User talk:Salvidrim!/Q2 2013 Archive

Apology
Hello again, Salvidrim. I know you are busy, but I would like to owe you and everyone else a very sincere and heartfelt apology for my apparent inability to disengage and also for pushing it too aggressively and I am willing to end all interaction with Niemti if possible. I got swept up into the controversy back in August against my better judgment and I had to disengage due to his attitude. I would also like to owe you an apology for my unintentional and apparent Wikihounding of this user and also for my apparent inability to disengage (the disengage was actually due to his behavior and was the result of an ANI discussion back in early August where I was involved in a dispute between him). Now I have permanently disengaged from the AN discussion unless I am directly being addressed per Sergecross73 because I don't want the focus to be shifted on to me and I understand what the harassment policy is. I am positively sure that I did not mean to make Niemti feel harassed in any way and since some users have expressed concerns about shifting the focus of the situation to me, I also think it would be a good idea if I don't participate in the AN discussion unless directly addressed. I have also decided that I will not discuss the Wikihounding issues anymore. As what Kurtis pointed out to me, being entrenched in one of Wikipedia's civility disputes as an involved party is a devastating thing, even for me as I unintentionally fell into that trap. Hopefully, everything will be okay. By the way, do you think we can work on Sonic Shuffle or on Luigi's Mansion if you have the chance? Also, in case you aren't aware, I have posted an announcement on my talk page as well as WT:VG about what I should be doing at the present. Also, I always appreciate your contributions so I would like to thank you for the hard work that you have done on Wikipedia. Happy Easter, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Forget it, why did I even have to bother? I should be doing some other work on Wikipedia like working on Super Mario RPG or Super Mario Bros. for that matter. Happy Easter, anyway. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

In regards to the edit on Non-admin closure
Hello Salvidrim,

In response to the edit on Non-admin closure, I started a related discussion on Template talk:Supplement that can hopefully form a consensus about a character limit for the "shortcut=" field in Template:Supplement. You input would be very appreciated. I also went ahead and left the article with your revert. Cheers! Steel1943 (talk) 06:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, and I have opened a discussion about this specific case at Wikipedia talk:Non-admin closure. Your idea is just more ambitious than mine. I'll reply there. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  06:17, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, I understand. By the way, I'm going to tag the discussion on the template talk with an WP:RFC template. Hopefully, some sort of consensus can be made about this, given this template's use on several Wikipedia-space articles. P.S., I like that word "ambitious" ... kind of describes my dispute resolution style! :) Steel1943  (talk) 06:40, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Got a Sockpuppet on the loose here...
Hi. We have a very serious problem here:, whom I suspect to be a Sockpuppet of the banned user , is on the loose. Same interests (i.e. Earl Cain, Professor Layton), same addition of speculation, same geographical location (Pennsylvania), same attitude. Isn't it time to give this IP a long block? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what's going on, but I'd like to point this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Danganronpa&diff=548870447&oldid=548573565

