User talk:Saltine/Archive 2

Recent block
When you blocked 99.49.83.163, you left an "indef blocked" message on their talk page. Might want to clear that up, it could turn scandalous :) A little insignificant talk to me! (please!) 14:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I left it like that intentionally. I know it's a bit misleading, but the user is to be indefinitely blocked until the legal threat is retracted. The only reason we don't block IP's indefinitely is because they do change, and a new user could end up with that IP. If that occured I would notify the new user. On the other hand, if the block expired and the same person continued editing without retracting the threat, the block would be reapplied. Evil saltine (talk) 02:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Color me confused
I'm trying to figure out how to !vote regarding the Orangesodakid user pages. In the course of trying to figure out what is going on, I saw your post here stating that user was not blocked. Your post has a time of 00:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC). Yet the block log has two blocks, both with (apparently) earlier times, e.g. 23:09, 18 September 2009. The block time doesn't list a time zone - I assumed UTC, is that wrong? If a user is blocked, and told they should respond to ANI, what is supposed to happen? Can blocked users post at ANI?-- SPhilbrick  T  16:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What you see in the block log is your local time, not UTC. The local time is set in your preferences. In response to your second question, a blocked user should respond on his or her talk page; it will be watched by one or more administrators. Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 18:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I be athinkin'
Fer a seadog with a fine pirate name, thee dunt speak like a Pirate... LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Arrrr... Evil saltine (talk) 19:50, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you sooo much. And for the record me and Orangesodakid are not the same person we have diffrent IP addreses!-- Coldplay   Expert  02:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Just be aware that two users that communicate off-wiki could be treated as sockpuppets if they make similar disruptive edits. Evil saltine (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Im fine with that but I never made any disrupted edits. The only thing that I did was get on Gurrenlaggen or whatever the heck his name was.-- Coldplay   Expert  02:26, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't mean to accuse you of anything. Evil saltine (talk) 02:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Then wait was I blocked for a whole day for just logging into GL?!?! (Im not really mad)-- Coldplay   Expert  02:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Bias
Please stop editing my posts. I only care about the accuracy of the article and pursue every effort to follow Wikipedia guidelines; so I don't understand why you've removed it twice.

Thanks. -Jesus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.148.212.200 (talk • contribs)
 * Changing a quote is not accuracy. Evil saltine (talk) 04:54, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Parchive
I know you closed this in good faith, but no one was able to come up with anything substantial at the end of this debate to demonstrate notability. I will probably be taking this to deletion review for a higher level discussion and wanted to give you a heads up, it is nothing personal at all. JBsupreme (talk) 14:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Thanks for letting me know. Evil saltine (talk) 03:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Filter 238
Is anyone actively monitoring the log for this? Prodego talk  22:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am monitoring the log for it. Why do you ask? Evil saltine (talk) 23:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just clearing out unused, old, and non-worthwhile filters, and came across that one, and I wanted to make sure someone was monitoring it. Prodego  talk  02:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Theantinawlin
Just fyi   Chzz  ►  23:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Evil saltine (talk) 06:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!
For your help with my userpage. -- Banj e b oi   15:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Evil saltine (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Blocking
Please stop blocking people without giving fair warning first. You have no reason to believe that they weren't trying to make a good faith edit and accidently made a mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.120.211.137 (talk) 16:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's pretty obvious that you're the same person who's been vandalizing User:Pepperpiggle. Evil saltine (talk) 20:16, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for blocking my evil alter ego, vfp16! We've had serious problems with him on French Wikipedia. Vincent (talk) 01:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, lol. Evil saltine (talk) 01:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks II
Thank you for cleaning up. ;) This probably made them a bit angry... *hrhr* --Thogo (Talk) 10:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh no problem. =) Evil saltine (talk) 10:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Sick of mE (band)

 * ah ok well its up there now. i dont care about the images but that text took me forever to come up with and i was too tired to save it. thanks anyway ill be sure that if i do ever post an article on here ill read the guide lines first.Stich666 (talk) 20:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)stich666
 * No problem. The email has been sent. Evil saltine (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Your expertise requested
Articles for deletion/Saltine cracker challenge -- please comment. JBsupreme (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, lol =) Evil saltine (talk) 20:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Please salt Eric Zaccar
Hello, … Less that 24 hours after Articles for deletion/Eric Zaccar was closed as Delete, one of the sockpuppets -  - has recreated it … I've tagged it with uw-repost, but would you please WP:SALT it? Thnx!

