User talk:Ultraexactzz/Archive 2

This archive includes edits to User talk:Ultraexactzz from Mid-January 2008 through Mid-March 2008.

Admin coaching
Hey Ultraexactzz, I see you request the help of an admin coach/experienced user on WP:ADMINCOACH. Would I be able to do that? I've seen you around quite a few times and your profile is excellent. If you have any queries about me, just ask. :) Regards, Rudget . 20:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Create a page in your userspace (example: User:Ultraexactzz/Admin coaching) and we'll proceed from there. I'll start the questions tomorrow! :) Regards, Rudget . 20:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, one more thing before tomorrow, could you give a history of time here on the wiki? Like here for example? Be great if you could. :) Thanks. Rudget . 21:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry about Rudget, who was a friend to both of us. Would you mind if I took up his reins to continue your admin coaching?  bibliomaniac 1  5  02:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I added to the page. Your answers to the questions were very good, and I feel quite confident in your skills as an editor.  bibliomaniac 1  5  03:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

So...without Rudget, what's gonna happen here? *hopes to here a "you nom me now!"* Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 04:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * oh, btw. replied on my talk page if you're still online. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 05:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry.
Don't worry about Rudget -- You probably already know this, but apparently it was just his cousin playing a joke with his account when he left his computer on. See AN and his talk page. --Coppertwig (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your RfA's formatting
Sounds good to me, thanks for the heads up -- pb30 < talk > 04:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Nom?
I think it's fairly obvious that you are well-fitted for the job. I think we can cut this short, as I did before with User:Malinaccier. Would you like to be nommed now?  bibliomaniac 1  5  05:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * In that case, I'm ready. Yes, I would indeed like to be nominated at this time.UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 13:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Can't help but intrude, but I think you'll make a great admin. You'll have my support at your RFA.  Good luck!  Malinaccier Public (talk) 13:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Alrighty. Please answer the questions and transclude into the main page when you are done. Good luck!  bibliomaniac 1  5  21:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would have to say that Biblio knows what he's doing. ;D Malinaccier (talk) 22:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't take it too hard. You will do fine.  bibliomaniac 1  5  04:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam
, I wish to tender my sincere thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 37 supports, 2 opposes, and 2 neutral. The results of the RfA are extremely bittersweet because of the recent departure of my nominator, Rudget. Hopefully I can live up to his and your expectations. I would especially like to thank Epbr123 and TomStar81 for mentioning that they were preparing to offer me a nomination. The past week has been one of the most stressful weeks in my life, and I appreciate your vote of confidence in me. If you ever need anything, just get in touch. -MBK004 21:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

RfD question
Could you please explain this deletion: Reserved people rules. As it was in AfD and the nomination was a mess and there was no clear agreement I think closing it early was not the best call. I can't know because I can't see the article but I'd like it relisted. Hobit (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Hobit (talk) 04:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

C. Vernon Mason
Are you planning to return to the discussion that you started at Talk:C. Vernon Mason? I'm not surprised at all that the Bloomfield anon has failed to pay any attention to the talk page, but I am disappointed that you would use the threat of page protection in order to get people onto the talk page and then not follow up with those people who actually do want a meaningful resolution. -- 209.6.177.176 (talk) 02:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've replied to you. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 02:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

peer review
I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 05:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

AFDsort
I noticed at your RfA you mentioned that you weren't sure if anyone else was using a script you wrote, AFDsort. By coincidence, just before visiting your RfA with the intention of perhaps voting, I was looking at User:Pb30's RfA, and had happened to notice that that user apparently uses AFDsort. I thought you might be happy to know this. --Coppertwig (talk) 02:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome. Note that I've just posted a follow-up question to question 5 in your RfA. --Coppertwig (talk) 13:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response at the RfA. Well said. --Coppertwig (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

