User talk:Ryulong/Archive 9

WeniWidiWiki
I've unprotected Wwws userpage, see my comment on User_talk:WeniWidiWiki. I don't want us to enter a wheel-war, and I suggest if you want to pursue this you post it on WP:AN/I for wider input. regards, dab (𒁳) 10:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My special status? I don't think so!
(Protected User:WeniWidiWiki: Several editors have expressed an opinion that your user page contains an improper message, including a former arbitrator ) 

Pleeeeeseee don't do that! One of things I really hated about being an arbitrator is that people accorded me special status because of it even when I was simply expressing opinions personally i.e. not on arbitration cases. The one thing I love about no longer being an arbitrator is that I can speak my mind freely without having to be on my best good girl behabviour all the time. By all means respect my opinions, but don't hold them above anyone elses because of a position I once held and wasn't particulaly good at anyway. |Cheers Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 16:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Vandalism
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Cbrown1023 talk 21:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

68.117.46.48
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page in response to my post at AIV. I noticed that another admin User:Chrislk02 removed the listing from AIV saying that the IP was acting in good faith. I questioned this and please note the detail that I posed on Chris's talk page User talk:Chrislk02. I then started to wonder how this person could possibly be an admin with this type of decision making, and found out that he wasn't per Requests for adminship/Chrislk02!!! Do you feel like performing an intervention or that any coaching is needed here? At the very least, should Chris be asked to refrain from making actions at AIV? --After Midnight 0001 22:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, wait, now I see Requests for adminship/Chrislk02 2. I guess he was already reconsidered and promoted. I still feel that some coaching is needed here. If he's going to have the bit, I think he needs to be more dilligent. I'm all for jumping in like new admins tend to, but he needs a bit more seasoning, I think. --After Midnight 0001 22:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I was going to remove him from the list, as well. The edit warring would have been an issue, but a block at this time would have been useless, as the edits were too old to require immediate intervention.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Right I have no quarrel with the decision not to block for the same reason you cite. I'm more concerned with the assertation by Chris who thinks that the IP is engaged in Good Faith editing.  A block may not be useful, but I think that the IP does need to be recognized as a vandal, not as a good faith editor. --After Midnight 0001 01:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Chris has responded on my talk page at the same time that I posted the above to you. I thnk that you probably can let this drop. Thanks for your attention. --After Midnight 0001 01:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Alan & Denise
How was it possible that this article got deleted by db-bio, if Notability_%28music%29 gives literally notability to every musician or ensemble, that has had a charted hit on any national music chart? Medium chart success was mentioned in the deleted version and is proved by the equivalent article in German Wikipedia. -- 84.178.25.44 22:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It did not assert notability or back it up.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, deletion is not always permanent. If you (registered) can create an article that supports and asserts the individual's notability in a way that is easily visable to anyone who randomly finds the article, then it can be recreated.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As the Deletion Log partly proves the deleted version gave already information on the duo's chart success. So their notabiliy was already easily visible to anyone. -- 84.178.25.44 22:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Alan & Denise. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- 84.178.25.44 00:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion offered at deletion review is that you don't object to a listing at AFD. If you choose to overturn yourself and list at AFD, then we close the deletion review as "overturned by deleting admin", as the review is effective mooted by your action. If you take no further action in the matter, the deletion review will run, and consensus thereat measured in a few days.  You can go either way, but as a new admin, and not one who has been a deletion review regular before becoming an admin, you might not have been aware of this option.  The preference of the DRV regulars is that concerns be resolved before a DRV case is even opened.  GRBerry 20:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm still thinking about it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hallway Hug
I don't understand what the problem is with the Hallway Hug article. It isn't nonsense, it actually means something to some people. Just because it may not appeal to you as interesting or informing doesn't mean this shouldn't be somewhere where people can find it. Quite a few are interested in this. There isn't much information in the article, but there isn't much about the subject that exhists. Why is this not worthy of being able to look up on the internet? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BambiGirl (talk • contribs) 04:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC).
 * It's pure nonsense. Wikipedia is not for things you make up in one day. It's only important to you and does not require mention on Wikipedia.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 04:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes
Hi, is it possible to search for a userbox using the search function? If not, can such a feature be added? Thanks. Smokizzy 04:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Go to WP:UBX, and no such feature will be added.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 04:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of MichaelHeaviside1.jpg picture from Michael Heaviside article
Hi

I'd like to query your reason for deleting the image. I posted a link to the original picture so you could see the source AND I a comment paraphrasing the source website that it was okay to use the image in other websites and sources provided they were available free of charge.

Here again is the link to the image:

http://www.durham.gov.uk/chp/usp.nsf/lookup/michaelheaviside1/$file/michaelheaviside1.jpg

Here is the link to the terms of usage for the image and content:

google

And here is the relevant sections of the copyright information for you:

You may use the content contained in this website for reproduction in connection with presentations, reports, printed material, and other similar uses which are publicly distributed or displayed free of charge, including advertisements, posters, catalogues, brochures, leaflets. You may also publicly display or demonstrate the website in unaltered form on a computer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dazzola (talk • contribs) 09:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC).
 * You uploaded it with the wrong copyright tag. I don't know why they have it in the system, but if you let only Wikipedia use it, that counts as a speedy deletion criteria, WP:CSD. Check that out, and Image copyright tags to see what to reupload it under.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Additonally, you should never upload images off of a Google Search.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible Sockpuppetry
Call this a hunch, but Goldendoggy appears to be a sockpuppet. Flipping through the contribution history, the same types of pages are edited (GX, Naruto, Pokémon). The edits to GX episode articles seem to be nothing but deletion requests with that "I'm helping by removing vandal material w/ another account" feel, and some of the edit summaries this user has given include "it has been deciced to merge the page," where there is no evidence of any discussion of the sort whatsoever. The user also reverted the Jaden Yuki and Aster Phoenix pages to earlier versions when they still had card lists (it was decided by the community to remove them entirely), and uploads images from the same sources as you know who (with the same sourcing issues as well). --Benten 01:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit: It's obvious now. --Benten 01:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and blocked them for disruption. THe user was removing entries at WP:AIV (regarding themselves) as well as entries here and trying to hide their behavior.  The block was for 24 hours. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Benten has expressed concern that 24 hours block is not long enough. I am not comfterable issuing a longer block as of now as i only blocked them for disruption.  If you feel it is necessary, please issue a longer block.  Thanks-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked, it's obvious based on the AIV removal and the fact that she blanked this three times.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey Ryu. Just dropped by to mention that the puppet's talk page should be semi-protected to prevent her from continuing to use it as a source of spam (or, if your going to block her indefinitely, then that works too). --Benten 02:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea, thanks for removing it. I wasent relaly sure what to do with that actually.  I assumed it was just some form of disruption/trolling! Thanks for handeling the situation.  I was not directly involved with much of it so, i tried to just handle it with what I was involved with. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 03:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Jesus as myth
Please have the courtesy to read the talk page before reverting - you will see there has been a big discussion about this and th consensus of the active editors is that the article has been hijacked over the last few months and oyr best chance for improvement is to back track. Between us we represent a fair spread of faiths or lack of them so this is no edit war.