Happy Editing! &mdash;  00:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I considered salting it, but I hope that won't be necessary. If it gets created again I (or someone else) will. Thanks! Evil saltine (talk) 00:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Please tell me what "Salt" means. I re-created the Eric Zaccar article, using more in-depth information and many more checkable references from major newspapers for one reason and one reason alone:  I don't want people who google Eric to get a page that says that Eric's article has been deleted, and a link to the long diatribes that bad mouthed him. Again, a lot of money, time and energy has been invested in Eric's new screenplay and upcoming film, it's a very important story that could be a very important movie, and the last thing we need is a potential investor, director or star googling him and seeing the negative press that you've recently given him. Better to see nothing at all.

From the impression we "sock puppets" got, you didn't really want to delete Eric's article, you wanted to bring it up to your "standard." That's what I tried to do. It was flagged before anyone could have possibly had a chance to read it. Thank you.

Unless, of course, everything the editors were saying was crap, and you'd planned to delete Eric's article, all along, no matter how much contrary information we offered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robroams (talk • contribs) 05:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

PS: I tried to ask permission before I posted a new, more in depth article about Eric Zaccar, but even though you seem to indicate that messages can be sent to your editors through this site, trying to figure out how to do it is impossible. Everything said seemed to indicate to me that I could add a new article if I improved it.

Can I, Rob Stedelin, have my own article, if I'm the person who contacts my friends at several major New York news stations and has them do in-depth investigations on the self proclaimed editors of wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robroams (talk • contribs) 05:34, 27 October 2009
 * For the nth time, Robroams, CLICK THE LINK!!!  … in this case, that would be WP:SALT  … as for sending emails, those editors who have opted to have one available all have a E-mail this user link in the Toolbox section on the left-hand side of the screen … and once again, create a sandbox article in user space (click User:Robroams/Eric Zaccar to create it) then have some more experienced editors check it out before you post it in article space … and no, you can't have your own article on those grounds because anyone can edit Wikipedia, so there are no "self proclaimed editors" to investigate, but go ahead and contact your friends so that they can have a Good Laugh … as for Google pointing to a deleted page, that link will evaporate in a few days, so no one will see it (it may take longer now, because you recreated it) … in conclusion, if you're not smart enough to figure out how to sign your posts (or how to click the blue text to see what things mean), then maybe those people should not be investing in any enterprise with which you are connected.  &mdash; 138.88.125.101 (talk) 07:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Nehara Pieris
An article that you have been involved in editing, Nehara Pieris, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --  At am a  頭 16:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Eric Zaccar & his Sock & Meat Puppets
This is in direct response to your editors who have called us "sock" or "meat" puppets, because we never edited anything, or gave our input on anything except one single article about Eric Zaccar.

Sophia Z's involved in a major project with Eric Zaccar. So am I.  We're working with Eric Zaccar. Some of the other "sock puppets" are probably also people who are familiar with the work of Eric Zaccar and know that he's a rather talented and diverse writer who has thousands of fans and supporters in the New York area. So we all signed on to defend someone that we know, who we care about and whose work we are familiar with. That's the way it's supposed to be. I can't imagine why any of us, or anyone else, would want to do edits on people and articles that we didn't know anything about and that weren't involved in our personal affairs. We didn't sign on to promote Eric or to use your site (is it in fact YOUR site?) for publicity or public relations. We signed on to stop your site from bad mouthing him.

Again, in Brooklyn and Manhattan, where a lot of us come from, we grew up learning to mind our own business and not to bother anyone that doesn't bother us. Because ten people made comments on one subject and one subject alone means that this is the one subject that we have personal information about, that effects our lives and that we care about.

Our production company put together the financing for Eric to be able to spend months interviewing people, visiting prisons, reading court papers and records and traveling thousands of miles to research his screenplay, even though, as the many newspaper articles about his jury service will confirm, he probably already knew more about the subject than almost anyone. You know why? Because some people write what they actually know about. Some of your "editors" might want to consider taking a page from Eric (oh yeah, I forgot, you deleted that page because you were experts on Eric Zaccar and his work).

