User talk:Useight/Archive14

hello
Sorry for the delay but i can't tell you right now the images that i want to be deleted because i can't open my gallery... there is an unknown error... thanks... I was formerly user:rajalberini if u can recall... thanks, my fav admin... oh yeah how can i place something like this (2,682,429 articles | Sunday | 4:32pm | online ) in my userpage

--EmilinAlbs (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

hi again... here are the names of the image (Me and Dan.jpg, Marian Rivera.jpg, Jennylynmercado.jpg, Nyt prom3.jpg, Smile at me.jpg, Pretty d ako.jpg) thanks.. please delete thank you --EmilinAlbs (talk) 03:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. Useight (talk) 20:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm...
Hey, back again from another long break. Hope you had a nice holiday and new year. Just wanted to reply to your last message too, and I didn't see where it said e-mail. No big deal, I'll just look again later.--Mence Master (talk) 05:57, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Recent block
You may want to prevent this user from editing the user talk page, based on his recent activities there. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 02:15, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Border hide
If you're an expert with wiki formatting, would you happen to know the code that allows the border around a box containing a given item to be hidden? The box would typically contain an image, as seen here (random article) with the Charles Mill Lake image box. This isn't where I want to do it, I was just giving an example. Thanks. --Readopedia (talk) 17:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I'm not an expert with wikiformatting, so I'm not even sure what, exactly, you're trying to do. However, when I don't know an answer, I probably know someone who does. So I will direct you to RyanCross, he's an expert in that realm and he'll probably know the answer. Useight (talk) 17:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry
My sincere apologies for getting you involved in this mess. If you want to withdraw your nomination, I completely understand.  Enigma msg  17:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's where I stand on this matter. I know that if I withdraw my nomination, that would almost certainly cause the RFA to fail. But I don't believe you should fail. A lot of editors have had moments where they have completely screwed up, but I don't think these 20 edits are a deal breaker. However, it would have been nice to have had some warning about this potential closet skeleton that I would have never discovered, as a simple admin. I'm just glad that nobody has come up to me and said something like, "How come you nominated? You should have known about that first" when there was no way I could have. I also must say that I am disappointed to see that those edits came from someone of your caliber. If you take a look at User:Useight/RFA Participation, I have only "strong support"ed five times before your RFA because I want a "strong support" from me to really mean someting. I am considering downgrading to "support" in this case. But, if I do that, it'll probably come at the very tail end of the RFA. Thanks, though, for the apology, that means a lot. Useight (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * How come you nominated? You should have known about that first. Tan   &#124;   39  18:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Should've seen that coming. Why didn't I knock on wood? Useight (talk) 18:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hopefully one day I can try to make this up to you somehow. I really don't want this reflecting badly on my nominators or the people who supported, because it was my screw-up.  Enigma msg  19:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt any of the first ones started at 46/0/1. You have that at least. I referred people to you at the top of my user talk. You may remove it if you don't want it there, of course. I'll be back next week, hopefully. Thanks for the nomination.  Enigma msg  23:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm honored to have my name there, and I hope to see you around again soon. Useight (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

thank you for reply
Thank for your reply to Red Thunder's user talk page. What happened to Thatcher, WJBScribe, AGK. MaxSem. Was there a dispute and hard feelings? A few of the 12, I haven't heard of. Some of them, I've heard of but didn't keep track of. Chergles (talk) 16:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know why Thatcher left, but WJBscribe and AGK said they didn't have much time anymore, and MaxSem seemed to just disappear. Useight (talk) 17:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

 * for reverting my user page! WadeSimMiser (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I got your back. Useight (talk) 22:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA
I did respond to your concerns at my RfA. You did misread one of my edits, so in fairness I wanted to set the record straight. But in my view your issues were largely valid, so I'm not sure if you should change your !vote. I suppose that depends on the unspoken positive aspects of your view of me. :)

Cheers, though!