Please review your revert. Sophia 08:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not see anything wrong with the article version, so long as it is well cited and referenced, which it appears to be. I looked at the talk page, saw the small discussion going on, and reverted based on that. This does not have as many inline citations and notes as the current one, and whereas I cannot at this exact time read through the entire article, I simply have a feeling that this is a WP:OWN issue. Let others comment on either version (WP:RFC may be a good route to get an outside opinion on the article) before unilaterally making massive changes to get rid of material that (it appears to me) you do not agree with.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 08:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * If you don't have time to read it you should not be involved. As someone who has read a lot of these theories is it not a good article and gives undue weight to really marginal and even discredited ideas. The in-line citations were to be covered this weekend by me - hopefully with help from others as it's easier to get help on live versions than on sandbox copies. The talk page has been active on this subject for several weeks with all sides of the debate expressing their dissatisfaction with the current version. I have reverted at this point as I now have a little time to work on it and everyone is in agreement with the idea. I am an athiest with strong leanings to the myth theories and have left this revert until the active christian editors have agreed to the idea - this is a starting point for improvement - not a revert to a definitive copy.


 * Anyway - this discussion should happen on the talk page. It is rude in the extreme to expect an editor to summarise for you a talk page discussion that you won't make the time to read and yet are prepared to act decisively on. Sophia  09:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't have time to read the article right now. I read the talk page (the latest discussion towards the bottom where it is suggested that your version be reinstated). If you look at my clock, you can see it's after 4 am where I am. When I wake up, I will look over the article versions and review my decision to revert it (I would like you to know that in the process of your removal, you practically removed enough content to start an entirely new article with).— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Additionally, you can integrate information instead of removing it completely.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * You will find (when you make the time) that most of the material is elsewhere already see . It is inefficient in a database structure to replicate information - correct cross section referencing is essential. I must ask based on your responses so far - do you know anything about this subject? Sophia  09:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Omi.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Omi.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sandstein 13:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Jesus as myth
We have been discussing a move backwards to a previous version for weeks on the talk page and reached a general consensus to start back at a previous version. Is this a problem?--Filll 14:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I couldn't tell that from the discussion. I was only doing a reversion as an editor. Go ahead and undo it already.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Another Sentai Article split
Other than the the two seperate pages for Bakuryuu Sentai Abaranger there was also another article split done for Kyōryū Sentai Zyuranger by seperating the Zyuranger info into a new article called Zyurangers which was done by a different user. However I jumped in and took care alot of cleaning up the new article and moved the page to The Zyurangers.

If you want to check it out and make any futher edits go right ahead but I did my part. Also the main page is now only 44 kilobytes long after all that is happened so it would matter to me if you decide whever or not you could put Bandora and her gang into their own seperate page as well. -Adv193 21:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

/b/
Give me five mintues to upload the pciture, all right?

My image, was a fiar use image, and p[hotographs are always citeable as a source. You jsut deleted it ebcause you dotn want to accept the addition, whicxh is an abuse of pwoer. Do not do it again.TheGreenFaerae
 * No, you uploaded it with the wrong rationale, and even then, you'd have to have a reason that the screenshot of second life should be used in the article on 4chan.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well i fixed the rational, and the reaosn ti should be sued is exp-alined by the cpation. Any other problems?TheGreenFaerae 23:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate protection
Please see WP:PPOL; This protection is inappropriate, especially considering you have personal involvement in that page, there is also no indication of edit warring/vandalism. Please un-protect and if you would like submit an RFPP, though I'd imagine it'd be declined as it's inappropriate protection. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 01:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Not to throw AGF out of the window, but are you stalking my logs or something? The information added is a spoiler for a series that does not air for three weeks that has no references whatsoever. I requested that Power Rangers: Operation Overdrive be protected, as the issues arose from that article's massive amounts of unsourceable spoilers.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 01:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * or maybe I'm trying to edit a page, like I usually do? It rarely gets edited, no vandalism has occurred, etc, no need for page protection thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 01:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As I said, it is an issue with unsourced titles of which there are no references for.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 01:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As such, I've lowered it to a semiprotection. And I have to wonder, why did you tag those two facts with cn as they are supported by the linked articles?— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 01:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

EUI
LOL! I wonder if we need an WP:EUI page ... Antandrus (talk) 02:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OMG there is one. I had no idea.  ::goes off to read it:: Antandrus  (talk) 02:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

HBC AIV helperbot2 Block
Hello! Its Extranet here, operator of HBC AIV helperbot. As you have posted on my talk page, you seem to have blocked HBC AIV helperbot2. Could you possibly tell me why and link the problem if necessary so I and the bot creator can diagnose the problem. Thank you. Extranet (Talk 04:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've posted this at HighInBC's talk.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 04:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Omi
I've done a first pass on the inline citations. If there are any other statements that seem POV or OR then they should be tagged and I will cite or remove as appropriate. Jay32183 04:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Question about WP:IFD
When there's been Afd discussion about an article, and it passes, the article is tagged so users will know that it has been discussed and passed. Does that not happen with Ifd? I ask because you removed some info from Image:Ejaculation sample.jpg, but I see no tag on the article linking to the Ifd discussion. Jeffpw 14:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Fred Burkle.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Fred Burkle.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 14:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #9
The February issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

My user pages
I believe it should now be safe to unprotect my user and user talk pages. It's been a week and whoever they are, they haven't come back. :) Flyingtoaster1337 06:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I've unsprotected the user talk, but I left move on. Do you want me to unprotect the user redirect?— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 06:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll put something there shortly. Thanks! Flyingtoaster1337 07:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Evolution vandals
Whaddaya think -- should we full-protect the article? Or does it matter? They seem to have saved up a bunch of account names for use in this attack. NawlinWiki 22:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm working on RFCU right now. Trying to find someone to run it to kill the IP.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Plate tectonics - thanks
Thanks for the sprotect on Plate tectonics - much appreciated. Cheers Geologyguy 22:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * All IPs involved blocked for a month with schoolblock— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Penguins
Digging the penguins on your page...am not sure what or where they are from, but I might just have to steal them. OK, maybe not, but they are still cool :o) Rock on....SVRTVDude 04:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Benny Hill Image
You removed the speedy-delete tag from this image, but I was a little confused by the edit summary (not fair use, not speedy). Did you not intend to put that first "not", or are you contesting the fair use licensing rationale? Thanks, Jerry lavoie 05:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not a speedy candidate.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 05:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Reversion
Although the user is username blocked, it isn't clear to me why this is necessary. JoshuaZ 06:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Newbie voting at an AFD is usually not noticed by the closing admin. Also, the speed at which AFD is found is also a bit odd.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 06:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * His other edits all seem fine. Why not just put a note that he's a new user? JoshuaZ 06:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * :/ A bit more work. But I'll rollback my rollbacks.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 06:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Please delete my photos
I see that you reverted the following images that I asked to delete: Image:Clint mathis.jpg Image:Tim howard.jpg Image:Youri Djorkaeff.jpg Image:Jeff Agoos.jpg Image:Mo Johnston.jpg. These are my photographs, taken for my website. I originally uploaded them for use on Wikipedia, but I no longer want them used. Please delete them. Thank you. DR31 (talk) 13:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * You simply can't revoke the licensing...once they're here, they're here, especially if they are Creative Commons. These look useful and they illustrated the subject's respecitve pages.  tried to delete all of his photos as well but they were all kept. Hbdragon88 23:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Decipherit
Hey, sorry, I should have been more clear last night when I asked you to speedy Bleed Bangalore. That user had left me a note because he was confused about why his/her article kept disappearing, saying that he hadn't received the nn warnings in time since his connection was slow, and he didn't mean to vandalize. I agreed to help him/her understand the reasoning, then I looked back through his/her contribs and found the nn article, possibly created before he had gotten the warnings. Since he didn't (to my knowledge) repost the thing since he got my note, I think it would be a nice thing to do to unblock him/her and give them another chance. Of course, if s/he does it again, the block would be totally justified. But I think this might be just a person who was well-meaning but genuinely confused. Anyway, it's up to you, but I thought I'd give my thoughts on it. Peace, delldot | talk 17:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Hi, Ryulong - regarding your edit to Sociological and cultural aspects of Tourette syndrome, would you mind clicking on the button in edit preferences that reminds one to enter an edit summary? If would have saved me from an interruption to the work I was doing to see what your edit was. Thanks, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize. I had deleted images at a users request (see higher up) and I removed the images after they were deleted. However, I really do not think it is necessary (nor would it have reminded me seeing as I did a section edit) that I change my preferences.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't understand the settings that well, but I do section edits, and the edit summary thingie works there??? Anyway, I was up to my eyeballs installing  templates and had to go over and make sure you weren't making a Tourette's guy vandal edit ! Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Item Reverted
Hi my expanded article on XLR8R magazine was reverted to the old stub that had been up there a year. I didn't see a reason for the reversion only "Reverted edits by Kerryisbest (talk) to last version by SmackBot". I had uploaded two images incorrectly, but didn't link those images into the article, does it have something to do with that? Kerryisbest 21:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Kerryisbest, Feb-06-2007
 * Yes, it does. I found the images, and sought out their source. Usually, when a user uploads an image without the correct source or copyright tag, that often means that their use for the picture also violates Wikipedia guidelines. And when I see the image added, I usually rollback to remove it from the latest edit history.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hammerbrother.png
Ryulong why did you deleted the picture Image:Hammerbrother.png? I was Trying to put the picture in the hammer brother article.--FG90 01:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Harry Colquhoun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Harry_Colquhoun