My transclusions
Thanks for catching up on them for me. I don't have any more lurking ou there, and will double-check next time. Thanks. Kevin McE (talk) 01:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday
-- Nadir D Steinmetz 19:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
I am not one for sending round pretty pictures, but after my recent RfA, which passed 68/1/7, I am now relaxed and this is to thank you for your support. I will take on board all the comments made and look forward to wielding the mop with alacrity. Or two lacrities. -- Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 20:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You are now an administrator
Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjBscribe 00:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. I knew you could do it! Just don't get too hasty with your newfound powers!  bibliomaniac 1  5  00:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, congrats! Malinaccier (talk) 01:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC).
 * When you feel you are experienced as an admin, please remember to pass on the knowledge.  bibliomaniac 1  5  01:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yo! Congratulations, and welcome to the club of downtrodden, poorly-paid, jacks-of-all-trade who keep the place clean! -- Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 01:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats! -- Alexf42 01:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Enjoy your "lofty yet not-a-big-deal responsibility" -- LOL! --Coppertwig (talk) 01:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, and congratulations! Earth bending master  01:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well done! Have a great time, you should do just fine. Rudget . 16:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

About your RfA
Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 02:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good work! Tiptoety  talk 03:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * You're very welcome, and congratulations on becoming an admin. :-)  Lra drama 18:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Question on Warnings (Hope it is not too silly)
Hello! Sorry to bother, but I wanted to get your opinion on Warnings.

Specifically, would it make sense for me to issue a Level 1 Warning relating to inappropriate humor against an editor who made a small but sarcastic crack designed to belittle a comment I made in a WQA resolution conversation – a conversation where that editor was supposed to be offering unbiased moderation.

The mediation thread is here: I initiated the complaint against someone that I believed was a potential troll. This person acknowledged having no knowledge of the subject prior to his posting, to which I commented that I only edit articles where I have a knowledge of the article’s subject.

The mediating editor then went to the page in question, fixed a tiny typo, but added a sarcastic comment that was designed (I believe) to ridicule my comment about subject knowledge. It is the top edit on this page:.

Unless I am mistaken, this is inappropriate humor designed solely to belittle my opinion -- especially when this editor is supposed to be unbiased and acting in good faith. What I wanted to know is (1) am I justified in issuing a Level 1 warning based on this, and (2) can I issue the warning directly or does a third party who is not involved in this dispute have to come in and do that?

I need to point out this editor issued a Level 1 warning against me at the conclusion of the mediation, but only issued a very soft message of caution against the person I saw as a perceived troll. I disputed the action, claiming the editor was not acting in good faith and showed very clear bias. The editor later acknowledged his decision was incorrect on his User page, but immediately removed that text from display when I called it to his attention.

In the scheme of things, it is incredibly small pickings. Still, I was interested in getting feedback on how to proceed.

Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to ask another question, but...

 * Hello again! Your comment actually raised another question. The comment: "Since a level 1 warning is intended to notify a user that there was a concern over their actions, and it appears that you have already made this plain, I don't see the need for a further warning."

The problem I have is the user Doug did not acknowledge two key concerns I raised, which involved (1) his sarcastic comment in editing the Phil Hall (US writer) page with a comment that clearly was designed to belittle a comment I made in the WQA dispute, and (2) the statement he made in his User Doug/DR page where he claimed I was demanding unconditional agreement, which is not true and which appears to contradict Wikipedia's good faith doctrine.

What I would like to know is: do I, as an editor, have a right to issue a Level 1 warning against him based on either of these?

Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 19:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I promise, last input on this subject.

Question on this comment: "Your comments on his talk page here present your concerns over his remarks at User:Doug/DR, and do so in depth and detail far exceeding any level 1 warning." Does that mean a Level 1 Warning is worthless? Doug's resolution of my WQA dispute was giving me a Level 1 Warning but only giving a very soft scolding to the person I saw to be a troll. I don't understand the point of that warning, seriously.

Question on this comment: "The fact that he later refactored those remarks...shows that he received (and acknowledged) your concerns." But he later claimed that he did not acknowledge my concerns and claimed he was correct in his actions, even though his DR page comments showed otherwise.

Question on this comment: "As for the sarcasm you see in his edit summary - In my opinion, warning User:Doug for that comment would do nothing more than prolong discussion in ways which would ultimately not be of benefit to anyone." The problem is that I raised that point three times and Doug ignored this all three times. Making sarcastic comments is unprofessional, especially when they are aimed at someone he is supposed to be assisting in good faith (which he also acknowledged on his DR page that he did not have).