CRGreathouse (t | c) 04:56, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Responded on the RFA. Useight (talk) 05:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Playoff format
Can you explain to me why you are going about that initiative? Just because some 2008 season pages have it doesn't mean you need to go back and do it for every other old season page. The fact of the matter is, most old season pages (i.e. 2007 and prior) used "did not qualify," not "Did not qualify," and did not bold any playoff losses. If 2008 season pages have these (mainly because of User:Alakazam's edits), then the 2008 pages should be changed, not every other 2007 and before pages - that only makes sense. Besides, what's the point of having BOTH playoff losses and playoff wins in bold? Bold is used to make a distinction, so if both wins and losses (i.e. everything) is in bold, then you might as well have it in all plain text. So I may suggest that you revert your edits to and instead focus on making the "did not qualify" (non-capital "d") and the bold/not bold format the standard for 2008 pages.  Pats 1  T / C  03:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To answer the first part, I was going about in order to make everything standardized. I like everything to be the same. I selected the "Did not qualify" over "did not qualify" in the 2008 seasons because, from my sample, there were more with a capital "D" than a lowercase one. However, like you said, after I went back a couple of seasons, it does seem that more have the lowercase "d". Hence, I'll make the "did not qualify" the standard instead. However, I do believe both "Won" and "Lost" should still be bold, since it makes it much easier to see the result of the game at a quick glance. Useight (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * In the interests of saving time and effort, it's always easier to standardize by replacing the minority with the majority; so instead of editing hundreds of articles, you're only editing 32 by doing just 2008. I did the 2008 AFC South teams already. But generally, team season article infoboxes do need some standardizing, as these articles (even outside the infoboxes) vary greatly from one another -- just see 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers season for example; that's the first time I've seen an MVP or ROY field used, and the first time I've seen the Pro Bowlers field populated by a list instead of numbers. But these articles go back years and years, and every infobox is a little different. That would be an interesting project to undertake, keeping in mind these articles have less users frequenting and monitoring them and a lot more IP activity. As far as Won/Loss goes, again, the point of bold is to contrast two things; having both "Won" and "Loss" in bold defeats the purpose of having bold in the first place. Keep in mind that I have standardized all of the Pats season articles, and when playoff results are bolded, it's the entire result, not just the Won/Loss word part.  Pats 1  T / C  03:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm aware that it's faster to replace the minority with the majority, that's obvious, that's why I was going with the capital "D", but I only took a sample from the 2008 season. I'm now standardizing them back to a lowercase "d". I'll leave the "Won" vs. "Loss" part alone for now. And, yeah, the further back we go, like the articles I'm making now from the early 70's, the fewer people that are actually looking at them. Useight (talk) 03:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

 * Delivered by The  Helpful  One  for  Garden  and  iMatthew  at 23:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

USURP Problem
When User:Rdsmith4 Usurped me from User:SRX to my present name of User:Truco, my edits were not connected (tied together), and so they are separate. May you fix that? He said he would do it but he hasn't been active lately.--Truco 16:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not a bureaucrat, so I can't look into it at the same level that bureaucrats may be able to, but I see that the usurpation took place on the 3rd of this month. It can take several weeks for your edits to transfer over, especially if you have a lot. I see, according to your userbox, that you have 19,000+, so that could take a little while. I wouldn't be concerned until another week has gone by. Useight (talk) 05:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the compliment on User talk:RlndGunslinger! :) Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :D  14:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Updates
I updated this a little 4 you. Hope you don't mind, oh, and I'm serious, I don't mind looking over the Nintendo article again before you resubmit. Best. — Realist  2  19:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
link, link, link  Enigma msg  17:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Each has been blocked. Thanks for the heads up. Useight (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

"Milestone Edits" Failure
Just thought I'd clue you in that several of your "Milestone Edits" links no longer (if they ever did so) link to where you want them to go. Your 30,000th edit link goes here: []. TheInfinityZero (talk) 02:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * My reply here