I have done as you suggested and would now like you to revise your decision to delete.

Thanks

Servers of City of Heroes and City of Villains
As a fellow CoX player and fellow admin could I ask you to keep an eye on what is going on on the above linked page? I've found myself in a slow edit-war with an editer who insists on removing the nickname of one (and only one) of the servers, when IMHO it's a widespread nickname. Several requests in my revert edit summaries for him to come to the talk page have been fruitless, and in his last edit he hit me with a fairly strong personal attack. I've given him a personal response on his talk page, and given what I hope is a lightly worded warning about the personal attack, so I'm not looking for action to be taken on *this* attack. (And it would, of course, be totally inappropriate for me to take any sort of action myself since I'm the one involved in the slow edit war with him.) I'm mostly wanting another pair of eyes on the situation, especially an admin pair. I've directed him on his talk page to come to the article's talk page, so hopefully we can finally move this there and address his issues, rather than simply reverting each other. - TexasAndroid 04:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've protected it, as there's an obvious edit war going on. Let's hope he moves to the talk page and starts a civil discussion.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 04:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Problem
Hey Ryu. I've got an issue that needs to be dealt with. There's a user who edits Mega Man Battle Network-related pages, as well as voice actor pages for the series' anime, continuously mispelling the Japanese name of the series (mispelling "Rockman" as "RockMan" despite having been directed to sources in the past to prove the proper spelling, even though it should seem unnecessary), among other things. Anyways, this user has been very disruptive when editing, causing problems on numerous pages, and since it isn't technically obvious vandalism, the user has evaded blocks, but also with several sockpuppets. Below is the most recent account, as well as three others that I salvaged from page histories. Could you please set up a way so that we can stop this vandal from causing any further problems (preferably blocking the accounts; I could report any future incidents to you for blocking as well). Thanks. --Benten 00:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * 68.205.146.8
 * 70.118.65.87
 * 70.121.57.221
 * 70.118.114.238
 * I really don't know what to do here. Post it at ANI (and please post at the bottom of my page in the future? :P)— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Muchos gracias!
Many thanks for reverting my user page after some nutcase posted biblical scripture on there. I've only just noticed. Candy 08:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I am concerned about an unblock request I handled
Hello, I am posting this same message to User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me,User:Naconkantari and User:Ryulong.

I am deeply concerned by an unblock request I handled today. User:Sircumscribe was blocked by User:Naconkantari on August 10th apparently before making his first contribution, given the reason please contact an administrator for verification, as described on this page.. No information was described on any page this user was likely to be looking at. I found this very odd, so I look through the history.

Another user, anon, pointed out that at the time this person blocked, that the admin was on "some sort of mad blocking binge". This post was rolled back by User:Ryulong. I looked at that log, and User:Naconkantari did indeed blocked 21 people in 10 minutes(August 10, 2006 between 21:58 and 22:08 ), including Sircumscribe. I would not describe it as "some sort of mad blocking binge", but I can certainly see the users point. Many of these seemed like very obvious vandals, but at one block every 30 seconds it is very possible Sircumscribe got hit by the crossfire.

The user anon user, now with a username repeated his message, User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me rolled this back again, and informed Sircumscribe that the blocking admin would be contacted. However, even looking at deleted revisions, I cannot find anything about this on the blocking admins talk page.

The same person came and repeated his message, under another name, and was rolled back again by User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me.

12 days later, this user asks if there is any progress. I find there is not. I unblocked this user. If I have been mistaken in my interpretation of these events then please correct me, but it appear this new user got bit, and bit hard.

I am not trying to make people feel bad, just trying to point out what happened. If I am wrong about anything here please point it out. I will gladly retract any mistake I made.

Perhaps the user made inappropriate pages that were deleted and I cannot see them in the logs, I don't know because the block reason has no information about the reason for the block. I almost missed the information about the block log because it had been removed. I could find no response from the blocking admin, because the admin was not asked. I apologized to the user for the lack of information. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I do recognize that you had a very limited involvement in this Ryulong, I sent the same message to everyone for clarity's sake. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 21:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Anna Nicole Smith image
What "false copyright" are you talking about? TheQuandry 21:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It was claimed to be licensed under the GFDL. I had doubts about it. I contacted the uploader.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The image Nareklm uploaded is the one I am discussing, btw.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I uploaded an image under fair use and put it in there, then say that it had been removed... I think the flurry of edits got everyone tangled up. Cheers! TheQuandry 19:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:
Its better, if its deleted since that image is being used everywhere it will just cause problems. Nareklm 21:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey one more thing my user talk page was recently protected can you protect it again? that anon keeps on bugging me about random things, he's been blocked indef for using socks he's been using for months now. Nareklm  21:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * But was it licensed under the GFDL? And I'll look into it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I doubt that will stop him wait a few seconds or minutes and he's back, also it seemed compatible with GFDL so i put it, but i bet if you search now theres thousands of images since her death and im sure, theres at least one that works with wikipedian licenses. Nareklm  21:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Still, unless you took the picture it's not under the GFDL unless you have permission from the photographer.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey will this work, my first time cc license, seems capable, Image:Annanicolea.jpg Nareklm  22:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Can i get protection now? :-P Nareklm  22:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Done.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! thats better. Nareklm  22:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Bad image list addition
Hey there, could you explain this edit? The image you added doesn't look like it is in danger of being used for vandalism. The bad image list is supposed to be kept short, so is that addition really necessary? --Conti|&#9993; 23:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's to prevent abuse by a banned user. It's the only way (other than sprotection) to deal with it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 23:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I came over with the exact same question. Could you add an explanation to the list item so people know what is going on?  There are several users who occasionally remove images that are less likely to be used for vandalism, and I would assume that that one would be the first to be removed.  Also, please make sure to add Badimage to image talks when adding items. Thanks, BanyanTree 14:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Dr.Steel
Okay Ryulong what can I do to keep the dr. steel page from being erased. I am a former submariner, and the fan base is strong for the article is strong. What can be done to save this wiki? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.112.60.244 (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
 * You can
 * Provide sources that show the individual exists outside of MySpace
 * Provide sources that show the band exists
 * Remove a shitload of images.
 * — Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 23:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