I assume that I have the right, as an editor, to issue this warning. That is correct, yes? But, then, what value does this warning have?

Thanks again! Ecoleetage (talk) 20:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * You know, you're 100% right! I will follow your advice. Thanks and be well! Ecoleetage (talk) 21:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi There
Mind helping out here?. The IP you just blocked has been making the same edits under other IPs and a username also. Thanks,   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  04:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Condoleezza Rice Photo Vandalism
Thank you for responding to my vandalism report with respect to the photo used in the Condoleezza Rice article. While the problem in that article has been fixed, the same problem in the United States Secretary of State article has not been fixed. --TommyBoy (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I figured out how to fix the problem. --TommyBoy (talk) 05:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hi, just dropping by to say thanks for supporting my RfA, I totally wasn't expecting to get so much support, it was a really pleasant surprise. Melesse (talk) 04:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC) 

Melesse (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Considering an unblock of User:Bilbobag
User shows genuine contrition and a willingness to work within Wikipedia rules. They have requested an unblock, and I am considering doing so in the next hour or so unless I hear from you with some compelling reason not to... --Jayron32. talk . contribs 17:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Took care of it. Thanks for your quick response on my talk page.  Later!  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  17:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Wheel War!
Dude, nice one. That's smart thinking. Normally I'd only block IP's for 24 hours, but it seemed that 72 was better here, as they'd come back straight after the previous block. Like the plan of slanting those hours - I'll remember that fo rthe future, particularly for school IP's. Pedro : Chat  15:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Hi there,

Thats OK, I saw that edit, and as a result of that I was greylisted on #cvn-wp-en as admin rollback, no worries though.. I removed the incorrect listing :)

-- The  Helpful   One  18:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

204.38.89.214's‎ talk page
You might have to semi protect it in case vandalism continues after this. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AIV
Thanks, you're doing quite well yourself. Best of luck with your lovely new tools! Keilana | Parlez ici 02:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

71.99
Sorry, but you removed an IP from administrators intervention because of no warnings, I should have made myself clearer but see this: Abuse reports/71.x.x.x, see Czechs and its talk page see Reservoir Dogs (video game) about ten IP's from this one person have been blocked tonight only, there is no point in warning since the user knows exactly what he's doing.--The Dominator (talk) 04:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually it doesn't even matter anymore, he'll probably be rangeblocked anyway.--The Dominator (talk) 04:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Now that you mention it, there are a few pages that could use protection: Reservoir Dogs (video game, Socialism with a human face. Czechs has been semi-protected, but he vandalises the talk, I'm not sure if there is anything we can do about that, he has also edited Joe Pesci tonight.--The Dominator (talk) 05:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA double
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADlohcierekim&diff=190835313&oldid=190637651 Thanks. Fixed.] Dloh  cierekim  Deleted?  05:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Apollo 8
Hi there, I was going to do some copyediting at Apollo 8 but I don't want to step on your toes since you have been engaged with the article. Is it okay to get in there today, or are their sections you still wanted to work on? I can focus on specific sections if you like. --Laser brain (talk) 14:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Richard Nixon
First of all, congratulations on the speedy deletion; I am impressed! Under 5 minutes. Maybe you want to get a life. Okay, maybe its me, who puts stupid things on Wikipedia that needs a life, but com'on, 5 minutes, and it's 9:06pm here in Britian- what's that, 4pm in America (i assume this is where you live; maybe I am wrong). Do you not have a job? A relationsip. Even a television??? You know their is some quality programming on in the evenings; or afternoon. Do you get paid to do this? Because if the answer is 'yes', that jolly good show! Where do I sign up? If not... get a proper job and stop ruining my fun. $10 says you can't delete my information on Tom Selleck. If you're smart you'll soon work out why, if not- then your American. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luke570 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

T3 (The Think Tank)
Can you please take a look at the page now? I posted it before I saw your message.

Thank you. Ah1275 (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the reference help. I've uploaded the logo. Can you verify that I chose the correct license, etc?

Ah1275 (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I looked but could not find guidance on how to cite something multiple times within an article. Any help would be appreciated.