RfA thankspam
Denbot (talk) 22:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Um, you know, J.delanoy was the subject of a WP:AN post regarding the blocking of people who have vandalized his userpage being a COI, and the vast majority ruled that it was not a COI. So... I think you'd be safe to block him, especially since he's vandalized more than 1 place.  Until It Sleeps   05:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm sure it would've been fine; I just took the conservative approach. Useight (talk) 05:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Q10 of my rfa
I wasnt wrong in my answer please read WP:CDB  Here  Ford 18:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Based on your link, I think you're actually referring to Q11 on your RFA, "When should cool-down blocks be used?" Anyway, the full text of WP:CDB says, "Blocks intended solely to "cool down" an angry user should not be used, as they often have the opposite effect. However, an angry user who is also being disruptive can be blocked to prevent further disruption." Now, certainly a disruptive editor can be blocked, if it is preventative rather than punitive, however, this is not called a "cool down block", but rather just a block. The "cool down block" refers only to an angry editor being blocked solely with the intent to give them time to let off steam. The answer to "When should cool-down blocks be used" is "Never. Blocks are meant to be preventative, not punitive." Useight (talk) 18:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there!
Great to see you still on here :). I am thinking about becoming semi-active on this site again (in addition to the Simple English Wikipedia).  I was wondering if you would be willing to be like pals or buddies or something (kinda like adoption, only without the adoption part)....you game for something like this?  Cheers, Razorflame 19:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)  P.S:Gotta clear out my watchlist of old pages and users that I need to befriend again.  Cheers, Raz</b><b style="color:#6cc">or</b><b style="color:#6c9">fl</b><b style="color:#6c6">am</b><b style="color:#6c3">e</b> 19:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, good to see you again, I thought you retired. If you're looking for a WikiFriend, I'm right here. Useight (talk) 20:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nah, I didn't retire from this site, I just decided to get more active over on the Simple English Wikipedia...where I now have around 29,000 edits. ;).  Cheers, <b style="color:#6cf">Raz</b><b style="color:#6cc">or</b><b style="color:#6c9">fl</b><b style="color:#6c6">am</b><b style="color:#6c3">e</b> 20:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy Useight's Day!

 * Sweet! Thanks, Biblio, for the honor. Useight (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow
That's enlightening - but perhaps not as much fun as this comment. How times have changed! Good find. Pedro : Chat  20:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Woah. That's classic. Useight (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, how did you stumble so early upon me sorting through the old archives? Useight (talk) 20:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I saw it flash up on RC patrol and had a nose :) Pedro : Chat  20:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work getting started with that, it's something that really needs doing. It might be a good idea to say what archive each thing is from though.  Majorly  talk  20:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. I'll do that. I'll go back and add them in once I've finished archive 15; I don't want to stop in the middle of an archive. Useight (talk) 20:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violation?
 Enigma <sup style="color:#FFA500;">msg  16:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like it could be, but I don't work with images, so I'm not sure what the fair use policy is. I think the uploader has one week, though, to figure out the copyright situation. Useight (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

 * 17:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Email
Hi Useight, I've sent you an email. Regards, Sam  Blab 22:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied via e-mail. Useight (talk) 22:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

input needed
ok i'm a dbz fan so i added some info on the androids and didn't cite material that has been on wiki at one time or another (mostly when dbz characters had their own articles)

half the info on this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dragon_Ball_characters isn't cited but Sesshomaru reverts my addition of a few lines here and there, and calls it original work.

Now i could remove the info not cited to prove a point, but i'm not because that's against the rules. I'm pretty sure that there is a rule that tells people don't just delete and try to cite and help.