Whoever this user is and whatever problem she seems to have with me, she vandalized a whole freaking page undoing my edits. Someone has been vandalizing that page for a while, and I took the time to fix it up. She undid that for no reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.178.220 (talk) 02:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC) Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:08, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * First of all, I am a male and calling my edits vandalism is clearly bad faith. If you want to report me, take it up to ANI and post your differences there. But beware the WP:BOOMERANG! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I fixed vandalism. You continuously re-add it. I consider that vandalism, as well as you striking out my post and falsely claiming it's harassment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.178.220 (talk) 03:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Sigh... You are clearly the community banned user Fragments of Jade, as noted by your editing style and attitude, as well as your geographical location (Pennsylvania). Personal attacks and harassment will not be tolerated. I have already filed a case here. You can't call good faith edits vandalism. I suggest you read WP:VANDAL. Also, if you continue to be disruptive, you will be blocked. Salvidrim, don't listen to the IP. This has got to stop. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:21, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * As interesting as this all is, I have too little time to do much, and thus suggest you take this discussion elsewhere to ensure any issues will be resolved promptly, :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a banned anybody! I've hardly made any edits, and you've gone to war! I reported her edit warring on the Dangan Ronpa page, and she deleted it. That has to be against the rules, right? Please, get this person to leave me alone. And to stop messing with that article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.178.220 (talk) 03:27, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, you are banned, Fragments of Jade. With all due respect, please take this discussion somewhere else. You reported my supposed edit warring, which was not intended and banned users are exempt from 3RR, to the wrong place, the WP:DRN. If you have concerns about my behavior, take it up to WP:AN or WP:ANI. But beware of the WP:BOOMERANG, once again. Badmouthing regular established editors is not going to do any good. If you file a report on me, they will just laugh at you. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I tried being kind of subtle, but I guess I should be clearer -- this doesn't involve me and using my talk page to discuss it is evidently a bad idea. Find a better venue. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not banned! Why would I be banned? And I don't understand these WP things you are throwing at me. What I do know, is that you are acting really awful. I fixed vandalism-obvious vandalism-on an article. Not only did you undo my fixes, but you didn't even take the time to fix the article yourself. Whatever problems you have with me, leave the article out of it. Why would anyone purposefully damage an article's quality over some petty feud?

And sorry, Salivdrum. I made a report elsewhere. Hopefully, they will stop posting about it here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.178.220 (talk) 03:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Salivdrum? That's a new one. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:37, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. Read your name wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.178.220 (talk) 03:39, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

And so, the IP has been blocked as a banned user. I think we're about done here. Far too much time was wasted on this matter. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:11, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

i need help
im trying to make an biography how can i do that.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merk City The Mayor (talk • contribs) 00:29, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Share the cookies

 * Hell no. I'll eat them all! *nomnomnom* :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  01:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Bureaucratship
 Xx12345678907896xx would like to nominate you to become a bureaucrat. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then [ contact Example] to accept or decline the nomination. A page created for your nomination at Requests for bureaucratship/ . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. I thought you would like this. Xx12345678907896xx 18:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Think again, buddy! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  18:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

ANI discussion
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
 * I find it hard to consider myself involved much, but hey, thanks for your diligence. :) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  18:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No hard feelings. As they say, "That's all folks!" By the way, I don't know if you are you aware of this discussion. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the removal, Salvidrim. I keep my talk page 99% comprehensive too, but this type of thing is the 1% I typically remove outright. Sergecross73  msg me   18:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * shrugs* No worries. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  19:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks ... but
Page ended up in the wrong spot: Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Administrator instructions instead of Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Administrator instructions. (The move interface does that to me, too). NE Ent 16:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha... *facepalm*; I toned down from FMPP to SMPP; you should be able to do what needs to be done. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

ANI discussion
Hi. I don't know if you are aware of this matter, but there is an ANI discussion concerning the recent blocking and unblocking of Fladrif. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:15, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I am aware, but feel absolutely no need to become involved in any capacity. WikiDrama's hardly my preferred choice of a weekend activity. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  20:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep, and I think it's best to avoid getting involved in contentious confrontations on Wikipedia and real life. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:54, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, in spite of the controversies and disagreements we've been through, I consider you a highly respected video game editor and administrator. I apologize if I was uncivil in any way or caused any issues with other users in any way. I did not really mean for some things to happen. Other than that, keep up the good work as usual. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Farewell
I am sending this message to the users who I have closely collaborated with. I will be taking a temporary Wikibreak for at least 5-7 days to let off some steam and get myself reenergized. Some of the stress has got to me, so I think it's best if I should take a couple of days off. I also have final exams coming up as well, so I have more important things to worry about. I, however, will be here to contribute to some articles that I have worked on. Until then, farewell. With my very best and warmest regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Lantlôs Page Deletion
I'm clearly no pro at Wikipedia editing but I'm confused why the band Lantlôs and all their recordings have been removed. Is it a question of credible sources? Wondering if you could shed light on what may have been done wrong or what I might need to do to go about creating them again. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theslateman (talk • contribs) 19:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * They had been proposed for deletion and the proposition hadn't been contested within the normal delay of 7 days, thus the deletion was considered to be uncontroversial. If you believe any of the pages should be restored because they meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, you are free to request their undeletion. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  20:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Didn't quite follow the relevance of a diff you linked on your user page.
".- I really don't understand persistent vandals. I am not in favor of allowing IPs to edit but I understand."