Ah1275 (talk) 19:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * In citing that source twice I've inadvertantly hidden the reference section. Any idea what I did wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ah1275 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for all your help. I've added a few more items and will continue to improve the page.

Ah1275 (talk) 20:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Anthonyebert
I think blocking him for an indefinite period is more advisable; all I'm seeing from him are vandal edits. Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  04:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * And good job to you, too. :) Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  04:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Stephen Macloughlin
No problem- yes, the template went SNAFU so I withdrew it for re-doing at a later date- you'd have been doing me a favour actually if you'd re-done the nom! Anyway, doesn't matter, I'm sure I'll get round to it eventually, there's nothing imperative about this one.

Thanks, Badgerpatrol (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

12.39.2.83
Thanks for your help. I have file an ANI on the user for trolling behavior. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for blocking. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * He's got a friend deleting his talk page warnings. Someone has already reverted it, though, so apparently he's being watched now. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Cute. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sabrina Aircraft Manufacturing
Question, what needs to be done to restore Sabrina Aircraft Manufacturing? Sources were cited and no advertising was posted. Rutan and SAM are the only companies with registered craft. The craft are not for sale and SAM does not carry passengers for hire? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chicago312 (talk • contribs) 02:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

How is this version of Sabrina Aircraft Manufacturing? (Thanks again for getting back so quick.) --Chicago312 (talk) 04:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/Cate_Edwards_2
That was fine what you did. Bearian (talk) 21:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Alex Garcia (boxer)
¡Gracias! --AndrewHowse (talk) 18:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:AIV
Its Huggle. A Bug? So sorry for the frustration. I'm going to look at the people it reports now. Again, Sorry. -  Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  21:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If I do report manually I do it with Twinkle (you may have seen the reports that belong in WP:AIV were reported by Twinkle as seen in the edit summaries. -  Milk's   Favorite   Cookie  21:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment on main page deletion incident
As you made an edit to the incident listed in the Administrators notice board, it is requested that you confirm the details of the incident here (section 1.1.2)

This is as the incident is used as the basis of an argument and needs to be confirm by persons familar with the event

Regards --User:Mitrebox talk 2008-02-22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.11.244.78 (talk) 07:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For fixing this AfD. I'm not so familiar with the procedure here. Greetings. Clem23 (talk) 19:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Ditto the thanks :) TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 19:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I did see that, and don't have a problem with your block. Thanks for the courtesy of your note! GBT/C 21:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Balachandran AfD
I don't see what the problem could be. It looks like the usual discussion. Do you think it should be kept? Make an argument and I could change my mind. Did someone mess with your account, or someone else's? Are you surprised that I actually made my 3rd AfD nom in 13 months? :-) Bearian (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello
Following your blocking of Clem32 (that was of course not created by me), I have to show you 2 things. The first is in French, the discussion with other administrators about the problems with Boubaker and Mario Scolas. The second is in english, m:Vandalism reports/BogaertB, talking about what Mario Scolas has done on the French and Dutch WP. 260 vandal accounts on the sole french, 400 approx on all different WP. If you know how I should proceed to get the permanent blocking of this guy on en:WP do tell me. I'm ready to give any necessary information for a check-user (I'm a check-user myself) or to other admins. If you can do something, thanks in advnce. On the other hand, if you can't I do not blame you, I've stopped counting the hours that I lost because of Scolas, his vandalisms and his socks. See you. Clem23 (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

be aware
Sir ! be aware from Clem23 propsals, they caused damage to Droop and many other! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonton Bradipus (talk • contribs) 13:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for deletion
Many thanks for deleting my user page as requested.

If you agree with my rationale, would you consider deleting my user talk page as well?

Also it worries me a bit that it's still possible for someone to create a new user page for me - is there any way to prevent that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csymeonides (talk • contribs) 13:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Concerning the delete
I have posted my reply to the deletion of the "Beyond protocol" article, I would be very happy if a discussion could be held.

Here are 4 link, do you think this is enough? I will continue to look for more anyway.

http://www.mmortsgamers.com/content/view/168/1/ http://www.mmortsgamers.com/content/view/167/1/ http://beyondprotocol.wikidot.com http://www.beyondprotocol.com

Thank you for the help, just tell me what you think after reading these.

