at hand.  [Jam] [talk] 15:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Article for deleting
Sony/ATV Music Publishing - could you delete this article please, it repeats everything that is in the Northern Songs article which is a better article and well sourced. It should be redirected to Northern Songs really. If you can do it please also take the Wikiproject banners off the talk page. Cheers. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 18:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, will do. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 18:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Blade Runner
I understand. I still regard it as an obscure and needless addition to the opening paragraph, but I will of course abide by the collective decision.Normalmouth (talk) 19:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

User:91.104.156.54 is DY71 sock
I am almost sure. An unnoticed edit of ACC from 27 March is the tipoff, together with list of contributions. Another IP editor with the same modus operandi is active now, User:85.73.240.56. I have reverted both cases, but keep an eye out and block him when you are convinced. Wwheaton (talk) 06:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Also 78.109.28.16, I think, still active. Wwheaton (talk) 06:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think so. I just tagged three or four IP accounts as suspected socks. Keep on truckin' Wwheaton (talk) 03:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Seem to be under attack by IPs again. This time User:118.90.86.14, but also another at 2001: A Space Odyssey (film), already reverted by Ian Rose. I'm thinking to lie low and watch for the moment. Wwheaton (talk) 08:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Silver editor service award
Because of your many edits you have a Silver editor star.

Greetings! Demophon (talk) 08:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear Rodhullandemu,
 * My well-meant excuse! You 'don't' have the right to the Silver editor star. You're right, only after more than 16,000 edits and 3 years' service you're entitled to the Silver editor star. Sorry!! How did you get so many edits in such a short time? Demophon (talk) 12:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Insomnia, mostly. -- Rodhull andemu  12:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your intervention
Hello! Thank you for your block of the editor NewLeadership, who was creating disruptive edits and articles. I was going to list a Level 3 warning when you intervened -- I am glad that you did, as I think that editor would not have paid much heed to additional warnings. Cheers! Ecoleetage (talk) 18:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Problem User
Hi.

I think you might need to block User:Godalmingyellow because they keep vandalising Joey Beauchamp. I had reverted 3 edits by this user because they had undone reverts by other people (it sounds confusing). I have warned this user on their talk page but they keep blanking it.

Please take a look at this ASAP.

Thanks,

--TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 14:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your swift actions. I don't think this editor understood the rules here. It was quite clear he had no intentions of making constructive edits. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 16:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Codewords
That's why we shouldn't use the phrase here to describe our beliefs. I don't know why people feel the need to describe their beliefs, especially if they are so dramatically divisive as "white pride." PouponOnToast (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Would agree that in a multi-cultural environment, some sensitivity and awareness is commendable, but equally, Lara has explained what she means by the term, and if others seek to misinterpret, ignore or extrapolate from that, then it's unhelpful and detrimental to the collegiate atmosphere we try so carefully to encourage here; that's my concern. That's one reason I don't get involved in zOMG draaahmas, because they detract from the mission; there are better things to do here and I think Lara has had enough of it. "Time to move on" is my point. -- Rodhull andemu  18:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Julianna Rose Mauriello
Just in case that address is accurate, should we try to get those edits wiped from the article history? Rainbow Of Light  Talk  21:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