I was glancing through your page and the above entry caught caught my attention. Seems to me the linked diff grumbled about "the current consensus" without really addressing/describing it.

I'm actually curious for detail on this as I've been making a general effort to better understand our WP:Culture.

Seems like 'registering (a username) to edit' presents a small inconvenience to well meaning kindly motivated contributors which would be justified by the amount of passive 'drive by' vandalism  it would filter out. Would raise the bar just a bit beyond the reach of many fleeting impulsive whims. Perhaps an exception could be made to article talk pages so as to still have a venue for casual readers to easily bring things to the attention of others.

It occurs to me that I may be misinterpreting your post as I'm unclear as to whether "...allowing IPs to edit..." refers to registered/unregistered IP's or both. I'm actually somewhat new to Wikipedia 'under-the-hood'.

Hmm, and come to think of it, you referred to "persistent vandals".

I've less of a clue than when I started typing!

Curiosity remains,

--Kevjonesin (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Aye, that bit of rambling is a tad incoherent. IPs is used as a short form for "unregistered contributors", which to say editors without an account and whose contributions are attributed to an IP address. As for the diff, the specific bit I was trying to refer to was about "WMF having lolno'd Sign In To Edit", but even that is hardly evident. Other than that, the point you make about registering to edit is quite exactly my opinion. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  21:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Updated my userpage some. The bit about "persistent vandals" used to be a wikilink to page I wanted to keep handy but the wikilink has since been moved elsewhere on my userpage so it's not really needed. The diff was superfluous. Thanks for prodding me to do it! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  21:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. --Kevjonesin (talk) 21:29, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

p.s. Also curious about your "Quick UserNav" gadget.
p.s. Is your "Quick UserNav" template something established which you modified or was it built from scratch? I like it and wanted to check if there was a generic version before attempting to reverse engineer a copy of yours. --Kevjonesin (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I just took a Navbox template, put it in my userspace and filled it with what I needed it for. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  21:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Right on. Exactly what I was after. Tanx. --Kevjonesin (talk) 21:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. If you need anything else just let me know. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  21:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Super Shot Soccer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Czech (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * So I get a DPL bot message for an edit I made with DabSolver... pft! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * And both edits were totally useless. :) --89.214.42.1 (talk) 12:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * And [this one], Spain Davis Cup team? funny stuff. --89.214.42.1 (talk) 12:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Your comment on Headbombs talk page
Greetings, I just noticed you left a comment on Headbombs talk page about Noomosbot. It looks like Headbomb hasn't edited since September 2012. I am of course not trying to speak for him but it would appear that he might not have time to do the bot right now. I just wanted to let you know in case you wanted to ask someone else. Kumioko (talk) 19:30, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh jeez! I actually meant to ask User:Hellknowz! Thanks for pointing it out. :) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  19:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. Good luck. Kumioko (talk) 19:42, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

