User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2007/December

Kenny's deaths
Hey, thanks for deleting the list of Kenny's deaths. I was wondering though; is there any way of retrieving a copy of that page to transwiki over to the South Park wiki? It seems like a waste to lose that information. Thanks.  Paul    730  20:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Restored at User:Paul730/Kenny. Sandstein (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, I just recreated it at the SP wiki. BTW, if you can access deleted pages, do you think you could give me a copy of Buffyverse chronology?  It was deleted a while back, but it would be great for the Buffy wiki.  If you can, just leave it in that Kenny user page you made, but if not, thanks anyway. :)     Paul    730  22:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem; done. Sandstein 16:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, you're been really helpful.   Paul    730  16:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry to bother you again, but that chronology only seems to cover half of it? Do you know if there's a "part 2" page or something? I wasn't familiar with the page before it was deleted, I just know some other editors who want to see it back, so I thought transwiki-ing it might be a compromise.  Paul    730  16:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No, sorry, it is not apparent from the deleted page log that this page was ever substantially larger. I know nothing of a complementary article. Sandstein 20:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe there were three articles - Buffyverse chronology, Buffyverse chronology (2), and Buffyverse chronology (3). If you can't find them, that's fine, thanks for trying anyway.     Paul    730  08:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

10:08 deletion discussion
Hi, I see you deleted 10:08. There has been a recent question about 10:08 at the refdesks, and I am trying to find the deletion discussion - any idea where it is please? Thanks, DuncanHill 08:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10:08. The link in the deletion log is malformed, sorry. Sandstein 12:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, DuncanHill 17:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Unblock req.

 * If you haven't read the blocking policy, it is not meant to punish users but to prevent disruption. I was blocked for edit warring and my intention is to create an RfC to build consensus which there is none (instead of edit-warring which gets nowhere). This is why I want to start an RfC and this is what RfCs are for. Please consider this as an attempt to alternate away from the reason I was blocked and a digression from by edit warring habits. Then take into account that a block is meant to prevent disruption and an RfC is far from disruption. Parable1991 22:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Romance Pannonian language
I disagree with the deletion of the article "Romance Pannonian language". I believe Tom is right. There were 3 wikipedians who voted Delete (and one was a banned sockpuppet, as correctly notes Tom), while 2 wikipedians voted Maintain the article. I was going to vote in favor of maintainig the article, but suddenly I saw it deleted. Probably with my vote in this case the article should have not been deleted, but only modified. Anyway, you wrote that , but how? How can I read again the content and merge something somewhere? The content has disappeared. Now I can read only about "Pannonia".Thanks.--Cherso (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * AfD is not a vote; the closing admin takes the arguments into account. In this case, the problem was that the article was not really about the (supposed) language itself, but about the history of the region, which content probably belongs elsewhere. Is there any proof of banned users participating in the AfD?
 * Also, you can't see the history because deleted it. Please ask him to restore it if you want to merge the content from the history. Sandstein (talk) 06:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This deletion of Romance Pannonian language is very strange. Above you ask if "there is any proof of banned users participating in the AfD", after I wrote you that user:Sambure is a banned sockpuppet......of course, as you certainly know looking at ! Then Cherso ask for the content that has disappeared and you (an admin) don't know how to retrieve it and so you send the poor Cherso to the boss of the Romanian Wikipedia, Bogdangiusca, for information about. Strange, very strange....May be the smell of nationalism that I have complained in my former edit comes not only from Hungary.....Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.77.23.98 (talk) 22:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This attitude will not help you get the article undeleted. Go bother someone else. Sandstein (talk) 22:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

WOW. What a rude answer. All this scares away people from participating to Wikipedia: no wonder that the author of the article is no more writing on Wikipedia since the deletion of "Romance Pannonian language".....--Cherso 14:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Book of Shadows (Charmed)
Thank you very much for your work on this AfD Articles for deletion/Book of Shadows (Charmed) debate. But for the record I never claimed being unsourced was not a reason for deletion. ;) Thanks. Web Warlock 19:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right; I misread - it was RRay who said that. Sorry. Sandstein 22:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries! Just making sure I am learning all this stuff right! Thanks.  Web Warlock 22:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I also want to thank you for your contribution there also. I do see your point. Rray 23:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

just curious
what happened with the previous version of the article?