800 word prequel
It had sufficent text to it, what else would you add to it? Instead of deleting it why don't you just add to it? The article was better than nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fshoutofdawater (talk • contribs) 21:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Where do I start? It wasn't even a stub, with the best will in the world, it was a poorly-written shed. It had a title that nobody in their right mind would search for, no explanation of what it was or how it fitted into the Harry Potter universe, and no indication of why anyone should care about it. The prequel is an 800-word sketch which at present might deserve a paragraph in the main article but certainly not its own article yet, and that's if the quoted sources supported that, which they didn't. I'll gladly undelete it to your own userspace so it can be turned into something useful, but as things were, it didn't do the encyclopedia any credit. Sorry, but there are some standards here. -- Rodhull andemu  21:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply
Maybe, we are all really hurt by these statements though Rod, very. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed.:((((( Xp54321 ( Hello!, Contribs ) 00:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Admins should have no greater say than anyone, really. I know some groups of editors hurl Barnstars around like confetti between themselves, but that happens anywhere such personal awards are available; nothing much should be read into it. Likewise, Admins can be as wrong as anyone, believe me, they're just supposed to know policy, although sometimes you'd wonder. I doubt if blocking you was ever a serious option; I can't possibly see any reason for it. Working together closely might arouse suspicions, but to take it to an allegation of sockpuppetry would need something more cogent and defensible than that. My experience is that if an admin suspects socking but isn't sure, s/he will ask for a second opinion in the Admins' IRC channel or by email. I see no evidence of it, so you've nothing to worry about. Shit happens, as my wife used to say. -- Rodhull andemu  00:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I fully understand; it's extremely regrettable, but in the whole scheme of things, unlikely to have a long-term effect. It seems to be a misinterpretation of your collective enthusiasm to me, and I've seen enough sockpuppetry to be able to smell it. Here, your editing histories show not only no need, but also no plausibility to sustain such an allegation. But I think it might have been wiser to seek advice before going to WP:ANI. Accusations tend to fly rather freely round here, for one reason and another, and some resilience is good to develop. -- Rodhull andemu  00:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It wouldnt bother me if it was some fool saying it, but this is an actual admin who has accused me (and others) of sock puppetry and completely discredited my work. Can I still work/help Kodster without Admins looking over my shoulder? Its not fair and Iris should retract the comments. Because we help each other out, defend one another and give the occasional barnstar we must be socks? Admins shouldn't be allowed to say this, sometimes I think you guys forget how much power your words hold (Your ok though Rod :-)). The fact that he/she has considered blocking us is scary. I cant afford another block Rod, you know that.— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Shit does indeed happen, mostly to me though lol. Dont say I haven't made it interesting lol. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 01:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I liked the linking to the copyright decision. Affirmed, indeed. 86.44.27.243 (talk) 02:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Godalmingyellow1
Remember user Godalmingyellow? He's back as Godalmingyellow1 and has undid my revert on the Joey Beauchamp page. This is not allowed. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 10:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * user:Godalmingyellow1 blocked indef. BencherliteTalk 10:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry I missed this. Not even the wit to use a different username. Cuh! -- Rodhull andemu  11:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

/* Terry Wogan and the Eurovision */
I'd be happy if you allow me to broaden the audience of this discussion. I find you a bit hasty in your judgment and I would appreciate if you had documented yourself before accusing me of vandalism.

You wrote me this: Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Terry Wogan. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Your reference does not support the article text, and in any case it's a breach of WP:NPOV. --Rodhullandemu 19:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

For example you could first have read the previous comment in my talk and avoid making twice the same comment: hmm.. I'm not really familiar with this guy, so when you changed that to mean something completely different, I thought you merely vandalizing the article. My apologies. If you have the cite, than by all means change the article to make it accurate. (see this page for info on how to create a citation for Wikipedia) Again, sorry about that. Thingg⊕⊗ 01:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

as well as the Telegraph article I attached previously. Furthermore a bit of googling would have easily provided you with more illustration of my edition from more general newspapers such as this article from timesonline

UKR 12/06/08


 * Well, since you haven't signed your comment, I have no idea who you are. And it is not my job to go googling for you. -- Rodhull andemu  21:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I apologize if my comments were not clear. But I did not mean for you to google ME, as I am of no importance. I was hoping you would document yourself on the subject, like you acquaintance Thingg did, before deciding that my comments were of no interest. UKR 86.144.98.155 (talk) 21:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.98.155 (talk) 21:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I didn't see much point in Googling a variably-assigned IP address, because experience tells me that it doesn't tend to work unless you've been visiting sites that for some reason are under law-enforcement surveillance (er, and I am at the time using one of the profession's search engines, which Google is not). What I meant was doing your Googling for you, since it's the responsibility of an editor seeking to add content to provide a source for it. In the case in point, I have left a response here. -- Rodhull andemu  22:41, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I could not agree more with your comment on the need for an editor/censor to act responsibly. What an irony ! By the way, you'd be wise to keep your innuendo away from Wikipedia. UKR, 86.144.98.155 (talk) 19:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever. There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, however. -- Rodhull andemu  19:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Text on other websites.
Hi