What should i do because the info i added is not orignal work, and being how old dbz is and how much of the fans have turned away, citing things is harder and the bulk of sources would be user generated which is also not allowed on wiki. Yami (talk) 19:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I should point out that i've had trouble with this user who once accused me of vandalism for adding Info to a Trunks artile that was more related to the alternate time line trunks from the future. He is also getting what i'd say is a attitude on my talk page. I say this because he made a point to put emphasis on Blockable. Yami (talk) 19:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I am taking a look at the situation now. Useight (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

thx, and you can see his comment on my talk page relating to the trunks thing in my archives, i believe the first archive. Yami (talk) 19:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * My response [here] Yami (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Is this a reliable citation? http://www.giantbomb.com/android-16/94-3644/ Yami (talk) 22:35, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably not the best source ever, but it does seem to be a decent one. It has a place for readers to subscribe. I'd go ahead and use it, if nothing better can be found. Useight (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Mr Attitude is back. the edits were removed again with the sources i added, and he left this message on my talk page "Both of you, read User talk:Collectonian#List of Dragon Ball characters. Your contributions are not helping."

21:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

He is also revering to us in a unwikipedic talk page manner. Yami (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh geez
i sure know how to pick articles to edit.

the stuff on #17 and #18can be let go but the 16 bomb and power level sensing is vital to the character. I just wonder if they're going argue against that. I know from how Collectonian spoke, he made it out like it was only important to me because i was a fan. i could quote articles agaisnt such actions, but that always causes trouble when i do that.

Yami (talk) 23:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're on a roll with your article selection. Useight (talk) 23:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Collectonian's attitude is getting counter productive. Yami (talk) 19:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * To which edits are you referring? Useight (talk) 19:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

He's being Uncivil on his talk page. I've posted that he should read WP:CIV

He is aggressive, has already focused on the editor(s) not the content and is counter productive in his approach requesting unrealistic things.

The show DBZ is fictional so there is no real way to cite "to the series itself as something directly stated by characters, or to actual reliable sources"

The characters have stated upon 16's power level sensing ability, *edit*and the bomb thing, but sites don't spring up everyday to mention every thing said by a person on a fictional series. Even the official site doesn't offer much to cite.

Yami (talk) 19:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I looked here, but it offers pretty much nothing. Useight (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at List of Naruto characters, a Featured List, pretty much all the references come from www.animenewsnetwork.com or from actual chapters of the manga. I'm going to look for references on that website, apparently it is a reliable source. Useight (talk) 19:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

thank you. I don't want to become a leech or what ever the term is like i did with the past articles, so i might not be on regularly.


 * edit to clarify* He has a problem with the Bomb site i found for some reason and called it unreliable. It has a user registration so it has to have guidelines and rules that qualify it for Wikipedia grade citations.

I know for a fact that you can't discriminate against all cites that can be edited. because even Internet Movie Database and Animenewsnetwork can be edited by registered users. That what gets so confusing, you can use sites like those, but not other wikis. Yami (talk) 19:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

He removed the part where i told him the show is fictional and characters can't claim things like that. He also removed my sugession that he got to [[WP:CIV] and called it a snarky remark

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACollectonian&diff=267882615&oldid=267877042

Yami (talk) 19:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

He has now removed the whole discussion on 16 form his talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACollectonian&diff=267883885&oldid=267883650

This hults productivity. It was his and the other guy's idea to take this whole thing to Collectonian's talk page. Yami (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

He's claiming i igonored guidelines he and sesshoumur pointed out and that i ignored the option for input from a project.

If i remember right, i didn't ignore anything, and it was believed by you that asking for input from a project was forum shopping so i never inputted on that. This is getting to be out of hand even thought so far only 4 editors are involved in the matter. Yami (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I hate to break it to you, but editors are allowed to remove comments from their talk page. Although calling your remark snarky was unecessary. Useight (talk) 22:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's hunt for references at www.animenewsnetwork.com. Useight (talk) 22:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand being able to remove things, but his whole attitude needs adjusting. Why do i get the feeling if i acted like Collectonian I'd get blocked and/or ban? He also keeps Capping who words with an attitude most NO and NOT.

I can't seem to find anything relating to the material on animenesnetwork, and apparently you can only use that site with a limit. Also it seems that they're using Viz's sit, but that doesn't give an in depth look into anything. Just a brief summary.