 * Thanks! Don't forget to follow-up with fixing the templates on the archive pages. :) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  15:30, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The template on the main talk page fixed itself with respect to the archive links. It is a template that provides links to as many archives as there are.  So your fix was sufficient.    Robert McClenon (talk) 00:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I meant on the individual archive pages, the header templates. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  01:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Blocked without warning
Hello, I usually go User:DoctorHver it seems I was blocked admin User:Kww without warning. So wonder if you could help me. There there no warnings on my talk page, that i'm going to get blocked. That has never happend before, Users far as I know get warnings, before hand. Maybe that person is just new to being admin so he might not know what to do on user's talkpages. If you don't belive me I will leave this message on my talk page as well and mention your name there Salvidrim. 31.209.147.93 (talk) 16:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * User:DoctorHver is not blocked. I'm not sure that the issue may be? I'm notifying Kww so we can clarify the situation, but rest assured I see nothing wrong at all here. Can you explain what error message you get when trying to edit, if any? :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps he is referring to my block of ? That would appear to be the closest behavioural match. Remember what warnings about beans can do, Salvidrim: I'm genuinely interested in the IPs response.&mdash;Kww(talk) 17:10, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I must admit that the initial message caused me no small amount of surprise; why me? I don't recall ever interacting with you. I'm eagerly awaiting some further clarifications, 31.209.x! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  17:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The reason why I conntacted you Salvidrim, is the fact that Kww has his talk page blocked from unregistered users, so there was no why I could contact him on my own, first after finding out that blocked user can only use there talk page not the talk page of the blocking admin, and as there was no warning on my talk page I decided to log of my user account and see, if I could do edits without the account, when I could do that I decided to check Kww, account again but for no avil as he seems to block unregistered user from his talk page so, i decided to contact the first admin that doesn't block his user talk page from unregistered user. So you was the first one I found so it was random you got the message not someone else, Salvidrim.
 * As for Kww is sift response on here, I can confirm that have never heard about that user Conwell Nufc nor its puppet master Football Boys. If Kww don't belive me then he is free to start sock puppet investigation. But that puppet  seems to come from UK, while I live in Iceland. So I would have assumed that its block error or glitz in the system which I had assumed where impossible to happen. Unless higher ups at Wikipedia are chaining around how blocks behaves regerding registered vs none-registered users, which is a wild guess. this is the actuall block message I got when I clicked on the edit button through my DoctorHver account "Editing from 2001:4C28:194:520:0:0:0:0/64 has been blocked (disabled) by Kww " and the experiation date "This block has been set to expire: 23:07, 23 May 2013."  But if more user not only me are getting block message maybe the main admin board might want look into this. 31.209.147.93 (talk) 16:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarifications; it appears your account was caught in a rangeblock Kww enacted. I will wait for him to clarify if it is intended or coincidental before doing anything else. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  17:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The block will be remaining in place, and is likely to get expanded in the near future. That IP belongs to Opera Software. The Opera browser is, under some circumstances, redirecting Opera users through IPs that are internal to Opera corporate headquarters and is acting as an anonymous proxy. Vandals have taken advantage of this. I have requested checkuser assistance in determining how much larger I need to make the block to be 100% effective, as we still have some such edits leaking through. In the meantime, using any browser other than Opera should allow you to edit. My talk page is not protected, and never has been. Any details you can share about your configuration so that we can understand how and why Opera does this would be helpful. Any such information you can leave on my talk page would be helpful.&mdash;Kww(talk) 18:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The Springs, Islamabad
Hi, I got your message. I originally reverted the removal of the PROD tag because no reason was given for its removal. Consequently, the second removal of the tag wasn't valid. Hope that clarifires the position. Denisarona (talk) 05:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Per our current policy on contesting PRODs, a simple removal of the PROD tag is a perfectly valid objection and it thus kills the PROD. It is encouraged, although not required, to provide a rationale, but not doing so does not invalidate the fact that the PROD is now contested, and that deletion cannot be considered uncontroversial. The policy also rather clearly indicates that if anyone removes a PROD tag, it is not to be replaced. Hope that does clear things up for you. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  06:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

MfD
Looks as if User:Jay Myers (Hurricane Jay) may have understood because he hasn't  edited since 14 May. Will you  remember to delete the pages in  one month  if he doesn't  respond? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I hope you realize how tempting it is to forget! I also reached out to him off-wiki. I will remember this summer, no promises on the exact date (although to be frank I don't think the exact date matters much). :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  04:01, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Good close. You deserve credit for a close which read the sentiment of the discussion perfectly. Thanks. If autumn drags on, I'll try to remember to remind you... Begoon &thinsp; talk  08:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Admin tag
Hi. Regarding placing an admin tag on the admin noticeboard: redundancy is redundant. It serves no purpose since it's already a place admins look. Killiondude (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * *shrugs* I understand, but I meant to draw attention of a patrolling admin if need be. I hadn't seen NE Ent's post on VPT. It's no big deal either way. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Renaming to "Salvidrim!"
Doing this so it's easier to track stuff.