And of course I was kidding when I said I wanted my own article. I haven't done much yet to merit one. After this film, hopefully you'll come and solicit us. And yes, that's (kind of) a joke too. robroams
 * I understand that you have a vested interest in this person's career. Unfortunately, we had to debate whether he met the notability criteria. This often brings up judgments such as "minor" or "not significant." Our deletion discussion pages are tagged "noindex" to keep them from being indexed by search engines. I wish you luck with your project. Hopefully someday he will be notable enough to have an article. Evil saltine (talk) 05:50, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Robroams
Hello again, … I've given up repeating myself, so would you please explain to  why just typing their name is not in the spirit of WP:SIG? I really believe that they cannot find the "~" key on their keyboard, as demonstrated by this post … Happy Editing! &mdash;  23:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would, but I don't know if it's really worth arguing over. Evil saltine (talk) 00:03, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ … looks like he finally figured it out! :-) &mdash; 138.88.125.101 (talk) 04:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

If I understood these things, I would do them. NOBODY in my camp is deliberately trying to break your rules. We're trying our best to conform, and have been all along, but everything we do seems to agitate you more. My username is associated with my writings. What difference does it make how I phrase it?

(Robroams)
 * I'm sorry for being insensitive. The main reason is that the " ~ " signature includes a link to both your user and talk pages, and a timestamp of when the comment was made. This makes it easier to keep track of discussions. Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 05:58, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

For the record, nobody ever tried to deny that any of the user names that you called sock or meat puppets, were in fact asked by people on our team to come here and defend Eric. However, they're all legitimate people who know his work and were happy to do it.

If we really wanted to put the word out, we could have had a hundred defenders, but then, they all would have been people that just signed up for this purpose, and they all would have been accused of being puppets.

If you check at least one of Eric's Youtube videos, it's gotten over twenty six thousand UNSOLICITED hits. He does have a support base, however small and insignificant you might think it is. And he does have the distinction of being a writer who really gets involved in what he's doing, whether it's taking a job at the housing department to research his play or spending a year interviewing everyone around his jury case, visiting prisons and reading every court record and every article. If he could have interned for Bill Clinton when he was writing his play about Starr and Monica, I have no doubt that he would have (though he might not have provided the expected services). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robroams (talk • contribs) 03:30, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hello and thank you for blocking the vandal that's been having a go at Sid Haig's page under various IPs. It was getting very tiresome reverting and reporting the same thing almost daily and it's good to see an Admin taking this thing seriously (not that the others weren't but it's nice to see some initiative). Thanks again! 76.89.161.88 (talk) 08:16, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. =) Evil saltine (talk) 18:12, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Bless you bless you bless you for protecting the page from the multi-IP vandal! 76.89.161.88 (talk) 08:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh thanks. =) Hopefully they won't be back after the protection expires. Evil saltine (talk) 21:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Oops!
You're right; I was a bit distracted while I did the block. Thanks for letting me know! I've fixed the problem. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've done similar things before. It seems that account creation was blocked on the account though, but he could have logged out and done it I think. Evil saltine (talk) 02:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Melbourne Library Service
Hi There,

I started an entry for Melbourne Library Service and I didn't realise I had to have an individual name etc. My entry was deleted by you as it was perceived to be unambiguous advertising and promotion but there are other libraries on WP such as Casey Carinia Libraries and Yarra Plenty Regional Library etc. I think people would like to have us on WP if they are looking for us to find information about our library and to get to our catalogue etc. I have applied for a name change which indicates that I as an individual will be editing and I want to re do our entry. I hope that will be ok? I am new to this and learning :o)

Cheers, Tony - Training and Website Librarian Melbourne Library Service

Melbourne Library Service (talk) 04:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The page Article wizard 2.0 will help you in creating the article. The article would have to meet Wikipedia's notability standard (see WP:ORG). Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 14:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Error in username blacklist
Hi! Your edit here added a comma into a flag parameter, which causes the message about names from the Middle East sometimes containing "nazi" no longer to show up in username reports. Would you mind slightly rewording the message so that it no longer contains a comma? Draftydoor (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, thanks for letting me know. Evil saltine (talk) 22:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Requesting change in block settings...
User talk:Ag dog is abusing talk page privileges. Thanks A8  UDI  03:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KGTV logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:KGTV logo.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 08:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

suggestion
Dear sir. Thank you for your constructive criticism of my edi on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I have decided not to incorporate your suggestions into my future edits as I don't really care. May Allah bestow great blessings upon your house —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.58.26 (talk) 21:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