hi
are you an administrator? Spintasser 03:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah...— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 04:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me?
I'm not vandalising the page. Season 3 had sixteen episodes under it, but each season of Ed edd n eddy only has THIRTEEN episodes. I was moving the misplaced episodes to season 4 which only had 10 episodes under it, yet you people assume in erasing the episodes. Can you at least check what I'm trying to do before you assume in vandalizing, because that wasn't cool at all. DietLimeCola 04:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I did not know what you were doing, as I could not tell from your contributions. This is why I undid and asked you.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 04:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Hello, I see from the page history that you have just been on AN/I. I have never filed a 3RR report, and I am unsure of what is required. Is it possible for you take a look at the issue on AN/I regarding Electronic voice phenomenon? -MsHyde 09:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Go to WP:AN3— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

comment
You have email. FT2 (Talk 11:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Dave Winer
As you probably saw when looking at my talk page your friends talked to another admin that would not block me because I was doing a good thing for the article. From the comments left here I see that you have done things like this ,without cause, in the past and I am going to report you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.79.164.130 (talk) 15:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

Dave Winer
The block that you gave to a friend in order to stop me from editing Dave Winer was completely inappropriate. They have already tried to do this with another admin and he said admitted that I did nothing wrong. I am going to report this. --Nirelan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.79.164.130 (talk) 15:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC).


 * Ryulong, thank you for blocking and his two sockpuppets for 96 hours. Nirelan has now registered yet another sock, which he is using to vandalize Dave Winer today, . And I see from the HagermanBot that he also has yet another IP that he can use. Sigh. Just to clarify, Nirelan is angry that you blocked him so he's accusing you of being my friend. The "other admin" who gave him a pass was Ganfon, who took only a very superficial look at Nirelan's edits, in the context of Nirelan's claim that all who oppose him are "fanboys" of Dave Winer.  I've also file an RfC on this matter, if you would like to comment there I'd be very grateful: betsythedevine 17:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Block of user 86.3.0.169
Hi, I was just wondering how come user 86.3.0.169 (User_talk:86.3.0.169) has just been able to edit his talk page, when he is supposed to be on a 6 month block, according to his blocklog? Thanks - Belovedfreak 18:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Blocked users are allowed to edit their talk pages unless there are extenuating circumstances in which this needs to be prevented.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

MegaMan NT Warrior
Hey Ryu, would you mind semi-protecting the MegaMan NT Warrior article? There seems to be a user introducing superfluous information through multiple IPs. --Benten 23:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Not enough activity that I can see.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 23:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, he/she is reverting now back to the version with a bunch of superfluous examples. --Benten 23:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

NLP
I was alerted to a discussion on NLP today. I was one of the mentors on there for a few months. If you need any background, let me know ok? --WoohookittyWoohoo! 01:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :)
Glen 07:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion
Why did you delete my page (Christopher Kohler)? What was wrong with it? It is not fair. Wkohler 09:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You are not notable.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

re Holy Blood
Why did you readd the unneccesary redirect without an explanation?--E tac 10:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You can write over redirects. If anything, send it to WP:RFD so you can create an article (make it at a disambig first or something)— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 10:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

re:Lifeads.org
Please elaborate on "spam for spam" as a reason for deletion. I have read the deletion policy. Is there a way the article can be re-written to be acceptable? Pdeluca 12:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If it is not spam. Please read WP:CSD as to why the deletion occurred.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I did read that the first time. When the article was written, it was modeled on the article about the Million Dollar Homepage. MDHP, while notable as a website, was completely for commercial gain. LifeAds.org is, to my knowledge, the first site of its kind in that it is specifically for charity. Many other organizations that raise funds for charitable causes are listed. Please let me know if there is a way that the article can be written, formatted, etc. so that it acceptable.Pdeluca 12:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

nlp
Thanks Ryulong. And Woohookitty. Fainites 13:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

KR Episode Lists
Instead of going with the slightly disorgnized method you proposed, try this. I'm sure it will work out better, and still give the article some organization. Floria L 14:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That works much better :)— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Abandon
If Nuestra Señora de los Desamparados de Marikina is no longer a copyvio, I think that some of the protected titles, in particlular Our Lady of the Abandoned of Marikina, could be restored. -- RHaworth 18:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It still is a copyvio. It's the same text as all of the other ones.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.marikina.gov.ph/pages/news/2005/nov/news.jsp?page=111105 — Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Award for you
--sunstar nettalk 23:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, bud, why did you delete the edits I made to the Xiaolin Showdown page? Anyone is allowed to edit the pages, so why? The "Other Techniques" was useful to others. Please respond back, I want to know. Cocoaleche2 00:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You signed it. And we don't really need the list.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

So, if I dont sign it, and I make it a seperate page, then can I put it up? Cocoaleche2 00:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's just a list of everything Omi did. It's not really that important to the whole of the series.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it is used by Chase, Jermaine, Omi, MM quan, and others. And, this is and encyclodpia. It should have as much information as possible that is a part of the series. Cocoaleche2 00:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:NOT— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Yah, but what I'm doin' is none of that. It is a list of techiniques used in the series. There are already some techiniques. If mine cant be on there, those shouldnt either. Also, your not the boss of the Xiaolin Showdown page, so quite actin' like you are. Cocoaleche2 00:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I do remember it being there to begin with. I will check to see why it was removed.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Yah, I remember them being there too. Thats why I was trying to bring 'em back Cocoaleche2 00:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Here it is and I agree with its removal.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Why do you agree? If I made a page with just that it should be fine. I could fine tune it to make it work. Cocoaleche2 00:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's just not important. It's just a list of information that has very little to do with the over all series. They are only random made up moves that Omi has used throughout the series, and that he had learned from Chase and Guan (and that Jermaine learned from Chase). Please do not add it back.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Well then, if my list is just a bunch of random crud, then you better take off Jack Spicer's inventions. It is "not important to the overall series", a "list of useless information", and not important. Plus, your not in charge. I should beable to do it because you dont know wats best for the WEB, let alone the Wikipedian community. Cocoaleche2 00:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That's actually a good idea for the Jack Spicer article. And while I am not in charnge, I am an administrator who does know what is best for the community and the encyclopedia.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Well guess wat? I'm going to make my own page, and please don't delete it. You really don't know wats best. When I look on Wiki, I am looking to find out as much as I can about the topic I'm looking for. The more I can find the more I appreciate Wiki for haveing the info so I can learn about what I need to learn about. And I was just trying to make a point, dont delete the jack spicer stuff. Cocoaleche2 00:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, Wikipedia has guidelines for content. The list of other moves is certainly something that does not need to be on Wikipedia. It's really crufty and cannot be reliably sourced.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it can. I have all the episodes at my fingertips, and if need be, I could get sources for ALL of the moves. Cocoaleche2 00:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay. Just listen to me.
 * It is not important. It is indiscriminate information that is better for a fansite than for an encyclopedia article. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia as you did on Jay's user page, you will be blocked.
 * — Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Fine, now listen to me