You said The result was delete qua language article (since, as Nergaal puts it, "very little is known" about this supposed language), but preserve the historical content for re-use at Pannonia or similar. Accordingly, redirected to Pannonia for now. Feel free to change the redirect target or merge the content from the history somewhere. but I cannot find the source text to merge the content.Nergaal (talk) 01:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * deleted the history. Please ask him to restore it so that you can merge the content. Sandstein (talk) 06:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

uw-balkans
Hey there, I've temporarily removed the above template from WP:UTM, see here. I have no problems with the template itself just the wording, and I think it could do with a few editors input. I think it would be better to have a discussion with the guys in the know at either WP:UTM or WP:UW. What do you think? Cheers Khu  kri  14:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no objections to improvements in the wording. I just copied it from Stifle's diff. Feel free to improve on it or to invite others to do so. With regard to your query about uw-kashmir, uw-northernireland etc., I suppose yes, if we have more arbcom decisions like this one. Sandstein (talk) 14:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * OK I'll put a note up on WP:UTM in a wee bit. cheers Khu  kri  15:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Whig
I probably shouldn't have been the one to block him, but there's a wealth of discussion that shows the community was unwilling to put up with him any more, e.g. Requests for comment/Whig 2 and several particularly lengthy WP:ANI threads. The first indef block came, as I recall, after he publicly announced on AN/I that he refused to be bound by any restriction, and that he was the lone person who understood NPOV, etc, in response to attempts to negotiate a behavioural change from him. User:Mercury tried to mentor him, with my agreement, after the first indefblock. Perhaps you should ask his opinion as well? Thanks. Vanished user talk 23:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've replied at your talk. Sandstein 06:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * On procedural unblock, what does Mercury say? Since Mercury would, presumably, be handling and taking responsibility for the user afterwards, he should probably be the one that should decide. I'm not, in principle, against a procedural unblock: It was unseemly for me to block him, however much I may think myself able to view the case dispassionately - but he's certainly no innocent, and unblocking him without the mentorship would be inappropriate, given the RfC, in my opinion. - Vanished user talk 07:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I've edited my commentary on your talk page, but, never mind. Basically, Mercury was the person who agreed to mentor him and who he is naming as the person who should enforce his behaviour. If he wants Mercury to handle him, Mercury ought to agree to do so. Vanished user talk 07:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanished user (talk • contribs)

Appreciation
Hi Sandstein. I appreciate what you are doing to help on the Asian fetish article. I would appreciate your continued scrutiny/encouragement there whenever you have time. Being asian myself from Hong Kong, I do tend to see Tkguy's view. There are some rather exasperating editing going on there and I'd like to get the article into a much better shape. I suspect there will be problems there long term, so a habit of sensible communication should be encouraged. I'll do my best, but feel free to put me straight wherever needed as I am pretty much starting out here. Aberdeenharbour (talk) 06:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I have no interest in the content of this article. As an administrator, it is my job to help out with procedural issues when they arise, as in the case of these protected edit requests. Feel free to ask me for help in the event of any further procedural issue that might arise. Sandstein 06:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure Sandstein. Thats what I was thinking. Basically help with avoiding edit wars, encouraging constructive discussion as you have been and so on. Aberdeenharbour (talk) 06:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA
Thank you for your taking the time to comment on my RfA - see Requests for adminship/Wassupwestcoast. I've added comments that might clarify some of the issues you had concerns with. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 14:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Manollasa
It appears, to me, that this fellow is telling the truth. If you look at the article history you can see that this article was vandalized with some pretty mean unsourced material. I'm not sure how notable this person is, anyways. Perhaps consider unblocking him, so he can keep a watch out? I think he's just confused about editing. --Haemo (talk) 20:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedied McMaster School of the Arts
Hello, Sandstein,

I noticed that the SOTA article was speedy deleted on the 1st. It's actually not of a club on campus, but a legitimate part of the Faculty of Humanities at McMaster University.

It's also redlinked here.

I'm hoping you can reverse the decision (seeing as you were the admin that committed the speedy), and undelete the page :) Kareeser|Talk! 17:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello. The problem was that this school's article did not assert its notability, making it eligible for speedy deletion under WP:CSD. Can't this school be covered as part of the university's main article? Sandstein (talk) 06:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm thinking it may have been a fork in the first place, but since the article itself probably didn't have any content in it, I'll just drop the issue. Thanks! Kareeser|Talk! 05:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism warning ?
Please do not give vandalism warnings for something which is not vandalism or because something that could look like vadalism when you know it was not vandalising.You make it look like somebody actualy committed vandalism offence.Please choose your topic starter more wisely and i am at will to edit my own edit on a talk page as on my own page unless stated other wise like for example a blocked messeage can't be removed until the block is over and i am astonished that as an administrator you can't make out the clear and concise way i broke down the sections and particular passages in question in each of the two sections and than got the nerve to try to make me look stupid on the comment you made below my request.You are way off base and just do not want to edit the page for other reason.--Mikmik2953 (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * With this edit, you removed my comment declining your edit request. Per WP:TPG, you may not delete legitimate talk page comments, and you may be blocked if you do it again. Sandstein (talk) 18:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

yes if i find your comment offensive i may remove it and i felt it was a slander at my intelligence.When it was clear and concise. i hopeing to have a more knowlegable administrator look at the issue.and further more it is clear i pointed out the mis quote than added the proper quote and with the other passge i pointed out that i would like another quote added and sourced the quote and pointed it out which quote i would like added so what so hard about that sir--Mikmik2953 (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No, you may not remove comments that you find offensive, in particular not administrative comments. Take a look at how you write. Compare that with how others write. You prose is neither clear nor concise. To begin with, you have no grasp of punctuation and capitalization, so your sentences are very difficult to read. Administrators are not obliged to consider overly confused edit requests. This is not a slander of your intelligence, it is a comment about your lack of writing skills in English. Sandstein (talk) 21:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