My CSD tag on Actress de sorority
I tagged the article G1, nonsense. But then I read the CSD notice, where it says that G1 does not apply for non-English articles. Which CSD criterion ought I have used? (Given that, under WP:SNOWBALL I would have tagged the article for deletion anyway.) --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgot to add, you deleted the article before I could fix the CSD tag -- so I'm asking so I tag articles better next time. Keep up the good admin work! --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Could you reset Harold Greenwald ?
Not all of this article was under copyright infrigment, but you deleted ALL. So would you be kind enough to replace it as it was? I would then rearrange that properly, and faster. On another way I would give up. By the way you could reset also the girl of the night. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Archange50 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

User talk:71.80.121.0
I agree that the user has the right to remove warnings from their own talk page. But the welcome message and the warnings which you removed had been left on the page by the IP in the last edit he/she had made to their own talk page. The only items which had been added to the IP's last edit was the ISP tag, and a talkback message. Should your edit be reverted to restore the version made by the IP, or just leave it for the IP to deal with at this point? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a good point. I changed it to the IP's version with the ISP and talkback templates added. Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 00:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Requesting copy of defamatory message
Hello, Evil saltine. I did not get a chance to read that latest defamatory accusation by Raven in Orbit made against me, but I want to. Would it be okay for me to request a copy of it for record, through email? Flyer22 (talk) 11:03, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have Oversight access, so I can't access the message, and unfortunately I didn't save a copy, sorry =/. I could send you what I remember from it, but it looks like there isn't an e-mail set up for your account (in your preferences). Evil saltine (talk) 17:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I updated my preferences with my email account. I had not before, because my user page is where I display my email address. Thank you for the offer of relaying to me what you remember from the message. You can send it at any time. And not that I don't trust your memory being pretty accurate, but I would still prefer a copy of what he stated word for word. Perhaps I should ask an editor with Oversight? Flyer22 (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, sorry I didn't see the e-mail in your profile before. I'll send you one now. Evil saltine (talk) 22:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I am having trouble figuring how to edit the Name box (where it gives bried about the person)

Pasted belows is what i want to edit on the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karan_Singh_Grover

"Madar chodh sala Born Karan Singh February 23, 1982 (1982-02-23) (age 27) India Other name(s) Karan Singh Dr. Armaan Karan Singh Grover Occupation Model, Actor, Television presenter Years active 2004 - present Spouse(s) Chinal sali (2 December 2008 - present) "

The bold text are abusive words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pickytg (talk • contribs) 06:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion
Seeing Maher Zain on Google News and such, I wondered if you could copy his deleted article to my userspace? I want to see if it's salvageable to write an NPOV article about him or not. Much thanks. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 03:58, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Maher Zain
I just want to know why you deleted the Maher Zain page because I'm going to make an article and I want to avoid any bad or nonprofessional article making. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 10soccerkid10 (talk • contribs) 17:38, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

-10SoccerKid10

Ping!
Hello again, ... it's been a few months since our last conversation, and I just wanted to let you know that I'm still hangin' in here, although I was MIA for about a month, and now my IP seems to change every other day. 

Anywho, these changing IPs are Great Way to automagically archive old threads. :-)

Happy Editing! &mdash;  22:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

"Ref arena name"
It's being changed due to vandalism by the rival school's students and fans. There's no real point in referencing something so obvious.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 20:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * A reference can't hurt though, and it may not be all that obvious. Evil saltine (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * And Verifiability says that all material challenged must be sourced. There's no reason not to have a citation. Ideally, everything would be cited. Evil saltine (talk) 20:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Frying pan
Blocking him was fine with me: he's been screwing with the edit filter and knows he's not supposed to.  Acroterion  (talk)  20:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I know, but it was my fault not to expect a 4th level warning (I probably would have added a warning in your place). Evil saltine (talk) 20:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * And now he's gotten a 31 hour time out; can't take a hint.  Acroterion  (talk)  20:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Tfoxworth's reincarnations
Thank you for recently intervening in the near-daily ritual of reverting the vandalisms of the ever-changing sockpuppets of permanently banned User:Tfoxworth. His persistence over several years is flagrant and worse -- an invitation to others to mimic his evasions. But I believe he can be stopped with your continued help, as suggested here. FactStraight (talk) 03:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, no problem. He's pretty easy to detect now. Evil saltine (talk) 09:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm posting the following plea on the talk pages of some admins & editors, so please help: Please see diff. The only fix I can see is to block (even briefly, but swiftly) IPs as soon as he begins to use them, and the only way that can happen is if admins put the articles he edits (among others, Line of succession to the Russian throne, Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia, Maximilian von Götzen-Itúrbide and Nugzar Bagration-Gruzinsky) on their watchlists. I realize this isn't how admins prefer to manage these vandals, but is there any other way? Waiting until each new act of vandalism is reported by other editors gives him what he wants: 1. evidence that he is succeeding at diverting Wiki editors from doing the productive article work they come here to do 2. time during which his vandalisms appear to the public as Wikipedia's legitimate voice 3. proof that he is sufficiently persistent to compel Wikipedia to allow his vandalism to stand, while that of others is reverted. FactStraight (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, if there's going to be too much collateral damage, we'll just have to watch out for him. I'll watch the pages he hits. Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 06:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Calvin Christian School (Escondido, California)
This is in response to your message:

Your addition to Calvin Christian School (Escondido, California) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Evil saltine (talk) 03:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what material that I posted was copyrighted. Could you please let me know. I am new to Wikipedia so if there is a better way to discuss/resolve this please let me know.

Steensme (talk) 05:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)steensme

Tfoxworth rampage
Could use some help with this. To see which articles he's vandalizing, see edit histories of e.g., Monarchism in Georgia, Maximilian von Götzen-Itúrbide, Treaty of Georgievsk, Capetian dynasty, Tamara Czartoryska -- or anything else I've edited lately. He can only be tracked by watching these articles, since he changes his account and/or IP once you start to revert him. Thanks. FactStraight (talk) 07:55, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

from Mike Humphries
Hi, I've removed the discography from the page. What else do I need to do to fix the page?

Cheers

-infusion2k7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infusion2k7 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback
Thank you very much for the message, it was constructive and will help me to be a better editor. Ileana37 (talk) 08:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

John Albert Gardner and the section on Chelea King
Just to give you a heads up, that I took out the word "alleged" from the section heading. Nothing against your argument on BLP. I agrre with you on that. Its just that its not alleged that she was murdered, only that he did it. Saying "Alleged Murder" seems to imply that she may still be alive, which is not the case. If you have another way to name the heading, lets do it. Thanks.--Jojhutton (talk) 04:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It's known that she was murdered, but it is alleged that he murdered her. Having a section titled "Murder of ..." on a person's page implies that that person was involved in the murder. Evil saltine (talk) 04:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with you on every point. Yet could there be another way to phrase the section? Just a thought.--Jojhutton (talk) 16:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that removing the section header and moving that section up would be okay, since the article is not long. Evil saltine (talk) 21:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats a possible solution. Yet the article is still a starter class, so its most likely to grow as more information is released. Unfortunatly, the DA is keeping everything under wraps for now, but the trial should reveal quite a bit about what happened.--Jojhutton (talk) 03:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of the icarus williams page
please see below the conversation between me and the previous deleter of the page:

This page has been deleted several times now because it supposedly doesn't make its purpose clear but one read of the page makes it very clear. Why is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 04:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

The article was deleted because its subject is not notable (see Wikipedia:Notability (people)). Evil saltine (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I have read the notability section and i honestly feel that this article fits the critera. How do i go about contesting this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 07:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

You could take it to deletion review. Evil saltine (talk) 09:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I attempted a deletion review and was ignored.

I am reposting the article with appropriate referencing and assure you that it does meet with notoriety guidelines.

Read the article, i have even e-mailed the artist in question to get his approval. There is no reason to re-delete this piece. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 06:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs)

I need a bit of help, please
Hello there! I really need some help/advice (whichever you see most fitting to this situation); there is an individual continually updating a certain page with dubious information (and he happens to be the person who the page is about) as well as that of the page describing a sibling, and he recently has also started editing comments that I've left on discussion pages about the articles...editing my own discussion words rather than posting his own rebuttals, and then NOT signing! Could you please advise regarding what I should do? Feel free to email me if you prefer. Ileana37 (talk) 08:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

the deletion of the icarus williams page
This page has been deleted several times now because it supposedly doesn't make its purpose clear but one read of the page makes it very clear. Why is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 04:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The article was deleted because its subject is not notable (see Notability (people)). Evil saltine (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I have read the notability section and i honestly feel that this article fits the critera. How do i go about contesting this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 07:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You could take it to deletion review. Evil saltine (talk) 09:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I attempted a deletion review and was ignored.