Meta ✅

 * http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Changing_username#Salvidrim_.E2.86.92_Salvidrim.21
 * Done as requested. Best, MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Commons ✅

 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Changing_username/Current_requests#Salvidrim_.E2.86.92_Salvidrim.21
 * Posted on commons:Commons:BN, although I understand they're understaffed.

Nouvelle identité
Voilà ! C'est fait. Ton pseudonyme est désormais Salvidrim!. Ton mot de passe reste inchangé. Si tu as personnalisé ta signature, n'oublie pas de la mettre à jour dans tes préférences. Normalement, toutes tes pages et sous-pages auront été renommées. Attention : si tu avais procédé au Single User Login (compte global), tu devras recommencer l'opération pour ton nouveau compte. Afin de ne pas recréer ton ancien compte, pense à te connecter sous ta nouvelle identité ! − ©éréales Kille® [Speak to me]* en ce vendredi 24 mai 2013 à 20:51 (CEST)
 * Merci! J'attends que mes autres local renames soient faits avant d'aller au SUL. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  20:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata ✅

 * http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard#Rename_Salvidrim_.E2.86.92_Salvidrim.21
 * ✅ Vogone (talk) 17:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Simple.En.Wiki ✅

 * http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username#Salvidrim_.E2.86.92_Salvidrim.21

En.Wiki ✅
Waiting for other local renames, see User talk:MBisanz

Global/SUL ✅
Waiting for all local renames
 * Have you thought about Wikidata? --Rschen7754 02:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have two edits, so I guess I just cannot be arsed to request a local rename there. Not a project I intend to do anything with in the future anyhow. But if you tell me you're a crat there, then by all means, do it! :p :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  02:50, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Legoktm is. --Rschen7754 03:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I guess if anything, it can't hurt. :) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * *shrugs* I guess if I'm gonna do it I might as well do it for all local projects where I have any significant edit, before it's too late. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not that difficult if you know the right people :) User:Vituzzu is a crat on itwiki (though you may have to nudge him on Meta), and User:Jasper Deng is a crat on test. User:Quentinv57 is a crat on frwiktionary (ditto with the Meta poke). Unfortunately I don't know about ruwiki. --Rschen7754 03:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The it.wiki and ru.wiki edits I consider to be insignificant; test.wiki even more so. Plus anyways, I'm not super familiar with the inner workings of SUL, but I will re-register Salvidrim as a doppelgänger anyways, so the accounts not locally renamed will just stay with that SUL instead of the new one, "Salvidrim!"... I think. :) ·  Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:51, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Doppelgänger & cleanup
Just need to do this now, redirect RfA, and post a link to my old SUL on my userspage for the sake of transparence.

Target page name
It appears you created this page as a mistake, so I'm listing it for speedy deletion as a test. Regards, HueSatLum 01:59, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * HAH! What a goof. I deleted it. Thanks for your vigilance! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  02:02, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Deleted page, but you Failed to leave comments on why
Hi,

You deleted my professor's page without any comments on why. Please provide me with a reason, so I can fix the issue. You shouldn't just destroy my work without providing a reasoning for it.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donna Cheung (talk • contribs) 01:18, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you help me identify what page you're talking about? :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  01:43, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * If you are talking about Andrei Kirilenko (economist), it was deleted by User:B because copying the text from http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=54152 constitutes a copyright violation. RHaworth deleted Andrei Kirilenko (Economist) and I deleted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Andrei Kirilenko (Economist) for simple reasons of maintenance, as they were redirecting to a deleted page. I hope that clears things up for you! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  01:46, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I would also certainly recommend you ensure to fully read our policy on conflicts of interest, which will help you understand why you are strongly discouraged from editing about your employer (as I understand it, you are part of Mr. Kirilenko's support staff). :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  02:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Salvidrim,