I'm currently working on I Should Coco and want to add a section about the album artwork. I've found some information on a website about the artwork here and want to take that and put it into the article. How can I do that without using a direct copy from that site?

Any help would be good.

Thanks,

--TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 11:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Let me know if this reads OK. I tried to paraphrase is but it can always be changed if it needs to be.

--TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 12:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I've now added the inline reference for the quote and I've also added a link in reference section. Like this: I Should Coco Artwork described at Children of the Monkey Basket I'm not sure if that's good or not.. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 12:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I've done quite a bit of work on this article now. It's up for Peer review now. Please could you leave some comments on how I can bring it up to GA. Thanks. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 19:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

So that template will work like.. 'charted at number 43 in the UK Singles Chart ' ? I don't understand where to put it. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 20:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that. I've added chart references now. It just needs proofreading and any other corrections and the Peer Review. I want to make sure it's all fine before submitting for GA. --TwentiethApril1986 (talk) 21:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism referring to you
Are you aware of vandalism that appeared on "University Challenge" which referred to you? See this diff:. I've reverted it. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 14:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Also this:. It appears that Gracers and Cool-dude41 are sock-puppets of the same disruptive user. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 14:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

United World Chart
Regarding the deletion of that as a source and the community consensus that its unreliable (see the beatles talk page for more details). Is there a way to get the site banned as spam or something. The source is unreliable yet new editors, IPS and Fan boys will continue to add it. I purged all my articles of it. Apparantly the site is used in well over 1000 articles. Thoughts? — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 17:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Fun
Looks like you're in for a LONG evening! [Jam] [talk] 21:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

On Desperate Dan
I have no intention to vandalize the Desperate Dan page. I am sorry if you see it that way - I was only trying to rephrase a sentence I found awkward. If you prefer it the way it is, that's fine, though. 66.63.86.156 (talk) 00:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler
Hi Rodhull, I agree that User:Cretino's edit to Adolf Hitler isn't constructive and clearly violates WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE. However, I don't believe the quotations are fabrications. The Chiurchill quote is certainly real:. I'm pretty sure the Lloyd George quote is also genuine. Gwernol 01:38, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Review
I dont suppose you could conduct a review of my latest nomination Feedback (song)? Its modern and hip, im not sure if its the sort of thing your used to reviewing. Its been up a while on the list and everyone seems to have their hands full with other reviews. If you would rather pass up the offer its not a problem, just send me a message. Cheers Rod. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 09:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanx for getting back to me. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 18:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

It was twenty years ago today
Hey, I started a discussion at the Sgt. Pepper's talk page regarding non-notable and trivial stuff we can remove from the article. Hopefully we can build a consensus; thanks indopug (talk) 13:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Let it Be
I've restored this redirect which you had deleted as R1 on the grounds that it didn't qualify as R1 and that it broke a number of links. Also, you mentioned that it should redirect to the album in your deletion summary. If this is how you felt you should have changed the target, rather than delete. In this case the page already had a revision where it redirected to the album. -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 23:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well looking at all the links to the redirect, the intention is kind of split between the album and song. But it should redirect to Let It Be (which happens to be the album) because it's a lowercase version of that title. Anyways, I went ahead and fixed all the links that intended to lead to the song. -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 23:48, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hitler
I have added references. If you want move the quotation to Adolf Hitler's religious beliefs. --Esimal (talk) 12:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think the quotation here should be expanded. I'm going to do it. --Esimal (talk) 13:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

New editer
User:CrystalMares91 - I think this guy is making fake articles, he seems to be copying the singles discography of MJ and Britney spears for an unheard of singer. Regards. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 21:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers, im quite sure it was fake or some sort of parody. Thanx very much lol. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 21:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Justin Lee Collins BDO International Open
Good Evening/Morning whichever you prefer.