I am reposting the article with appropriate referencing and assure you that it does meet with notoriety guidelines.

Read the article, i have even e-mailed the artist in question to get his approval. There is no reason to re-delete this piece. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 06:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You need to follow the procedure at Deletion review to have your request looked at. Evil saltine (talk) 06:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Corporation for Public Broadcasting logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Corporation for Public Broadcasting logo.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 04:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ewshoes-skater.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Ewshoes-skater.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Windows 95 welcome.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Windows 95 welcome.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:19, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Disruptive Edit by Claudinian
Hi Evil santine

It seems that is continuously making disruptive edits after constant warnings and having been blocked from making edits in the Claudine Barretto article. Can I ask help on this one please, if we could block user from editing the article. I am continually monitoring the article to check that it adheres to NPOV standards, and I am continually reverting edits from the user on a daily basis for disruptive edits, vandalism and loosely based, uncited FAN info added. Wiki pseud (talk) 06:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Tungsten Ewaphospackate
please block his e-mail access. He's a sock of SGF and is spamming my e-mail.-- White Shadows you're breaking up 20:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Spider's Web: A Pig's Tale
Can we find more sources on this page please? Help wanted. Thanks. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 21:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I can't find any at the moment. I'll keep looking though. Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 21:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Your welcome. I also want to add it to the page Charlotte's Web (1973 film), but it's locked. Help? LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure it would fit on that page; it might fit in a list of cultural references if there was one, but I'm not sure about that. Feel free to suggest it on the talk page of that article though. Evil saltine (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. LighteningHeroZero80 (talk) 22:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion criterion for Googlegooglegooglegoogle
Hello Evil saltine. I just wanted to let you know that Googlegooglegooglegoogle exists (and therefore wasn't vandalism), although I do believe it was right to delete it. Regards, Airplaneman   ✈  00:48, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, you're right. I should have checked first. It still would have been deleted under A7 though. Evil saltine (talk) 00:52, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Why aren't talk pages IRC server's?
Seriously... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.157.8.52 (talk) 02:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

One of Us (film)
Re; also see here. Ryan 4314  (talk) 23:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Super Mario 64 beta.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Super Mario 64 beta.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Parabola with focus.png
Thanks for uploading File:Parabola with focus.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 07:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Makes me smile every time.
You just beat me to a revert. Your user name makes me smile every time I see it. Thanks for doing the sysop and vandalfighting things... and the fun name. Best. - Sinneed  22:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks =D Evil saltine (talk) 22:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Link on The Bible's Buried Secrets
It is blatantly obvious that it is a promotional link added by a person or persons with a conflict of interest. This is why I left a welcome message with information about spam links. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 18:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, but just because it's a COI doesn't automatically mean it's not appropriate for the article. Evil saltine (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It was readded by another editor in the mean time. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 18:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

SD article recreated
You recently deleted Ecycle computer recycling. This has now been recreated by the same editor as Ecycle Computer recycling. --Biker Biker (talk) 10:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Evil saltine (talk) 10:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Rationale for Deletion
Hi Saltine, I posted an article about a company that I work for. And we were promptly deleted within minutes of the posting. I would like to get some advice on this, because I feel that your delete action is knee-jerk and unfair. Here's why.

There are plenty of wikipedia articles that give overviews of different businesses. Sure, they tend to be established businesses and we're a young start up. It's hard for me to avoid getting the feeling that the implication here is that these companies deserve to be written about, and ours doesn't because we're too small. That doesn't seem like a solid rationale to me and not in keeping with Wikipedia.

I completely understand why you have to exert quality control for wikipedia entries, but I don't believe that a company writing about itself necessarily amounts to obtrusive advertising.

What if someone hears about us and wants to know more about us? Isn't that the point of Wikipedia ?

I understand the need to have a variety of sources, but don't you think I should be a valid informational source as I know alot about the company that I work for ? I used no "peacock language" in the article, and there was no sales-pitch terminology.

According to Wikipedia, the articles should be allowed to evolve and become more substantiated by different sources. Ours basically got ripped away from us before we had a chance to do any of that. I'd like to reinstate the article under whatever guidance you can give.