The bio from http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_spseqno=54152 was actually written by Andrei Kirilenko himself...Can we still not use it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donna Cheung (talk • contribs) 16:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * At the very least, no, its not useable on the grounds of a major conflict of interest. Sergecross73   msg me   16:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Administrators allowing Eric Corbett to harass other users
Why is user Eric Corbett allowed to call other users idiots and the like with hardly any negative reactions from administrators? Rather you seem to be cozy up to him and thus legitimizing his harassment. I am considering starting an RfC or proposing a community ban of the user. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 09:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This is already a thread on my talk page. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 11:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I admire your bravery; such things have been proposed a number of times before, and never managed to gain much consensus. If you have difficulty dealing with Eric, the best solution for you might be to avoid him? 11:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvidrim! (talk • contribs)
 * To the best of my knowledge I've had no dealings with Iselilja, so I suspect there's more to this than meets the eye. And let me just add that this accusation of harassment is far more uncivil than anything I've written, so why hasn't Iselilja been warned or sanctioned? Eric   Corbett  12:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit Warring
Why are you blocking me, and not the other guy? Favoritism. There is no Wikipedia, when people take sides and don't allow editing to something they startedBrian82027 (talk) 19:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I did not block you. Both of you may or may not have also deserved warnings for edit warring; you cannot war alone, and if you're stating that the other editor was edit warring with you, you are also admitting you were edit warring with him; considering you were blocked for edit warring not three months ago, I would strongly recommend you continue discussing whatever issues you may have with the content of the article. I just want to make sure the discussion remains civil and doesn't devolve into personal attacks like the one you posted. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  19:31, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've only reverted once, and then brought discussion to talk pages and relevant WikiProjects, FYI. Sergecross73   msg me   19:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Salvidrim, I'm holding back on doing anything since I'm INVOLVED, but if you look at his edit history, he's giving me bogus warnings about edit warring on my talk page, and reported me to WP:AIV for edit warring (???). And now he's telling other editors to get a life. If you could assist, it would be greatly appreciated... Sergecross73   msg me   19:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * User has been blocked, sadly, for violating WP:3RR. I just he'd just be able to discuss the issues on the talk page. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  19:59, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yeah, from what I'd gathered, editors were having trouble with him earlier when he wanted to keep the article, but everyone else wanted to merge. I thought it was more of a policy issue, and I supported keeping it myself, so I overlooked it and just worked on saving the article. But even though the article was in fact kept, it looks like much more of an attitude problem. (As you said, he didn't even bother discussing on the talk page, nor did he give an !vote at the AFD. And he kept on warning me against policy that doesn't exist, or didn't work the way he was saying it...) Sergecross73   msg me   20:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Recent deletions on Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Video games
Hi there. I noticed that you just deleted 8 revisions of a conversation on WT:WikiProject Video games regarding a complaint from an editor. I took a quick look at the deleted revisions and wanted to ask if deleting those revisions was necessarily the right thing to do. I agree that the original report was overly verbose and sent to the wrong forum, but I'm not sure I agree that it was "grossly insulting" or demeaning of someone else's personal creation. Also, I thought the replies from the project editors were rather helpful - directing him to WP:ANI and WP:RFC/U, where his complaints would get the proper level of attention. With the revisions hidden, the IP editor may not have the opportunity to see the helpful advice our project was trying to give him.