I see you requested citation to be required for my edit on Justin Lee Collins' appearence on the BDO International Open yesterday. Well I could go ahead and post the entire draw sheet for the event that bears his name on group 4, or perhaps wait for the BDO/WDF (who organised the event) Setanta Sports (who showed the event live and interviewed him after his defeat) or JLC himself (via website, blog etc) to mention something and then use that as a reference. I just thought I'd come forward with what I know from memory rather than be accused (not by you but a bot of some sorts) of vandilism. Rest assure, the edit is legit and as soon as a ref becomes availible, I'll be sure to put it up on the section and keep the ball rolling. We part until then. Good night. Raphie (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

77.102.144.25
Hey Rodhullandemu. You have a message at User talk:77.102.144.25 *rolleyes*. [Jam] [talk] 14:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, do you think User talk:212.139.113.218 might be a sock (which I've tagged as such for the time being?)  [Jam] [talk] 15:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you recon WJH will ever listen to what you say? I guess you start to learn after a time that, despite what (blocked) people say, they often go and do the opposite. [Jam] [talk] 22:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really. Twice I've offered him advice which could have got him back into editing with approval and on both occasions he's blown it, hence I'm no longer interested. I know he's young, but he's not getting the message, and I don't see any reason to repeat myself. -- Rodhull andemu  22:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Strange to think that such a prolific (probably not the most, but pretty bad) sockpuppeter is so young... and I don't blame you for giving up - personally, I though his messages were more condescending than anything else. I don't really think they ever intend to change their ways, so it's back to the blocking board :D.  [Jam] [talk] 22:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Tocino
What should we do about this fanatic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.134.65.233 (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC) Please answer my question!84.134.118.194 (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You know, if I had some spare time not dealing with you, I'd be able to answer that. -- Rodhull andemu  18:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

84.134.126.213
Who is this an IP sock of? I believe I encountered another one earlier today, but didn't block it. Acalamari 18:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Funnily enough, I just blocked another one of his socks just now. Acalamari 18:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

kraid117
Um, why did you say I was vandalizing, Hitlers real name is Adolf Elizabeth Hitler. Pleese take it back and thank you.
 * Prove it. -- Rodhull andemu  15:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I am German and have read Hitlers biographys that were made in Germany and everyone I read it says his full name. If you want, Ill look in my storage and find one of my books. Also watch the producers remake it says it in there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kraid117 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you'll find that most reliable sources will be against you on that one. And the remake of a film- and a comedy at that- is NOT a reliable source. -- Rodhull andemu  15:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

IOW festival
Sorry, I'd just finished writing my contribution to the talk page when I saw your message. I was there too and my memories are somewhat different, but that isn't the point - it all needs to be referenced. As to the bit about Wally, the way it was written assumed that the reader should know what you where talking about, and I have no idea as I got married in 1971 which put an end to my festival days. Nor would anyone of this generation have any idea of what you were talking about. If your going to put it back in at least lead in with what it's all about. Richerman (talk) 15:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

That's ok. Last year I bought the Message from Love DVD and also The Who Live at the Isle of Wight. I had a good wallow in nostalgia for the night although I thought they concentrated too much on the problems with the non payers and not enough on the music and the "peace and love" atmosphere. Still, I suppose that's reportage for you - concentrate on the controversial bits. I'll be interested to see how the article develops and I'll try and give some help where I can. Richerman (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Cbsite
has agreed to not repeat his behavior. I have provisionally unblocked him. Please email me if it starts up again. Fred Talk 00:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