Rolles (talk) 15:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)rolles

Your opinion about the article is clear
that is your right.. but when you allowed the first part of the discussion remain in this page you made voters badly informed, so continue to be honest...Citypark2008 (talk) 15:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok; Thank you for all.Citypark2008 (talk) 15:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Before saying good bye ,we tell you that we would have been really upset if you resonded positively to the following request :

..... If you know how I should proceed to get the permanent blocking of this guy on en:WP do tell me. I'm ready to give any necessary information for a check-user (I'm a check-user myself) or to other admins. If you can do something, thanks in advnce. On the other hand, if you can't I do not blame you, ... Clem23 (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your human reaction.Citypark2008 (talk) 15:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The only one who replies to my reports are him.
HE did violate 3rr correct? Uconnstud (talk) 18:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand. I'm hoping something can be worked out. He has been warned on so many occasions and uses so many different sockpuppets on the same article. A clear violation, but thanks for writing back. Uconnstud (talk) 18:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Recommending a page for deletion
I see you are an admin, so I am bugging you with this question. There's a page I'd like to recommend for deletion (Grayson Boucher), but I don't know how to go about doing so. Based on the talk page, it looks like there was some discussion before about deleting it, but nothing was resolved. If you could point me in the right direction, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks. Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Got it, thanks! Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Boubaker polynomials (2nd nomination)
Many thanks for all your "clean-up" work on that page. After Clem23, it seems it's my turn to be dirtyed by user:Mario Scolas's socks.

Darkoneko (talk) 06:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

TiconderogaCCB
Keeps deleting opinions that are contrary to his opinion in an attempt to build a consensus. It can be seen here  where this opinion was deleted "J.Delany agreed to this verions     - I agree to this verion as well  63.113.199.109 (talk) 12:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)"  his reason was vandalism and he says discussion was deleted when it was simply moved from the top to the bottom to go in chronological order(after he moved it). Also he asked for an opinion on which version is better to which i was notified   and so was he. When the third opinion came in he simply ignored what the third opinion was and simply reverted the page. I thought we had a compromise and would listen to the 3rd opinion, but now i'm really starting to wonder if there can be any compromise with him. Uconnstud (talk) 02:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC) I could mention the fact that he has been going to articles thru my history and stalking me commenting after me when he was never ever ever in the previous listed article at all. Uconnstud (talk) 02:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Uconnstud (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The supposed "deletion" was the deletion of duplicate text. No comments were deleted, and why would I have done so given that the comments were in my favor. Further, I have commented on J.Delany's third party opinion as has J.Delany, and we are now taking a poll to see what other editors prefer. Please ignore UConnStudd, he is simply trying every avenue to get me into trouble because he wants to vandalize the SJU article. See his history for more understanding of his relentless pursuit. - --TiconderogaCCB (talk) 20:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Also Note: An editor using 150.210.176.81 IP address posted the following extremely offensive comments on my talk page and user page . These comments included, "you are one poor sarcastic sucker! have you ever gotten laid or have you always paid for it you sonnuva bitch!". This IP is part of Baruch College, the same source for IP's used by User:Uconnstud in past comments in which he did not use his user name, see User talk:150.210.176.218 & User talk:150.210.226.6. - --TiconderogaCCB (talk) 02:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

That is pretty funny considering that the only thing that any of those IP address and I have in common is that we've edited on the St. John's page. You do know that Baruch College has about 15,000 students. St John's has about 15,000 too. I've always used my username. You on the other hand.. are famous for not using it. Its funny how we now see random IP address who are suddenly coming out of nowhere and agreeing with you. When they have no history of editing at all and. All supporting "option 1." Uconnstud (talk) 03:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fixer-Upper
nope, that's fine. Thanks for checking! I withdrew since it was going to close per WP:SNOW and we moved the discussion to Talk:Fixer-Upper TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 21:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Dictionary AfD
Thank you very much. Basketball 110   will you sign?  ♣ 02:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * {| style="border: 1px solid ; background-color: ;"

Basketball 110   will you sign?  ♣ 02:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Missing barnstarPn.png|100px]]
 * style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | The Hidden Barnstar
 * style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This user has found Basketball110's secret hidden sub page! Can you find it?
 * }
 * }

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fizber (internet company)
I disagree with your close at Articles for deletion/Fizber (internet company). There was a large amount of canvassing by the person who created the article and no reliable third-party sources about the subject were presented. --- RockMFR 21:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship
 Dear Ultraexactzz, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats. I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight. I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community. I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :) I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 11:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sleaze rock
That would be great; thanks.Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 22:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you please inform me as to how sleaze rock is not a valid genre but grunge is? thankyou (Cfr63 (talk) 16:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)).