I'm sorry for what I did to his page, I was mad. I didn't know you wear the one behind it. I promise to never do it again. Now with that outta the way, It is worth putting in. You cannot simply control a page because you have nothing else better to do. I have information, information I bet alot of people would like to know, and It deserves to be on this site. An encyclopedia is a source with as much knowledge as possible that is availiable to all. Please, this deserves to be on here. You can't control a page just because you think you know wat people want. Cocoaleche2 00:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not controlling the page. I'm telling you why I think the information there is not necessary. Someone who randomly finds Xiaolin Showdown is not going to think that the show is interesting if there is a massive list that clutters up the article with unnecessary information. It was removed for that reason, and I would hope that it remains removed.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

PandaBubba
I've nominated this character page for deletion for being a minor character. It seems to have been created to make a point in responce to the deletion of Omi. I thought I'd notify you since you've been a major contributor to Xiaolin Showdown pages. If you would like to comment the afd is here. Jay32183 05:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for informing me.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 05:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

MARromance headsup
I just got an email from user:MARromance who was blocked by you. I do not know why he came to me, if he is canvassing admins to find one who will unblock or what. I will not and would rather not get involved in it personally. Just wanted to give you a heads up that the specified user is still trying to cause trouble. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page?
Hi. I am the founder of a band named GodSend and I recently put a page on here about it. I went to work on it today, and I noticed that it had been deleted. I was just wondering why you deleted it.

Sincerely, grumster89G (Graeme Alexander)
 * WP:MUSIC— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Please Exercise Judgement
Dear sir, I have uploaded some photos of the works of the Transpressionists artists to be incorporated in their page. The copy right permission for inclusion in the wikipedia was given by the admin of the Transpressionists group at the Google, which you can verify, by sending an email to this group: transpressionists@googlegroups.com

Further more, the pictures are already incorporated on the Transpressionisme in the French wikipedia, and under Transpressionismus in the German Wikipedia.

Despite of this you have used your Vandal Whacking Stick in the most uncalled for manner for an undergraduate science student to block me from editing.

This needs to be rectified urgently.

Yours, Arteban —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.80.199.91 (talk) 23:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

User:Ryulong/PTL
Have you thought of integrating User:Ryulong/PTL with the lists at Protected titles? If someone were to attempt to create one of these articles in good faith, they probably would be a bit confused. --- RockMFR 03:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Mostly, this is a Bobabobabo protection list, after she decided to go through my deletion log and fuck around. I deleted the first list because it was a fair use gallery, and she recreated it, and I had to delete it several times under G5.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 03:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

List of Death Note episodes
Mind giving some insight on this? Is it permitted to use images for each and every episode on the episode page? Floria L 16:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Issues with an article/editor
Hello, There is a situation over at the article X Japan, which might need administrative attention (I'm not entirely sure):

A fellow editor, apparently also a very dedicated fan of the band, keeps adding content to the article, which is either uncited, or referenced with unreliable or disputed sources. "Disputed" in the sense that they are in Japanese, meaning they are not immediately verifiable by the vast majority of readers and editors and another editor also commented on one of these sources that it plainly does not say what it is supposed to back up. Given that the user who keeps adding the disputed material has a history of disregard towards several policies (such as WP:CIVIL, WP:V and WP:CON), my ability to assume good faith in this case has expired as well.

Several means to deal with this behavior have already been exhausted. Policies and guidelines were pointed out by numerous users, third opinions were brought in and the article was recently blocked for a while to allow things to cool down, but all to no avail. A request for comment has also been filed a while back, during the last series of offenses, but apparently it's not going anywhere. I'd certainly like to keep working on this article with Wikipedia principles in mind, but without fending off such behavior at every turn, especially since it appears to go almost completely unchecked.

Long story short, I don't know how to handle this situation anymore and I'd very much like your advise and if you see fit, intervention. Regards - Cyrus XIII 16:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Doctor Steel Discography
I don't mean to be a pain, I just want to make information available in compliance with our standards. Thank you for the discography information from the page. I appreciate that a lot.Fenixasin 05:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

krav maga inc
Why was krav maga inc deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.209.164.184 (talk) 18:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ohranger-title.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ohranger-title.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 23:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Den-O.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Den-O.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 00:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for helping me out. Things are working again now. --NotJackhorkheimer 15:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Your name
Ryulong, I hope you don't mind. I used your name in my award for Selket bot shown here, since sometimes you edit from The University of Miami. Real96 18:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, RE XM
Thank you for protecting the XM page. In the future, where do I go to request a page be protected? -- TomXP411[Talk] 07:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Requests for page protection— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 07:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Username block of Guest9999
I've referred the contested username block of User:Guest9999, on which you declined an unblock request, to WP:RFC/N for further discussion. You might wish to comment there. Regards, Newyorkbrad 17:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Your block on User:Nirelan expired and he is back to vandalizing Dave Winer
Sigh. I've already reverted his changes there twice, they are exactly the same already-rejected-by-other-editors-after-talk-page-discussion changes he got banned for making and re-making before. I've posted this over at the 3RR noticeboard but I'm not sure if they'll count his 6 previous reverts (before he was blocked) on top of the 3 newest reverts, in the past hour. Well, if you can help straighten this strange situation out, I'd be grateful! betsythedevine 00:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Done.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for helping stop this very strange vandal attack that has wasted the time of many busy people. betsythedevine 01:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Blocking
What is the difference between an ordinary block and an account creation block?? Georgia guy 01:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Yogis
Hi, The list of Yogis is provided in the "See also" link and I've merged Yogin with Yogi. Kindly allow that version to remain as it's both merged and provides a "complete list" of Yogis instead of an abbreviated list which reads like an advertisment. Cheers! Freedom skies 01:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
I would like to take the time to thank you for the reverts you made on several Dravidian related sites. Also, if you are interested please do join us at WikiProject Dravidian civilizations and add your name in the members section. Regards. Wiki Raja 07:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Not to sound biased, but I really don't care about South India :/ It's not my area of expertise.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 07:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That's ok. Take care. Wiki Raja 07:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If anything, the range is 59.92.32.0/20 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log), but this is an issue since it is the IP range for the entire city of Chennai, a major city in India.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi. Does that mean that all 40 of the anonymous IP address users have been blocked? Regards. Wiki Raja 07:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it means I'm not blocking the city of Chennai.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 07:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Just dropping a note
You're doing good work as an admin. Happy editing to you, Teke ( talk ) 07:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Tooj Sockpuppetry
Thanks for dealing with this! Locriani 08:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

New Complaint
Hi,

perhaps you can help me here. Kind regards. Wiki Raja 09:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: MikeHunt35
Hi, I was just curious as to why you blocked MikeHunt35 indefinitely instead of for some period of time. I looked through his recent edit history, and it appears to be a mix of some vandalism with some good edits. I am not saying you are wrong, but I am a newer member here and am curious about why. Thanks! Whereizben 14:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! GX Template
Just thought I'd mention this. There's a user using sockpuppets to vandalize the GX template: Menctrasa, 67.186.146.38, Mencatra. --Benten 15:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like a normal user who needs to be informed of his mistakes.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

It says very clearly...
"If you want to make an open informal complaint over the behaviour of an admin, you can do so here."