As and Administrator
Hey Rodhullandemu, as an administrator, can you delete WWE Draft Lottery and move the content thats in that article to WWE Draft (which is a redirect to the WWE Draft Lottery article), as they are redirects, and I can't move them because they are redirects and only admins can. Also, my reasoning of moving them is because, per here, the draft is now referred to as the WWE Draft and not WWE Draft Lottery, only from 2002-2005 was it referred to as the WWE Draft Lottery and from 2007 to present its been referred to as the WWE Draft, thanks! ;)-- S R X -- Latino Heat  20:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure it can wait, you may do it tomorow ;)-- S R X -- Latino Heat  02:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

MJ - FA
Im gonna go for it again in the next few weeks (Thriller first though). I just have to fix a few loose ends. What you think? — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 02:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Godalmingyellow2
This is getting stupid. This user came back with the name Godalmingyellow2 and undid my revert on the Joey Beauchamp so it would go back to other version which is incorrect. Can you put a full protection on this article? -- TwentiethApril 1986  11:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Help
Hi! This user continues to delete sourced and discussed (here and here) informations in the Nazism article. In addition he has insulted me various times. Please do something. --Esimal (talk) 19:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Despite several warnings on his talk by various users such as Arnoutf, Zara1709 and others. Esimal has attempted to promote neo-paganism on Wikipedia and on the article about nazism, blank referenced relating to the connection between Nazism and Occultism (such as these scholary sources  ) All the while attempting to paint Christianity in general as an "anti semitic" ideology, despite the fact that only Luther and some of his writings were used by Nazis in relation to such thought. Lutherans been a minority within the ideologies within Christianity to begin with. - Gennarous (talk) 19:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Surely his removal of those three sources in relation to Nazi occultism is a form of violation, in regards to WP:BLANK. He wants to put a distance between Nazism and his personal neo-pagan leanings. Are there not any policies in regards to blatant history revisionism? Thanks. - Gennarous (talk) 19:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Administrators do not get involved in content disputes. I suggest you both back off and start negotiating. I've already given you both the advice you need. -- Rodhull andemu  19:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Please protect the page immediately. The issue has already been discussed, various users have approved it. The problem is that Wikipedia is full of religious fundamentalists whose only purpose is censorship. --Esimal (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Rodhullandemu, please block him. I've stopped revert as to not go over the WP:3RR, yet he, in his progaganda promotion of paganism has reverted other users too. He has made six reverts, he has violated consensus... and now he is spamming other neo-pagan editors in the hopes that they will revert for him; actively encouraging revert warrning. On the basis of his SIX reverts, I'd please like you to step in. - Gennarous (talk) 20:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Just saw your locking the article (probably the correct decision). Ia ssume I need not post a note at Administrators' noticeboard/3RR now. Note also, a user has raised an issue at Talk:Nazism, if you could, could you please remove that reference, it's indeed clearly unreliable and also not needed (except of course if the other references used to support that point are as bogus). Thanks.--Caranorn (talk) 20:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

You've locked the wrong version in which all disputed edits are deleted and Gennarous/Zara's POV addings are present. --Esimal (talk) 20:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Protection is not an endoresment of the current version, just an accident of timing. If I unprotect it and then reprotect a different version, I am excercising an editorial decision, which is outside my remit and an abuse of my Admin status. Thanks. -- Rodhull andemu  20:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Shrek/Girls Aloud vandal
Hi Rodhullandemu. I wonder if you might be able to help me (since you eat, sleep and breathe sockpuppet tracing) - there is a vandal in Ireland that vandalises Girls Aloud and Shrek articles. On Girls Aloud pages, they tend to remove Kimberley Walsh and replace her with Laura Mary Carter. They always vandalise from Eircom addresses (159.134.x.x) and also vandalise from their school IP address (87.36.158.133). I was wondering how we could tackle this disruptive user (perhaps by doing something similar to WJH - a category talk page relating to their edits) but I'm not sure if there is a "root" user who started this all off. Would you mind lending a hand? [Jam] [talk] 19:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Quotes
Hello.