So im the only one in wikipedia history to miss a period or a capital. So now you are singeling me out everybody else than me. Maybe you are just being lazy.I just think people on here just have a superiority complex and instead of trying to work with someone you just dimiss them and put grammar ahead of geting an article right. Wikipedia is not a a friendly envoirment at all just a bunch a smarties with an unfair system. Oh and by the way you do know what parenthesis are used for right english profesor--Mikmik2953 (talk) 06:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review for temporary undeletion of Ancients (Farscape)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ancients (Farscape). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. – sgeureka t•c 22:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Fredo and Pidjin
Hi! You deleted Fredo and Pidjin page. Please explain why! The article was respecting the notability rule of Wikipedia. I had the same discussion with another administrator Android79 two weeks ago. After he erased it, I agreed to modify it, and everything was OK from Wiki point of view. Please explain!stash2001) 20:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello. The article was deleted because it did not assert why the subject was notable; see WP:CSD. Sandstein (talk) 19:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Thnks. Your answer is apprecieted but doesn't help much. Excatly what was the problem? It is the ONLY webcomic in English from Romania, the ONLY using Adobe software, the ONLY awarded and so on. Is practically the only webcomic from Romania made by the state-of-art. Everything was explained in article, with references. There are no references in english to support the article, only in Romanian. Is this the problem? Could I improve the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stash2001 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but being the only webcomic in English from Romania, or the only one using Adobe software (which I doubt) are not really assertions of notability. Having received an award is an assertion of notability, but I could see no such claim in the article. What award has this comic received? Sandstein (talk) 06:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It won two 2nd places at Roblogfest 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stash2001 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That was not in the article (I think) and, at any rate, is not a sufficiently prestigious award to confer notability. Sorry, but I'll not restore the article until something happens that makes it meet WP:WEB. Sandstein (talk) 18:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk: regional power
You wrote: "Aletano, stop the personal attacks or you may be blocked. Sandstein (talk) 19:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)" This is totally pointless. Argentina was there in the article before, it had been for months, there was no concensus to REMOVE IT in the first place. This user started removing it and I just reverted his changes. So, I was just asking for things to be RESTORED, not CHANGED. The user that asked for protection CHANGED the article just minutes before. Im frustrated that an administrator wont even CARE to look at the history of the article. Also, I didnt make any personal attack. On the other side, I was called a fanatic of the Falklands War, as if I have ever even mentionated the Falklands in the "Regional power" article (I havent made any Falklands-related edit in months!), and I was also called a troll. And my user page was vandalized. But you didnt say anything about that, I was the only one warned. Im totally upset. I dont know if you are biased against me for some reason, if are just a very low quality Wikipedia administrator or if you are just plain unfair. Im starting to understand why serious institutions (Like Tutor.com for example) dont take this encyclopedia seriously, discouraging students from looking for information here. Now you can relax, I wont make any more interventions in the regional Power article because Im AFRAID of being accused of vandalism and blocked. Thats Wikipedia´s "democratic" nature. Maybe I wont make anymore contributions at all. Way to go admin, keep up the good work. Aletano (talk) 03:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * In case you care, which I doubt, this is the history of the article, that is, what you should have checked:

1 - This is when Argentina started being included in the article:

22:45, June 20, 2007 Limongi (Talk | contribs) (36,916 bytes) (→Latin America - Removed irrelevant information related to Argentina) (undo)

2 - This is when Kardrak -using just his IP- deleted Argentina for the first time, without any reason, more than four months later:

19:55, October 29, 2007 189.180.70.169 (Talk) (39,307 bytes) (→Latin America - true) (undo)

3 - This is just to show you that Im not the only one who has reverted Kardrak´s vandalism:

19:55, October 29, 2007 AnonGuy (Talk | contribs) m (40,732 bytes) (Reverted 1 edit by 189.180.70.169 identified as vandalism to last revision by Pataramyra. using TW) (undo)

21:46, October 29, 2007 Farmanesh (Talk | contribs) (40,732 bytes) (Undid revision 167955553 by Kardrak (talk) Why you delete referenced material? thats vandalism. If you have a point, say in talkpage) (undo)