Articles for deletion/Democracy of information
Thanks, and sorry you had to clean up after me! That template got speedied for whatever reason. --Prewitt81 (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

*cough*
Have a look? ~ Riana ⁂ 16:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not anymore. Ah, blissful silence :D ~ Riana ⁂ 16:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Pearson
All state legislators, past and present, by definition have been declared inherently notable. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The same editor created the Bizzaro article, and after I deleted it, with a nice little note about notability, he recreated it. I've re-deleted it. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Blackest Night close
Thank you for a careful and well-reasoned AfD closure. If AfDs were routinely treated with that much attention and nuance the page would be considerably less dysfunctional. Phil Sandifer (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

rofl
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Also for updating my vandalism count. I reloaded my watchlist and saw the "ding" edit summary. After I realized what was going on I literally laughed out loud and my sister asked me what was so funny. That was great!! Have a good day, and may the vandals fail... J.d ela noy gabs adds 17:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC) 

J.d ela noy gabs adds has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Please accept my apology for the Katol Chandikadevi Picture comment
I am sorry for the uncivil comments.But a user GPPande who I think merits the use of those comments is being disruptive with my work for reasons beyond my comprehension.The picture being discussed is of my "family deity" and Katol is my native place.I have clicked that image with my own camera and I want other people who are from Katol to have a glimpse of this fine deity.No one in his/her right mind would remove such an image which is released into public domain with such good intentions.If you are an administrator or a powerful person on wikipedia you can request GPPande to edit only those pages about which he has some knowledge to contribute/or simply ban him if you can.He is editing the Nagpur and Vidarbha page and he doesn't even live there.If such people are not stopped wikipedia will become a timepass for out of work people.I apologise again for the bad language -Niranjan Deshmukh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niranjandeshmukh (talk • contribs) 17:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

A sincere question
I have noticed that during my interaction with people on wikipedia,the admins or people like you intervene and give very good advice.Advice which can be used in the real world also.I want to know the source of your wisdom."Walk away" is sound advice.Is there a book or a manual where I can find it? Sincerely,Niranjan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niranjandeshmukh (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Heads-up
Thanks for the heads-up regarding the AN/I thread! --Kralizec! (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've responded on the WP:AN/I noticeboard. Steve Crossin (talk) 13:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Advice on article
Hi. I need some admin advice on a new article - The day in the life of a forensic entomologist. Is it unencylcopedic? I wasn't sure so I haven't tagged it. Take whatever action you think. It is more of a diary than an encylcopedia entry. If you think it's alright, it just needs some cleanup. Thanks Olly150  18:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, just wanted to make sure Olly150  10:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Socks
Thanks for your message - I'd be inclined to leave the original report alone, but tag the user page of the newly blocked sock with Erwin Morland - anyone wanting to know the reason for the block can click through to User:Erwin Morland where there's a convenient link to the evidence page from WP:SSP. Thanks. GBT/C 17:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, in cleaning up the category when creating it, I accidentally did the tagging of William K. Reed for you. Wasn't meaning to tread on your toes! Regards. GBT/C 17:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

WHY
WHY ARE YOU REMOVING/REDOING MY EDITS. SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THAT YOU RATHER LIKE INCORRECT GRAMMAR RUN-ON SENTENCES AND FALSE INFORMATION, BECAUSE THATS WHAT YOU ARE SHOWING ME. RUN ON's are not correct sentence structure. and the information about the uncut-bilingual being illegal in the united states is sourceless and false, also looking at the history that information was added by a IP user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.208.73.158 (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)