In the Anime, 16's ability is revealed in the Late Android Saga Early Cell saga, and the bomb and death is Cell Games.

I never got to read the manga to much. Yami (talk) 16:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Know any admins we can get to talk to Colletonian?
His attitude is gettign worse, and he's mocking me now. Yami (talk) 17:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't see where he was mocking you, but if he is, and depending on what he's doing, your options would pretty much be WP:ANI or WP:WQA. I don't think seeking out a random, uninvolved admin would get much done. Useight (talk) 19:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll just let it pass, he was mocking me because i told him emphasizing no and not is not appropriate, and he goes about making a point to post this "Uh, no, it doesn't. Internet references are NOT required (uh oh, emphasis) for anything on Wikipedia.


 * but i'll let it pass so i can get pass this sand trap of a article in the wikipedia golf course.

Yami (talk) 21:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Emergency
Lingle, Wyoming just had a murder threat (someone will die at "11:30"), which I reverted. I've reported it by email to the local sheriff's office, but could you please report this by telephone if you have the chance by 11:30 Mountain Time? I would do it myself, but I don't have phone access at the moment. Website is here for the Goshen County Sheriff's Office. Nyttend (talk) 17:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm on the phone with them now. Useight (talk) 18:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Spoke with the sheriff, they have two deputies on it now trying to track them down. Looks like they have 24 minutes before 11:30. Probably an empty threat, but it's a small town and the sheriff seemed familiar with the names, so if the threat had any substance, hopefully they can take care of it. Useight (talk) 18:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Before emailing the sheriff's office, I contacted Wyoming Community College (which owns the IP used to make the edits); the contact person replied almost immediately by saying that the message was being passed urgently to the appropriate person. Thank you so much!  Nyttend (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just out of curiosity, how did you select me as the first person to send this emergency message to? I hadn't made an edit for over eleven hours, yet was able to respond in minutes. I had just sent off an e-mail and was about to jump in the shower when I thought I'd check Wikipedia one more time. Useight (talk) 18:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Look at Highly Active Users/North America — you were (and still are, for that matter) the only Mountain Time editor listed as being online. I left notices for Sarcasticidealist and at the Administrator's Noticeboard because only after telling you did I look at your contributions and see that you'd not made any edits in recent minutes.  Thank you so much for postponing your shower!  Nyttend (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't know if you've heard anything, but I received an email somewhat more than three hours ago from the county's School Resource Officer, saying that she'd received word and investigated, and that the situation is now resolved. Nothing more (except a note of thanks, saying that it helped to solve the problem quickly) is in the email, so I take it that nothing happened.  Thank you so much for your help!  Just one question: did you get your shower yet?  Nyttend (talk) 00:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hadn't heard anything back, so thanks for the update. And don't you worry, I took a nice, long shower and then went to apply for a job. Which reminds me -- I need to go apply for some more. Useight (talk) 00:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I really, really, really hope you get a wonderful job very soon now. Preferably one that offers lots of highly paid overtime and is seven days a week. Another week of this and you can have my job. Otherwise, I'm going to collapse shortly from a very rare disorder called UIWOES. The long name is Useight-Inflicted-Wiki-Over-Editing-Syndrome. Man, I can't keep up this pace! ;) Paxse (talk) 14:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the funniest thing I've read on Wikipedia in a long time! I see that syndrome is a redlink...for now. Useight (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