11:47, October 3, 2007 Farmanesh (Talk | contribs) (40,513 bytes) (Undid revision 162018435 by 198.209.30.104 (talk) rv vandalism) (undo)

4 - And finally, this is to show you how Kardrak changed the article and asked for protection inmediately after:

18:20, December 9, 2007 Kardrak (Talk | contribs) (40,037 bytes) (Undid revision 176780223 by Aletano (talk)this user has been reported sevral times, is a fanatic from the Falkland's war.) (undo) Aletano (talk) 04:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

18:46, December 9, 2007 Ryan Postlethwaite (Talk | contribs) m (Protected Regional power: edit war [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 21:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)))

Aletano (talk) 04:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Your talk page header
You've forgotten to replace my username with yours in my your talk page header. It occurs in two places. MER-C 08:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and I'm sorry if you have inadvertently received messages meant for me. Sandstein (talk) 08:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK
I've noticed the math at Enriqueta Favez doesn't add up. It says she was born in 1791, was arrested in 1826, and was released from prison "at the age of 33." But she would already have been 38 on the date of her arrest! So something is wrong there. Gatoclass (talk) 08:19, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right. I must have misinterpreted the 1829 date given at and will remove it.

re: Disruption of Wikipedia talk:Special:Ancientpages
I actually removed the editprotected template from the top of the page. —Random832 14:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, sorry, I caught your talk page by mistake. Sandstein (talk) 14:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't know adding the template would be a mistake, much less a significant one. Someone told me to add it here. I suppose someone was deliberately misleading me? --Let Us Update Special:Ancientpages. 14:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I failed to assume good faith on your part. The advice you received was not deceptive, but it was in error. The template is only used to propose an edit to a protected page. Special:Ancientpages is not protected and cannot be updated by an ordinary admin (like me) responding to the template request. Sandstein (talk) 14:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:
I find it hard to believe that a new user who is restoring a diff that has been reverted hundreds of times is editing in good faith. Will (talk) 21:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that was not apparent from either your report or the user's contributions. All I saw was an editor with one edit and zero warnings. If this is a persistent vandalism campaign with numerous IPs and/or accounts, a detailed WP:AIV report may be needed to get a rangeblock and/or semiprotection for the affected articles. Sandstein (talk) 21:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have now semiprotected Iain Lee for a week. Sandstein (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Re:3RR - check the page's protection logs. Will (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Jerome709/Magnonimous
FYI, I have replied to your message at User talk:B. --B (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Your comment at Jim62sch's talk page
Sandstein, would you please consider removing your NPA warning from Jim62sch's talk page and leave a personalised note, with an appropriate diff link? For what it is worth, Jim62sch and I don't get along, but he is an experienced editor, and I think that a more personalised note might not build tension as a templated note generally does (and has in the past with Jim62sch). --Iamunknown 21:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, done. Sandstein (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) --Iamunknown 21:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Warnings
Sandstein, I don't know you and I've never seen you around until yesterday. That doesn't mean much in of itself. However, let me explain my unhappiness with regards to you "warning." First of all, traditionally on Wikipedia, we do not leave experienced and prolific editors canned warnings. And as an admin, you should be doubly aware of the sensitivity of this issue. I was pissed that you would leave such a rude warning. On the other hand, if you had been more personal, I would have understood what you were saying. All of this being said, you may wish to do what you want and ignore my recommendation, but I think I've seen you rankle others with your impersonal warnings. Specifically with regards to my comments here, I do not agree with your assessment that it was uncivil. "Wikipedia Hell" is a metaphor relating to the mythical Hell of Christians where you are punished for your sins. I felt as though your actions were going to reduce that metaphorical Hell. However, I guess the continued personal attacks of GusChiggins tested your patience anyways. At any rate, I apologize for coming down on you so hard with my replies to the warning, but I will have to tell you the only individuals that place those kind of warnings on my user page are Trolls and POV-warriors who are now blocked (and banned in a couple of cases). Since I had no clue who you were, I just thought you were another troll. I hope you take my apology and recommendation to heart. Orange Marlin Talk• Contributions 23:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Orangemarlin is, perhaps without knowing, referring to ideas from the essay Don't template the regulars. violet/riga (t) 00:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I didn't know about that essay. Thanks for the heads up, I'm bookmarking it.  I know I've been taken to task for templating a regular, of course in one case, that "regular" deserved it and subsequently received a community ban.  So I guess I was correct in giving him the template.   Orange Marlin  Talk• Contributions 00:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Acknowledged. Thanks for the message. I'll consider using less template messages on regulars henceforth. Sandstein (talk) 07:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Arrow740 has started a discussion, regarding a block you issued, here.Bless sins (talk) 03:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sandstein (talk) 07:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)