Just wanted to ask. Thanks. :) &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 16:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, looks like Masem's taking care of it. Nevermind. :)  Also, sorry, I misread the delete comment and thought you'd said "creation", not "condition".  Much more context now - again, sorry for the disturbance. :) &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 16:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I sent e-mails to both Serge and Masem to make sure their comments were re-added as needed; theirs were not the revisions that needed redacting. And to your other question: yes, I absolutely feel that such disgusting personal attacks on a vulnerable user's real-life conditions should be nuked from orbit; especially so when the user saying them has a long history of harassing that particular victim. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yup, just ignore me. :) &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 20:27, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

re WT:VG removal
No worries - I just resummarized what I added for comments. --M ASEM (t) 16:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I feel sick when I see people preying on more vulnerable people. I'm concerned about the effects and RFC/U might have on the editor, although it is obvious that there are issues. I wish we had some sort of team that would specialize in helping, assisting and guiding editors with particular conditions (autism comes to mind first and foremost, but I'm sure we have editors with bipolarity and other conditions that could also benefit from such an effort). :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, I totally missed the really out of line stuff. The IP was just ranting on and on, and I stopped reading well before it started getting bad, I just figured it was outside what WP:VG typically handles, and figured he should take it elsewhere. Good catch. Thanks. Sergecross73   msg me   16:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've had previous contacts with that particular predator before. Alarm bells went off quite quickly in my head. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  16:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Are these IPs Hydao? (or is that an unrelated issue?) Sergecross73   msg me   17:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This is exactly what it is. I wish I wasn't at work and I had time to figure out now how rangeblocks work. I've asked User:JamesBWatson for assistance. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  17:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't you have a better "wish"...? wow, well, wikipedia is definitely a place surrounded by weird people, i'm OFF. I "wish" you a good life with happy blocks and so on, Salvidrim. :) also, you should go visit gvnayr and give him a hug. --88.214.164.177 (talk) 17:29, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think hugs are always a good idea, and I'd be more than happy to give you, or anyone, a big loving bearhug. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  17:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, for someone who prides themselves for being so productive, and seems to have it out for someone he's decided doesn't meet his arbitrary requirements for productivity, he sure wastes a lot of time making stupid comments at a website he's been banned from... Sergecross73   msg me   18:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I have had another look at this, and it was not as impossible as I thought it might be. I have imposed a number of range blocks, all of them covering ranges where there has been little or no editing from anyone other than this person for a while, in some cases none at all for over a year. There is, of course, no guarantee that he won't pop up on another IP address, but the range blocks should be enough to seriously inconvenience him, and it may be enough to make him give up. Even if he doesn't give up immediately, a few more blocks may be enough: if a disruptive editor finds that every single time he wants to come back he has to spend time finding a new IP address, quite often he/she decides it's not worth the time and trouble. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  11:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Sir Nicholas
It's of no importance at all, but just out of curiosity, I wonder how you came across Sir Nicholas de Mimsy Porpington. As far as I can see, he did not exist anywhere at all except in deletion logs from 2006. Surely you can't have been looking through those old logs, checking each user. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:36, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * ... What? I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about, sorry. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  11:26, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * ... Well, no. I now see that the date of your action was 24 February 2013, so it's not surprising that you don't remember. Previously, I didn't notice the date, and for some reason I thought it was within the last couple of days. You unblocked Sir Nicholas de Mimsy Porpington, which is a nonexistent user which had been blocked for 10 years. JamesBWatson (talk) 07:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Took me some digging to remember where exactly I had happened on that particular situation! As my userpage states, sometimes I get bored enough to look up database reports to do some cleanup; in this case, "Unusually long user blocks", as of February, is where I happened upon it. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  12:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry to put you to the trouble. I really would never have brought the matter up if I hadn't thought you had done it within the last day or two, and would remember the circumstances, without having to check back. However, the answer was interesting, and as a side effect I learnt of the existence of yet one more of the amazing number of obscure Wikipedia project pages. Thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:39, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:DBR is an OCD perfectionnist's heaven and hell. And don't worry, I don't mind investigating! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  20:08, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, after 7 years here, 3 of them as an admin, I never knew that existed. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've got a few regular ones in my dashboard; ideally they'd always be cleaned empty, but I'm supremely lazy and this is hardly a one-man task. :p :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  21:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Scotiabank Centre