I've posted a question here about usage of quotes. Please can you give me your answer or opinion. Thanks. TwentiethApril1986  (talk)  17:53, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Eligible for CSD?
Me again :D. I've just been PRODing a few Strictly / DwtS / DoI articles that are complete speculation - Dancing on Ice: Axels and Spins and Dancing with the Stars: The Ultimate Game - and another, Strictly Come Dancing: Conga Party‎, has been PRODed by another editor. Do you think they might be eligible for CSD? I'm not sure what category they would fall under if they were eligible for it though. Any ideas? [Jam] [talk] 22:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

User:TimothyHorrigan
He is still up to his tricks on the MJ article, adding misinformation and fake fan cruft. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 23:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Placeholder Image from Alan Sugar article.
I've reverted this as I can see no consensus or even discussion on the talk page of the article. Such an image has a valid reason and use in the article. If you object please discuss on the article talk page. Exxolon (talk) 21:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Use of such images is now deprecated as against community consensus. See here. -- Rodhull andemu  21:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've removed the image. This issue could've been avoided with a more accurate edit summary. I used Remove Placeholder image as per consensus at Centralized discussion/Image placeholders. Exxolon (talk) 21:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I was assuming that editors would be aware of changes in community consensus. My mistake. -- Rodhull andemu  21:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
I had a left a message about that with User:LaraLove but thanks for your speedy action. Michellecrisp (talk) 14:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I am concerned about continuing discussion about me and in light of WP:LEGAL. Michellecrisp (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I am concerned that the comments posted after warnings are just continuing subtle attacks. Michellecrisp (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I am watching the situation too, but so far this seems to be a case of pushing each other's buttons. For example, considering that  had already been complaining about  stalking him, this edit of hers to Masalai's talkpage was probably not helpful at de-escalating the situation. Based on my review of her edits over the last few months, I think that Michellecrisp is usually an excellent editor, but sometimes in a dispute, she has a tendency to suddenly show up all over someone's watchlist.  Her edits are not outside of policy, but I could see that from her "opponent's" viewpoints, the fact that she suddenly seems to appear everywhere that they are working, might be understandably unsettling for some.  For example, Michellecrisp recently appeared at another article that Masalai was editing, University of Regina.  Yes, I know that both editors have a history of editing that article over the last year, but I could see why the current timing might put Masalai on edge.  And Michellecrisp is obviously watching Masalai's edits, to even ask the "Saskatchewan" question in the first place.  So I don't think it's entirely fair of Michellecrisp to be accusing Masalai of "subtly" attacking her, when her own act is far from clean here.  --Elonka 00:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree with the above comments, yes University of Regina is on my watchlist but that does not mean I'm stalking, you can clearly see I have edited many university articles and geographic based articles worldwide. my recent edits to University of Regina do not constitute stalking, I am now not allowed to edit the same articles as Masalai? Secondly, why is it that Masalai suddenly appears when I am having a disgreement with another editor. Same thing happened a few weeks ago when Mathsci was discussing me with Elonka. Seems that Masalai is looking for an opportunity to jump in on any disagreement I'm in. I also find it interesting that someone claiming to live in Brisbane is editing at 2am-4am in the morning Brisbane time. Michellecrisp (talk) 01:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In this edit Masalai even says he's in Canada. QED Michellecrisp (talk) 01:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, in July 2007. If he's now in Brisbane, as he claims, that would explain why he's editing Canadian articles. Can't say I approve of his patronising attitude to a native Australian, however. I'll sit on this awhile, mostly because I need some sleep. -- Rodhull andemu  01:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes and no edits except 1 Brisbane topic I can see. And editing at times that is consistent with North American time zone not the dead hours of the morning in Brisbane? Michellecrisp (talk) 01:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Why exactly does it matter where he lives? People move, people travel.  