Thank You,

Dan Cauthorn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancauthorn (talk • contribs) 22:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

dude
dude. no. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.68.178.162 (talk) 06:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Some Velvet Morning (Band)
Hi,

Please can you clarify what constitutes a signficance to a band. I am a reviewer and my article on Some Velvet Morning has been rejected. In my view, a band produced by Coldplay's producer and featured in the movie, 'Kickass' should be relevant. I am happy send examples of other wikipedia pages with less commendable content. If the sources need improving I am happy to do so.

Best

Rebecca —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebeccarobinson78 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Odourspace is back
You just blocked. He is back spamming the same article as. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for letting me know. Evil saltine (talk) 07:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Death of Lester Coleman?
Seems like you were just talking to his ghost. See User talk:Wikieditor4508 and Talk:Lester Coleman. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:54, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, do you have any confirmation or any additional details regarding this death? Off2riorob (talk) 19:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, unfortunately I can't find anything. Evil saltine (talk) 21:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Block unblock...? I have to say this is so mysterious... Has a checkuser been done on that wikieditor account? Off2riorob (talk) 12:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I was blocking because I thought the user was a sock of User:Timpanycecelia, but then I read this edit that claimed that that user was someone else. I really don't know what's going on now, and I'd rather unblock someone who shouldn't be here than block someone who doesn't deserve it. I e-mailed OTRS about it (since they handed out the block on User:Timpanycecelia they probably have more information). Hopefully it will all be fixed soon. Evil saltine (talk) 12:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

The person that added the death claims is imo a sock of a blocked user but I have no idea which one, anyway there is no hurry. I have serious doubts as to the factuality of the death claims and am looking to clear that up, anyways thanks for commenting. Off2riorob (talk) 14:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I agree with you about the potential for that user being a sock. About the death claim, I have posted on the BLP noticeboard: Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/ Evil saltine (talk) 14:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Good Work
Good work for blocking OdourSpace. How do you become a wikipedia police though? Canterbury21 (talk) 07:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The guide to administrator selection is here: Administrators. Evil saltine (talk) 00:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
I think your clarification will help stop the never ending removal of content from that section -- and if not, maybe you're note will :-)  jheiv  talk  contribs 04:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I hope so. Evil saltine (talk) 05:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Weird
Materialscientist (talk) 22:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And very disappointing that the blocking admin didn't (a) warn first, or (b) provide unblock details. Someone should block the blocking admin... oh, wait...! TFOWR 16:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Life is weird sometimes =p. Evil saltine (talk) 18:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Kappa Sigma
I believe that pp-semi would be good enough for the recent changes. As far as I can tell, all of the changes in the last month to remove the information about the founding were by ip users...Naraht (talk) 02:24, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. It is semi-protected right now. Evil saltine (talk) 02:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think another period of semi-protection might help with the recurring reverts we've been needing to do. jheiv  talk  contribs 22:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I've semi-protected it again. Evil saltine (talk) 23:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Four boxes of democracy
See the latest version, much better I think. I am vaguely considering moving the page again, this time to Four boxes of liberty, which seems a more appropriate title, before adding more inbound links and nominating for DYK. A tagline that links Frederick Douglass and the right-wing gun lobby appeals to my primitive sense of humor. Not important though, and I don't want to cause total confusion. What do you advise? Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 19:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice work. It definitely looks a lot better now. There's still no reliable sources that say that Ed Howdershelt said or coined the phrase, though. Evil saltine (talk) 04:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I found a lot of blog sites that quote Howdershelt as the source - but agreed, no reliable ones. He probably heard the phrase somewhere and did indeed say it, as did quite a few other people. You were absolutely right to trim the article and nominate for AfD. It looked hopeless. I started the rescue for fun, as a challenge, and after a while began to wonder if it was possible at all. Somehow it intrigued me, showed a new way to search, sources started to show up, and I am sort of pleased with the end result. It generated an amusing debate here, closed now I think but maybe useful in a small way. Four boxes was a fun one. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Thanks! Evil saltine (talk) 07:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

A Muslim Woman in Tito's Yugoslavia.
I am currently reading, A Muslim Woman in Tito's Yugoslavia. I was wondering why you decided to delete the article on it?

Just an innocent question...not complaining haha.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.185.101.57 (talk) 21:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't remember deleting an article by that name and I can't find either the deleted article or any mention in the logs. The deletion reason should be listed on the article page; with a link to that page I could tell you why it was deleted. Evil saltine (talk) 23:44, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Completely new abortion proposal and mediation
In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid accusations that this posting violates WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  02:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)