user:PSNMand
I'm just wounding should PSNMand be blocked if he was using sockpuppetry just like his other account? Kyle1278 (talk) 02:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably, he's been causing a lot of disruption in different places. But I thought I'd give him one final chance to edit constructively, because he's done some constructive work in the past. However, I'm watching his contribs closely now. Useight (talk) 02:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Tyler Jones
I see you recently deleted this - did you notice that this is the 10th incarnation of this page? Perhaps it should be protected from re-creation. I don't know if it's the same user that keeps re-creatiing it. pablo hablo. 06:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see the logs for the article here. I salted the article at 00:48. Only an administrator can recreate it now. Useight (talk) 07:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah right - I was just looking at the deletion log. Thanks. pablo hablo. 08:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk pages
Thank you for deleting my old archives! Illinois2011 (talk) 23:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, that's what I'm here for. Useight (talk) 00:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Mentor question
This question is more hypothetical, at least at the present time. Is it improper to teach people how to do surgery on Wikipedia? If not, how about bomb making, how to kill someone with an axe, how to evade detection from anti-terrorist police units, etc. I think all of the above are inappropriate. What is the general feeling among Wikipedia administrators? This is a prudent decision not a censorship decision.

There is a new article that may eventually evolve into how to teach people, including mental patients and criminals, to cut out people's eyes or their own eyes. Yuk! Chergles (talk) 20:37, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, according to policy, Wikipedia is not a How To. There shouldn't be any step-by-step instructions on how to perform any of the tasks you mention above. WikiHow would be a venue that could include such tasks, albeit the ethical dilemma could be debated without end. Certainly we have articles about surgery, bombs, axes, and counter-terrorism; however, these articles are focused more on the historical details and so forth rather than a how-to. Now, if you're asking me what I think of Wikipedia potentially assisting in criminal acts via detailed how-to's, I'd be against that, both due to the conflict with policy and I would take the conservative side of the ethical dilemma of providing such a how-to. Useight (talk) 20:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This whole discussion came about due to my creation of the page enucleation (surgical technique). As I mentioned here, here and here, I was not trying to write a surgical how-to.  I understand WP:NOT.  I was trying to write an article on the same level about enucleation as existing surgical technique articles, such as debridement, curettage, etc.  I was doing this so I could explain what enucleation was in detail in articles such as ameloblastoma, carnoy's solution, etc.  I renamed the current existing enucleation article to Enucleation of the Eye and put up a main disambig page at enucleation.  Since enucleation (surgical technique) was an obvious generalization of Enucleation of the Eye, I added a section for that as well (from the original article) and Template:Main wiki-linked it.


 * I'm not sure where Chergles is getting people cutting out their own eyes stuff. That's bizarre. --InsufficientData (talk) 00:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Bizarre is correct. See http://www.nature.com/eye/journal/v18/n4/full/6700667a.html and http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28582204/ . First link is entitled "Bilateral self-enucleation of eyes" describing an event in the UK. Second link is entitled "Death row inmate pulls out eye, says he ate it; He had earlier pulled out other eye after conviction in family's killings" and happened in Texas. Chergles (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, that's good to know. My brother, User:TheInfinityZero, asked me what this random question was all about. Useight (talk) 00:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Pool J and my damn userpage
Don't worry I'll need to go to bed shortly - the field is then yours till next weekend (when I'll race to catch up to you again!). I did something bad to my userpage and have no idea how to fix it. I wanted a small tasteful display of DYKs and such as a top bar but I seem to have screwed things up badly. Time for you to get some DYKs, the sports articles you've been creating would be great candidates. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 18:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, the NFL articles I've made could indeed become a source of DYKs, I hadn't thought about that. I've never made a DYK, so I guess I could look into that. Thanks for the idea, though, and good luck with fixing that userpage. Useight (talk) 22:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I sneaked a look at a couple of articles you were working on last week (actually hoping I could secretly nominate one for you). The only thing missing in your articles is more prose text - tables, refs and infoboxes unfortunately don't count for DYK. You need at least 1500 characters (including spaces) to qualify. I'd be happy to nominate articles for you. Ideally I'd like to nominate other editor's articles at least one for one with my own article nominations. Take 1928 Chicago Cardinals season for example. It's coming up at about 223 characters at the moment (just the first two lines). If you can add a couple of paragraphs of additional text about the 1928 season, preferably with an interesting (and cited) fact - you got a great DYK. If you add some text, I'll format the submission and put it up for you. Looks like the wildcards idea may save both our hides and get us into the next round of the cup. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 08:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What do you think of 1929 Dayton Triangles season? Is there a possible DYK in there? I'm not sure what the rules are on a DYK hook, I'll have to look into that. And I must agree, with the Wildcard format, there shouldn't be a problem for both of us to move on to the second round. In fact, five of the Pool J members would move on if it ended today. Useight (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Damn you beat me to it. I was going to put it up for you! Paxse (talk) 18:40, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sometimes I move quick. Does the Hook sound exciting/interesting enough? Useight (talk) 19:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The hook sounds great and I'm sure it will be promoted soon. Sorry I've been away for a few days and didn't reply. Speaking of which, why haven't you smashed me back into third or fourth place? I haven't edited for days! Paxse (talk) 18:51, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In my defense I was down by a good 50 points. The gap is currently nine and I plan on reaching 322 within the next couple of hours. Useight (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