Someone can be "from" one country, and attend school in a different one, get a job somewhere else.  But again, how is this relevant?  I recommend both editors just leave each other alone. --Elonka 03:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well you cannot interpret my recent edits to University of Regina as some form of stalking or interfering with Masalai. My point on location is that Masalai suddenly joins the side of someone I'm having a disagreement with (not the first time and which I believe is a form of stalking in itself) and then declares himself to be a lawyer from Brisbane strikingly similar to User:Osloinsummertime for the pure convenience of furthering his case against me, and now I get accused of stalking? Michellecrisp (talk) 03:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * (with apologies to Rodhullandemu for the use of the talkpage) Michelle, Masalai's comment towards you at Oslo's page was definitely unacceptable.  However, you have goaded him a bit as well, and there's some definite admin-shopping here, as now LaraLove, myself, and Rodhullandemu are all getting dragged into this, with both you and Masalai pointing fingers at the other and basically saying, "Admins, do something!" Further, this angst is based not so much on any article where you're currently having a dispute, but instead based on bad blood that both of you are evidently still resentful about, from a dispute that happened four months ago.  So Masalai sniped at Oslo's page, fine, he shouldn't have done that.  So you posted an unhelpful message at Masalai's talkpage, okay, you probably shouldn't have done that either.  Now can we stop this finger-pointing, and just get back to work, or how long does this have to drag on? --Elonka 04:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I resent the accusation/insinuation of stalking. There has been close to no interaction on similar articles between myself and Masalai since he was blocked yet you say "she [myself] has a tendency to suddenly show up all over someone's watchlist." could you please provide diffs of this since the block? Or do I have any confidence that if I may enter a disagreement in future with another editor that Masalai won't turn up? Michellecrisp (talk) 04:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * As for admin shopping, I initially contacted Laralove as original blocking admin, then Rodhullandemu commented (I did not know him before yesterday) and then you made your comments. I certainly did not suddenly call on 3 admins. Having said that I don't mind your inputs into this. your suggestion of a refactoring of the original comment by Masalai is welcome. Michellecrisp (talk) 04:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Girls Aloud
Perhaps a candidate for semi-protection? Maybe for a little bit? [Jam] [talk] 19:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at it. -- Rodhull andemu  19:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers :).  [Jam] [talk] 19:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Just have to say...
Every time I see your user name I have to chuckle to myself. I grew up in the age of Rod Hull and Emu and still crack up when I watch the "interview" with Parky. Great stuff! – ukexpat (talk) 14:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I do try to keep people happy. Glad you appreciate it. -- Rodhull andemu  14:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback rights for Kodster?
Hmmm? I think it'd be useful for me to have rollback to fight vandalism on The Beatles, Michael Jackson, etc. (which I edit on a regular basis). Thanks. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 16:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, no problem. -- Rodhull andemu  16:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