Please un-archive my complaint expediently. WikiTony 21:43, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The "long diatribe" comment takes precedence here. If you can repost the complaint with 100 words or less, then it will be given more weight and it will be replied to.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

DragutBarbarossa
He's evading his block as:



Could you please do something about it? I'm not sure if I'm allowed to block him because I was in a content dispute with him. Khoikhoi 00:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * ...and now as . Khoikhoi 02:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for dealing with this so quickly. I thought the nomination seemed quite odd, but I wrote out a rather long keep response anyway, only to find myself edit conflicted and the whole situation neatly taken care of, as well as the user's AfD contributions, etc. Excellent work. Best, Dar-Ape 02:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Jim Pooele
This user, whom you blocked, has agreed to edit constructively. I AGFed and decided to give him another chance, provided that you, as the blocking admin, agree. I ask you to look into this matter and make a decision regarding this. Thanks. --210 physicq  ( c ) 02:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I am unsure right now. The user's first edit was to an RFA, which was followed by listing the sockpuppet categories for CFD, sockpuppet for TFD, and randomly commenting at other AFDs. The put the final nail in the coffin.— Ryūlóng  ( 竜 龍 ) 02:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * His knowledge of various Wikipedia processes confirm it for me. I do not think that he should be unblocked, as he is more than likely a sockpuppet himself.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Then you have to tell him that, as I reached a different conclusion. Of course, we can also reblock him for his next "mistake." --210 physicq  ( c ) 02:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. I assumed good faith, until I saw the .— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Billy Last Name
I was able to verify it, why wasn't it removed?RangerKing 02:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Billy Cranston is where it should be because we found it on Amazon and then I also found Rocky's last name on the other site (the Disney one). That's why I removed it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Better be careful.
I think fancies you. *grin* HalfShadow 05:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Grignard reagents. Would those be good on ice cream or are we talking something that can melt your insides? HalfShadow 06:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * They're organomagnesium compounds.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 06:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh marvelous. I'd be a torch. This is why I'm not in college. HalfShadow 06:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Blanking talk pages
I know you're having a bad day, and it is not my intention to make it worse, but could you please direct me to a policy on WP that says one cannot blank their talk page or remove warnings placed on it? I know of no such policy, and WP:USER, which is only a guideline, even says ''On a user's own talk page, policy does not prohibit the removal of comments at that user's discretion, although archival is preferred to removal. Please note, though, that removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon.'' That seems to indicate that one may blank their page and even remove warnings if they wish. While I agree with the block of that anon IP with whom you are in conflict, I don't think it was appropriate of you to protect his page or block him (as he claims) for blanking it. If I have misread the situation, I apologize and please clear up any confusion on my part. Sincerely, Jeffpw 09:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, while he was allowed to blank the page, the method by which he did so was disruptive in itself: saying he'll get the ACLU to sue Wiki, repeated accusations of homophobia, and then causing the levels of destruction for posting a complaint at some blog where they attack Wikipedia. There's not much else that can be done now.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 09:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Blocking revert of page move by null edit
Perhaps you'd be the right person to take a look into such an edit recently (details at administrators' noticeboard/Incidents). :-) &mdash; Instantnood 11:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Billy's Last Name (cont)
If you found Billy's last name on Amazon, doesn't that conflict with your Bushido of only including information that pretty much comes from an official source?RangerKing 19:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Dirak/Domitius/Thulium etc.
Hi Ryulong, I saw you blocked the six incarnations of User:Dirak / Domitius / Thulium etc. identified by Dmcdevit this morning. Let me say first this user is a good, trusted friend of mine (though I have very frequently disagreed with him) and I firmly believe he can really be an excellent wikipedian. Also, although he's been getting into quite a lot of disputes lately, he is really one of the more liberal and least nationalist people among the Balkan crowd, and certainly one of the most intelligent. As I said on ANI earlier today, he's had a weird habit of giving up old accounts and starting up new ones quite frequently, trying to make "fresh starts". I've never been able to understand exactly why he was doing that. But most of the time, this has not involved anything approaching illegitimate sockpuppetry, since he used the accounts one after the other. Also, people in that area know him and his distinctive handwriting so well they have always recognised him quickly under each new guise, so he probably couldn't engage in serious sockpuppeting even if he wanted to.

I don't really know why his turnover of accounts went up to as many as six in a month now, but I've checked their contributions and I think they stayed away from each other sufficiently. Even when he was using two at the same time, that was almost always on different articles. In the one case where I've seen two accounts of his in the context of the same debate (shortly after each other, not simultaneously), I'm 100% certain everybody involved in that situation already knew what was going on anyway. There seems to have been no evading of 3RR (reverting the same article during the same day) or double voting or the like, for all I can see.

Anyway, I've been in contact with him and he promises to stop creating new accounts and stick with a single one. He asks to be allowed to continue as User:Domitius. Would it be okay if we unblocked that one? Thanks, --Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry for nagging, but could you take a moment to comment on this? I'd be loath to do anything unilaterally in this case. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Whichever one he wants to use, you can unblock it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked Domitius. Khoikhoi 22:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, was that someone lurking behind this page? :-) Thanks to you both. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: Image:Ejaculation_sample.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ejaculation_sample.jpg

(1) The image is questionable regarding the age of the boy in the picture. The lack of body hair, the size of the boy's body, and the texture of the skin indicates it is probably someone about 15 to 17 years old or younger. (2) Image is not representative of most ejaculations since it appears to be shooting in a straight stream all the way to the neck area. Studies conclude (from various surveys and the Kinsey Institute motion picture recordings) that ejaculations are usually a dribble or a combination of a dribble and a shot. (3) The size of the penis picture is not proportionate to the hand or the torso of the boy, which could be a sign that the photo has been altered. (4) If it is unaltered, then the picture is only representative of very few men.

APatcher 22:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * So?— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The IFD was closed. I decided that the deletion requests were not reasons for deleting it. And your reasons don't show me that I should delete it. People shave their bodies and he's gifted. Let's leave it at that.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Inflammatory user
I am sorry for reporting him, you may have thought that he doesn't exist and that I just made him up to get on somebody's nerves, but I didn't. I saw him as "New" on vandalProof, but maybe something happened. At any rate, I know I saw that user and I apologize for any confusion that I may have caused. ~ St ep tr ip   ( talk ) 01:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Marikina again
See special:contributions/Html Kame. -- RHaworth 02:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Dealt with.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 03:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Tooj socks
What does PTL'd mean? I had protected a few of the talk pages after he started adding unblock requests and links to a shock site on them ... I saw that you deleted one of them - - what does PTL'd mean? --BigDT 03:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:PTL— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 03:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thx ... I need to keep up-to-date on the new acronyms. ;) --BigDT 03:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

RfC
Just to say you were completely right to delete that stupid trolling RfC. I was just about to add to it: Outside view by WJBscribe I see no evidence of abuse by Ryulong in the two blocks in question:
 * was a block following a Requests for checkuser. This account was identified by Mackensen as an account of CBDrunkerson. (see Requests for checkuser). The indef block is therefore clearly warranted.
 * reverted Ryulong with his first edit, claiming that he used Vandal Proof to do so, when (obviously) not on the list of users authorised to use this software. Checkuser identified him as "possibly if not probably" a sockpuppet of CBDrunkerson.