See my protection summary; I'm badly confused. I'll do my best to sort it out if you stay away, or I'll be happy to stay away if you sort it out. Tell me what you'd prefer to do; I'll do nothing until hearing from you. Nyttend (talk) 02:57, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll do it. Our concurrent moves messed the history up. ;) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  02:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Went to your contribution history to watch for your reply, and I must say it looked odd — you're credited with moving Scotiabank and Talk:Scotiabank, and with creating Talk:Tire, but no mention is made of you creating Tire.  Never seen this happen before!  I just assumed that a move conflict would be resolved via the system accepting everything from one user and ignoring everything from the other one.  At least we moved it to the same place; imagine the chaos if we'd sent them to different places!  Nyttend (talk) 03:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That actually happened a while ago when me and another admin closed a RM in different ways at the same time. I was a newbie admin and he cleaned it all up, luckily. But yea... moving pages is a tricky system and trying to send more than one request at a time can produce unexpected results. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help! The most confusing part was what happened after the moves were done, with Scotiabank being a redirect to itself.  After looking at the move log for Tire, I think I have it figured out — the system says that you moved Tire to Scotiabank, and that I then did the same thing; apparently by the time I came around, only a redirect was in existence at Tire, so I ended up moving a redirect on top of its target.  Nyttend (talk) 03:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, that explains why all the revisions found themselves at Scotiabank! :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * : -) How ironic! But if that were good reason to rethink my support, it would also be good reason to consider resigning the tools myself :-)  I can only remember once getting into so many conflicts in such short order, and that was while editing the Virginia Tech massacre article in the immediate aftermath of the incident itself, when it was all over the news and piles of people were trying to edit it; such a large and confusing series of conflicts with the same person on a page getting less immediate attention is unprecedented in my experience.  This is precisely why I resort to temporary full protection when others are likely to be editing while I'm deleting or moving the page; I'd much rather do the work myself if two people together would cause history problems and if a talkpage message wouldn't reach the person on time.  Can't remember it happening with another admin before; it's the one situation in which I'll use my tools to gain an advantage over a non-admin, since I can't imagine someone objecting on policy grounds.  Nyttend (talk) 04:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone can reasonably object to temporary FPP while trying to do some vital maintenance. It's not like you're trying to push a POV or something. :p :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  04:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Your page protection
I will not challenge your indefinite full-protection of the article in question or seek to have it overturned, but given the tenor of my comments on AN, I would have appreciated if you had communicated with me or with Iridescent before taking such an action. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand that and would not strongly object if someone with full knowledge of the potential issues challenged the protection. It appeared that the potential concerns were not about the contents of the article itself but about what could be done to it, and as such protection seems best to limit possible liabilities to a minimum; if WMF states it feels comfortable enough legally to re-enable editing, protection can and will of course be lifted. If reusers modify the contents and get into trouble, this project isn't liable, and that stands for any article, so I felt unpublishing was overkill indeed. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  22:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Nothing material was going to happen with the article in the next few days, and it would have been better to leave the status quo. However, I'm sure you did what you thought was right, and I don't suppose it should be undone at this point. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:26, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * *shrugs* It may or may not have been needed; as you said, I did what I thought best, in good faith. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  22:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Vinod Agarwal (Bhajan singer)
Hey Salv, sorry to bother you but could you take a look at that AfD? I didn't realize it was a copyvio when i nominated it and when another editor pointed it out it became painfully obvious. Does the AfD just run its course or should it be closed and the article speedied? Obviously I can't close it - I nominated it - but if there's anything I can do just point me in the right direction. -- T K K  bark !  04:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It would've been possible to tag it as a G12 CSD, and once deleted, speedy close the AfD (nominator or not), assuming I wasn't available. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  04:36, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thank you for taking care of it, and I'll remember that for the future! -- T K K  bark !  04:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)