 * 20:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by J Milburn, on behalf of the judges. 20:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Has this changed
I was always told, and have read multiple times that editor's are not allowed to remove block notices while they are blocked. Is this not the case? Thanks. Landon1980 (talk) 02:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Responded at User_talk:J.delanoy in order to keep the conversation in one place. Useight (talk) 03:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Adoption
I noticed your name on the adopters list and I was wondering if you'd be willing to adopt me. I plan mostly on editing video game articles.Vantine84 (talk) 06:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My reply here

notability, adoptee question
I've learned that some things in WP are automatically notable and not subject to debate. High schools (not sure why), cities and towns, and libraries (really?!) are notable. Elementary schools are not automatically notable. How about mayors? Chergles (talk) 20:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I know some high schools have been merged with the article about the town. I would seriously doubt that all libraries are straight up notable. For complete information on mayors, see Notability_(people). I believe mayors are a second-level sub-national position. Useight (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I looked at that and I think a US state legislator would qualify. Do you agree? Let me know because I have randomly chosen a person to write about. I will attempt to make it a featured article. It may be impossible but I will try! It may take a year to do. I will begin a stub in a moment. If you think it does not qualify for automatic notability, let me know immediately to avoid wasted effort! Chergles (talk) 16:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that would fall under "first level", so you should be good to go. Useight (talk) 16:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

 * 23:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Bojil Kolarov
Please enrich this page by addind more relevent matter to it. Thanks  Jon Ascton    (talk)  13:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply
I don't think there is any rule that stops me from contacting anyone to help me with any article. Go and look at the way islamists are working on pro-islam pages at industrial scale. and all users I contatcted were related to the that page. They had all edited it  Jon Ascton    (talk)  14:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It is poor WikiEtiquette to post such requests. You said here that "All users I contatcted [sic] were related to the that page. They had all edited it", however, you had contacted me here asking me to improve the article, when according to the article's history, I have never edited the article. If you want me to "go look at the way islamists are working on pro-islam page", please include some links because I do not know who or what you are talking about. And regardless of what they are doing, it does not mean that is the best way to do things. Useight (talk) 17:32, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I made a mistake in your case, but my overall intention was to contact only those who had worked on Bojil page... Jon Ascton    (talk)

DYK for 1929 Dayton Triangles season
Shubinator (talk) 01:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Very belated congratulations! Paxse (talk) 13:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Heyo
Hey Useight are you around? Do you use Qui or AIM or anything? Vantine84 (talk) 06:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm around. I can get on Gmail chat. I also have Qui. Useight (talk) 07:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Great! I'm levi.vantine on Gmail. Vantine84 (talk) 08:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

User:WWEYANKS52
Would you like to give this editor a review? He looks like an article builder, and has expressed an interest in getting a mop. Cheers, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlohcierekim (talk • contribs)
 * In fact, he has a failing RFA running right now. Certainly, though. I will review his work and give him my assessment. Useight (talk) 22:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