IP
Thanx for dealing with that IP, seriously I have had to go around correcting all his mistakes, I think he was trying to label all MJS albums as compilations to make a point about how many reissues he has lol. Nevermind, I think Ive got it sorted now. Lol I love that "Realist2 would you please leave my article alone". — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 16:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

its a joke and not directed at you anyway
the comment re: the Lie-Bore party was intended as HUMOUR and it is difficult for me to give any reason why you or anyone might find that insulting as it is not aimed at you except inasmuch as i am saying that you are throwing sound-bite like words into your passages which in fact do not merely have no meaning but actually seem to serve to obscure the debate. calling the Labour party Lie-Bore is clearly not being pleasant to them but since both can be proved of their ministers in the present or last parliaments it is hardly an insult more of a political cry of a suffering citizen of this country. i am certainly not suggesting that you are lying or indeed boring, that is simply how i refer to the party which is infamous for using sound bites and deceptive rhetoric. even if you support them, my nick-name for them should not be taken as an insult as it is my genuine political opinion. oh and it was not gratuitous as i was using the humour to emphasise my point about you using too many rhetorical phrases / sound-bites which merely obscured the debate.Authouredbyanybody??? (talk) 01:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Martha Jones and Torchwood
On the Martha Jones article, you reverted my edit and said that concensus decided against it because she was on it temporarily. However, there is nothing like that on the Martha Jones talk page. What discussion page were you referring to? Thanks. Ophois (talk) 03:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Lisa Marie Presley
Could you deal with an IP on the Lisa Marie article, this IP has a history of owning the article. He has an anti MJ agenda, has previously put false anti Jackson statememts into the article and removed fact tags on these controversial statements when I requested them. He also took a source out of context deliberately to imply that Presley has seen Jackson rape children — Its only when you read the source in its full context that you realise that she was saying the complete opposite. Now today the editor removed a full paragraph of sourced info that I added with no edit summary. I reverted the IP obviously. The IP then reverted me again saying that I have taken the book I used out of context. Im highly offended by this accusation, the paragraph I used was copied from my work on the Michael Jackson article, he is therefore damaging my reputation and the reputation of the MJ artice. I have left multiple warnings on his talkpage and been in contact with Admin "Gogo Dodo". The admin previously reverted his edits for using a source out of context to put Jackson in a bad light. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 16:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Here are some threads to get a feel for it, also read the article history. This is now clearly more than a content dispute.

  . — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 16:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for approving me for Auto Wiki Browser. Much appreciated, and happy editing, Leonard( Bloom ) 23:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't blank text
Don't blank text without explanation. What possible reason could you have for not wanting mention of the South African version of Steptoe and Son? Kuratowski&#39;s Ghost (talk) 00:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:RS and WP:V are good enough reasons. Any chance you could take a look at WP:CIVIL as well? -- Rodhull andemu  07:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

RfA Review
Hello. I've noticed that you have a completed set of responses to the RfA Review question phase at User:Rodhullandemu/RfA review, but they don't seem to be included on the list of responses here. If you've completed your responses, please can you head to RfA Review/Question/Responses and add a link to them at the bottom of the list so that they get included in the research. We have a closing date of midnight UTC on 1st July, so please add your link before this date. Once again, thank you for taking the time to participate in the Question Phase of RfA Review.Gazimoff Write Read 15:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Oi you
Whats wrong with my Andy Abraham comment? Its true. Say sorry now. --TruthTellerGuy (talk) 19:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Me again
Reliable sources eh? Ask anyone on the street if they like him, or simply look at the eurovision results. We came last. Thats enough prove that he is a shite singer. I accept your apology. --TruthTellerGuy (talk) 20:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting, considering I didn't offer one, and didn't need to do so. -- Rodhull andemu  21:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Editor on Talk:Barack Obama
I've been reverting Special:Contributions/76.109.239.103's vandalism to Obama's talk page, found here, three times already. He's been warned with a level 4 vandalism template, and continues to revert my rollbacks. I think it'd be best to block him, because I think I've broken the 3-revert-rule thing. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 20:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * He posted that same message twelve times, three times as the IP above and the other nine as 98.219.81.21. I think he really should be blocked. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 20:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. He's been blocked. :) Sorry to bother you. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 20:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, for the past 20 minutes or so I've been rollbacking (rolling back, I guess) vandalism w/ "Recent Changes". I don't know why, I should be working on Sgt. Pepper. How dare you compare Chas and Dave to God, I mean, The Beatles? ;-) I've heard a song or two by them before, and they're not terrible. So-so, it's been a "ho hum" kind of day. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 21:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

AWB bot approval
Thanks for the extremely fast (5 minute) approval on AWB for my bot. :) Rockfang (talk) 12:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Davros/youtube edit
Fair enough. I agree with your conclusions. Thanks and sorry for any inconvenience! fraggle (talk) 13:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I take it back slightly. While I agree that original research should not be permitted in articles, I should at least point out that the video that I posted a link to is actually a video posted on the BBC's official Youtube channel, so it isn't a breach of copyright. Not all Youtube videos are illegal :-) fraggle (talk) 13:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)