It should be noted that the checkuser request above concluded that it was likely one of the people certifying this RfC (Jim Pooele) was "possibly, bordering on likely" a sockpuppet of CBDrunkerson. That user has not in fact edited this page. The user who created this page (Hiablke) edited unconstructively a few times on Feb 9 but had not edited since. His immidiate action prior to creating this RfC was to label Ryulong as a sockpuppeteer on his userpage, a clear act of vandalism. The other user certifying the basis for this dispute admits: to being PowerRangerBuster2, another checkuser confirmed encarnation of CBDrunkerson. This RfC seems to me a clear example of trolling and should be deleted as such. As far as I can see, you're doing a great job as an admin. WjBscribe 21:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the second time it was initiated. Both times by the same socks— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Block summary
Hey. Best to avoid all-caps in block summaries. Thanks. El_C 21:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I intended for it to be humorous. The user was disrupting Kurdistan by blanking it with all caps.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Cheers
Cheers for reverting my userpage, User:Estuary went mental! Have you blocked him? Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No. — Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Good idea - he seams like a good user ;-) Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, you're a hard working dude.

Special:Contributions/195.137.123.222
Should the person be blocked? Xiner (talk, email) 22:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry...
...to always be bugging you, but I don't know any other admins by username off the top of my head. Care to recommend a course of action regarding the erupting edit war over at Barenaked Ladies Are Me/Barenaked Ladies Are Men. Is there something like a Problems For Discussion or something? Right now, we've got one pro, one con, and one middleground (that's me). If you want more info, drop me a line. JPG-GR 03:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, found it! JPG-GR 06:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Penguin cabal
How would one go about joining, and is there a complicated handshake involved? ;) (jarbarf) 18:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll help you. But there is an extensive hazing ritual that needs to be completed.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 19:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As long as no penguin is harmed in the process, I am game. (jarbarf) 21:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Von Klinker
You blocked ; have a look at. —xyzzyn 23:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, indeed, he has blocked me. But this block was definitely unjustified. Where is policy that states that putting "For Brian Peppers" in just two edit summaries warrants indefinitely block??? Von Klinker 23:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Penguin Cabal
*thumbs up* Grace notes T  &#167; 00:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
That user from before who was causing problems on Mega Man Battle Network-related pages is back yet again under another IP. 67.8.165.205. After you suggested that I bring up the issue at AIN the last time, it was said that I should address the problem on the user's talk page. Well, I did at the time, and pointed the user to an official source with the proper spelling, and for one edit, it seemed that the user had finally gotten the point. But now, he/she is just back to deliberately mispelling things again. Someone at AIN had suggested semi-protecting the articles that were being edited; if you think that's what should be done, would you please do so? I still think some form of blocking would be more effective, as the user just keeps being disruptive through multiple accounts. --Benten 00:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit: The older puppets for quick reference, as well as the official source that was given (top right-hand corner).


 * Special:Contributions/68.205.146.8
 * Special:Contributions/70.118.65.87
 * Special:Contributions/70.121.57.221
 * Special:Contributions/70.118.114.238


 * http://www.capcom.co.jp/rockmanexe/

--Benten 00:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:BinSL
An editor has asked for a deletion review of image:BinSL. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TheGreenFaerae 07:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I wish to apologize for coming off so hostile initially. My concern was not really with the deletion of the image itself, which I don't really feel is all that nessecerry except to validate the statement that /b/ exists outside of 4chan. The fact that the statement is not being removed along with it makes me feel more comfortable, as the statement is true and, even though the proof many not be fully acceptable, it is still verifiable. As long as the mention of /b/ presence outside of 4chan in areas like Second Life is mentioned, the picture is really not all that needed. as long as you continue to observe this, as you have, you are to be commended, and I apologize again for my former remarks.TheGreenFaerae 09:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Block of User:Martirio
Thank you. My guess is that the guy was, someone whose user page was deleted and who left legal threats on my and Mail diablo's Talk pages in response and had been blocked several minutes before the new guy suddenly appeared. --Calton | Talk 08:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: And thank you for rolling back the edits, too! --Calton | Talk 08:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Good Lord, you and Woohookitty do not fool around. --Calton | Talk 12:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Requests for checkuser/Case/CBDrunkerson
Take a look at Special:Contributions/KnownTypes, especially his edit to the checkuser case. I have no experience with checkuser procedures, so I didn't add him to the list, but you might consider it. (Or just block for trolling). --N Shar 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for notifying me.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Nirelan still blocked, but his old sockpuppet is back
. And he's back attacking Dave Winer with the same POV edits so often reverted before. Special:Contributions/70.104.126.193 BTW, he's also made Nirelan-signed edits in the past from a different sock IP,. Could you please block both socks from making more accounts? Thanks! betsythedevine 01:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Episode pages
You don't believe an episode article can be allowed to grow? It doesn't matter how the page is now, it just matters if an article can be built there, and it can. - Peregrine Fisher 03:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * See my commentary at the talk page of the list.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 03:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize for my tone in that one comment. I'm a little touchy about the subject because of other editor's actions in the past.  I can see now that you were acting in good faith.  If I add information to the episode pages so that they contain info beyond the what's in the LOE page, will that be OK with you? - Peregrine Fisher 03:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Metal Hero
Ryulong, in Kamen Rider template appears the American footage. Metal Hero does not deserve it? URUTORAMAN MEBIUSU You need aid? 15:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The VR Troopers and Beetleborgs are not really the same as the other two, as Masked Rider and Dragon Knight are direct relations.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 20:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, i understand. Sorry, my friend. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mebiusu (talk • contribs) 21:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

User:HoffenKlinker
Hey. Since you have dealt with this before, you might be interested that User:Gen. von Klinkerhoffen is back with another sockpuppet account; User:HoffenKlinker. So far, he has posted an entirely off-topic drama message on Talk:Ejaculation and removed an image from Pearl necklace (sexuality). Prolog 23:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Muslims fear Backlash
You deleted this article at 06:02, February 25, 2007. It's back. Flyguy649 (talk-works) 06:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * ... and it's back again! (created at 06:24, February 25, 2007 by User:Prester John) Flyguy649 (talk-works) 06:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Protected it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 06:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you scared of this topic? I am willing to let you help me write it.Prester John 06:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It's back again...uh, and again. -- ArglebargleIV 06:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Damn. That first protection didn't hold.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 07:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

And I just speedied Talk:Muslims fear Backlash as db-talk -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs)  07:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You don't seem to able to engage in conversation with me. Is there a reason you tried to delete this page without any forms of disscussion? You have read the protocols related to Wikipedia I assume. Are there particular issues in the article that frighten you? or diminish your ability to engage in the issues? Please leave a message on my talk page about your thoughts. You do owe the courtesy to explain why this article was 'executed without a single disscussion comment being made. You can make it on your own page if you so desire.Prester John 08:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Because it was a nonsensical neologism that did not need to go through the five days and continue to fill the deletion backlogs. I frankly don't care about the whole "Muslim" or "Islamic" areas. I just knew original research when I saw it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 08:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

You did see the references included? right? Would you accept that the article was indeed not completed. (Its age can be counted in seconds) Would you capitulate if I refenced every statement in the article which I have repeatedly stated I can do? Is the issue of references the only obstacle to the completion of the article?Prester John 08:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There were no references each time I had deleted it. And the additions of the Wikiquote and the Wikisource tags to non-existant pages also shows that there is nothing concerning this phrase in modern usage. If you can find reliable sources to "Muslims fear Backlash" (the phrase itself does not make sense) being used, then the article should stay. If not, I guess it's going to AFD.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 08:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If I may jump in here, as I did point out it's recreation above, you (Prester John) could write and complete the article in a sandbox of your own, and then post it when complete. Or invite comments from editors who have had concerns about it. Regards, Flyguy649 (talk-works) 08:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess you had to make all the way to bottom of the article to see the "references" section. I'm sorry you didn't see either this section or the bracketed numbers that hyperlinked to these sources. Are you willing to stand by my posting of a fully referenced and completed article of this topic in the future? Prester John 08:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There were never any references in either its past or current forms. If you use Muslims fear Backlash and provide references, it can stay.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 08:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for expending the time to do a google search that netted 738 results. I hope you can accept that my editing style was to create the article and then build on it. I had no idea that it would be speedy deleted without any discussion at all in the talk page. I truly believed the idea of Wikipedia was to create a group consensus. I had no idea that the weight of numbers would be used to crush new terms or ideas that surfaced in todays society. Thank you for at least exploring the term, and again, I contest, given some time and democratic process we could have fleshed out the article before it was aborted prematurely. I again maintain that my computer has all the bookmarks ready and waiting to produce a full and complete article, if it would be just given a chance. Prester John 08:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

User Category for Discussion
 A category created by you or to which you have significantly contributed is being considered for deletion, rename, move or merge in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Discussion policies. This does not mean that any of the userpages in the category will be deleted. They may, however, be recategorized. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the User categories for discussion page. VegaDark 07:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Podiatry
Hi Ryulong! Do you have any idea what is going on at Podiatry and Podiatrist. I'm baffled and puzzled. A whole herd of single purpose accounts with very similar names has flocked to the articles, to make the same edits. A few of these accounts are, and. Is there a long-lasting edit war? Are these sockpuppets? And if so, what is the main account? A ecis Brievenbus 23:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I really have no clue. I just remember seeing them before. I've listed them on RFCU, but I don't know if anything will come of it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 00:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That was a quick decline by Essjay :) A  ecis Brievenbus 00:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Phoenix741/GreenRanger
Hi, thanks for taking an interest in my user box, but i would ask that any problems you have with it you should tell me about, such as the issue with the colors.That being said i saw no problem with the old colors and I changed it back. Thanks Phoenix741 01:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that it's impossible to read right now. The green is too dar.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 01:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * are you talking about the link text or the general text, cause the general text is white. Also I saw the penguins on top of your user page, how did you do that?Phoenix741 01:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Mainly the linked text. And the penguins are a secret.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 01:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok I will try to get the link text fixed, again next time, tell me what the problem is with my work so i may fix it.Phoenix741 01:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Or you could change it yourself what ever, anyway I was able to fix the same problem on another userbox so yea, thanks. Whish you would of talked to me first.Phoenix741 01:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Anyone can edit on Wikipedia. I knew a quicker fix and I could do it just like you could.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 01:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't mind if you edit it, but since it is mostly my creative work and not in essence facts, it would be nice to know when it is getting altered. That is all i am trying to say.Phoenix741 01:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk page message
I don't know what to make of User:Afganistaun, who created his own user talk page with this. Does he look familiar to you? —Angr 11:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Mistake
Ryulong-- I was in an edit war and went to paste the section I was working on in the article on Martina Navratilova, and pasted the section over the entire article. This deleted everything in this section; I would be willing to try to replace it but I am still catching on to Wikipedia; I've got a lot to learn--I feel that you are a good aministrator to help me restore this article. If you are willing, this would be great. I appoligize; and will be more careful in the future. Thank you, and please reply to me on my talkpage as for I will not remember to check back here. If this is possible I would be much greatful.  -Wikipediaman123 01:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC) 

User:DJ BatWave
I would like you to consider unblocking this user provided that he promises not to use sockpuppets and to stop moving articles. His page moves are less vandalism and more to do with stopping others from moving them back easily. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

PDFs
hi well, i dont know another way to upload .pdfs in wiki, y have a bunch of published papers in my team, and we want to upload them (cause we dont have them sitting in an accessible web link) so, if not as image, how ?
 * I'm not really sure why the MediaWiki software allows for the uploads of PDF files. You'll have to ask at the village pump— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 19:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Xiaolin Showdown Screencaps?
Hi, figured I'd see if I could get ahold of you. I've been comparing the xiaolin showdown article to Avatar the last air bender and thought that the structure used in Avatar's Main Characters section could be well applied to this show as well. Visual aids on the front page help to illustrate the subject, and as it stands a reader would have to dig a bit to get to any images at all. Since Avatar was recently featured I figured elements of that article could be applied over here as well. I restructured the article to fit TV show standards, and I might edit the page further but I didn't want to pursue this matter without consulting you since you revised me. Hewinsj 05:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Check the individual character articles, as well as the character list.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 05:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * So should I just use the images from those other pages rather than images from episodes? Or there shouldn't be images on the main article at all? Hewinsj 05:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Use the same images; it's better than having a completely different set for the same articles (and less copyright violatey)— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 05:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, and thanks for being so cool about this. I think the article can be improved, and it's nice when people are friendly. Done for the night, but I'll probably get to it in the next day or two. Hewinsj 05:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Block of User:AfroPedia
Hi Ryulong, could you explain your block of please? The only thing I can find is he created an article on a not-too-notable website of his, AfroPedia. Was that the only reason? In that case, I must say I'd find the block inappropriate. There was no warning, and no repeated creation after deletion; and the creation of that article looks pretty much good faith to me - after all, the misconception that all "-pedia"-like open encyclopedia projects are ipso facto noteworthy at Wikipedia is quite widespread and somehow understandable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. This user should have at least been warned. Part Deux 16:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ryulong, seeing as you probably won't be around again for another few hours, and seeing the the opinion here above, I think I'll go ahead and unblock provisionally. Will tell him though about the problems with that article. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a username block at best. And WP:COI issues, too.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Use of the "My local Time" Template
Can I copy and paste the code of your "My local Time" template to one of my subpages? I would create the page myself, but I have seen the edit window for it, and I must say, all of those time-calculating variables profusely confuse me. ~ St ep tr <span style="color: #00FFFF;" family="Trebuchet MS, sans-serif">ip 21:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure. You'll just have to change the "-5" to your local UTC offset (and the abbreviation for your timezone). User:Ryulong/Clock has a left alignment, /Clock has a centered alignment for my archive box. And try not to copy the #ifeq stuff. You'll get a less than desirable result.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 21:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ryuutaros
Seeing as we've already used Hepburn for the actual romanization, the transliteration should follow Waporo, as its easier to recognize, and type. Floria L 22:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * How about one u? Like how we have "Ryotaro"?— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I was trying to differentiate that a bit, since we only used Ryotaro because there was an official spelling of it. Still, it probably looked better before, so i'll fix it. Floria L 22:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, we won't really know until Gun Form does come out and he shows up on the website with an English spelling.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 22:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)