1924 Dayton Triangles season
Well, I was busy patrolling new pages, and I happen to see one of your pages. I am not sure which one it was, it might have been the 1924 Cleveland Bulldogs season, as you said. So after seeing your page I decided to try a NFL season. I don't think I did as good a job as you do. Adam Penale (talk) 23:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind, I'll go ahead and add a couple of things that are missing. It's pretty good, though. I'll just add the league standings and their weekly schedule. I've been pumping through these articles at a pretty fast pace, having created 371 of them now. So I've got a pattern that I follow, which makes it easier. It's been a pretty sizeable project. Thanks for your help. Useight (talk) 23:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank You! Adam Penale (talk) 23:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

40 winks
Sorry, it got very dusty in there 8-) -- Avi (talk) 05:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been trying to figure what you are referring to, but I am still not quite sure. I'm probably missing something completely obvious. Useight (talk) 07:40, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAnonymous_Dissident&diff=271526736&oldid=271526249 -- Avi (talk) 12:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, makes sense. My best guess was the conversation at BN. Useight (talk) 16:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

CHU instructions
Thanks! --Dweller (talk) 16:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'm here to help. Useight (talk) 16:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Problematic editor - how to handle?
Hi, Useight. You might remember me from such movies as Hat &rarr; &rarr; &rarr; &rarr; Ring (…and Here Comes the Metric System! ;-))

Say, how might best be guided towards coöperative participation? There've been one or two good additions, but mostly bizarre, random and/or abstruse entries on various talk pages, moving or copying entire blocks of text from one talk page to another, and repeated removals of valid templates (e.g. 1, 2). I've put appropriate and sequential warnings on his/her talk page in case it becomes necessary to put in for a block, but to try and avoid that I have also repeatedly tried to engage and coach this user (e.g. here, here, and here), with no success. I think English is not this user's first language, or perhaps there's some other impediment to effective communication. Have you any suggestions for how best to deal with an editor such as this? Thanks! —<span style="font:bold 11px Arial;display:inline;border:#151B8D 1px solid;background-color:#FFFF00;padding:0 4px 0 4px;">Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 20:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, this is an interesting one. I'm about to head to the bowling alley, so I haven't taken a very deep look yet, but it looks like he's editing in good faith. One option may be to collect an assortment of diffs and take them to ANI for further review. I also note that he does mention his Skype ID at Talk:Poppet valve. Perhaps actually speaking to him would give some enlightenment as to how good his handle on English is. Messages like that are pointless, I have no idea what he was trying to get across. From what I've seen from this bizarre situation, so far, is that it is not yet blockable, but I'm also not convinced that getting him an adopter would be all that useful either, especially if his grasp of English is lacking. Useight (talk) 20:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

GA Review
Hi there, as User:Vantine84's adopter I'd appreciate your thoughts on this. Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have replied on Vantine84's talk page. Useight (talk) 16:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Immediate block needed
 Enigma <sup style="color:#FFA500;">msg  05:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Due to this comment five minutes ago, I will decline for now and watch is contribs. Thanks for the heads up. Useight (talk) 06:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Steve Marcelle
I request that a page be made for his representation. I attempted earlier to expand upon him by adding him to the Green Bay Preble alumni and thatn proceeding to begin construction oh is page however my previous step I had taken in adding him to the Alumni had been deleted by you. I now ask that you create the page yourself as he is a Gatorade Wisconsin Athlete of the Year and High School Track and Field Champion and therefore is relevant. He also was a top recruit in football playing both offense and defense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The elegant professor (talk • contribs)
 * I must decline to create the page. As per WP:ATHLETE, I do not believe this individual to be notabl enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. Useight (talk) 07:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

A National Champion who broke a record that stood for over 60 years and who is now a canidate for the Olympic team. He now competes at Georgia Tech and is one of the top shotputters in the nation and is well known and followed throughout the state of Wisconsin. If this is the case I request that you quit making a mockery of the Green Bay Preble High School page and leave the changes up to Advisors such as myself. We shall remove edits of fictional content on our own. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The elegant professor (talk • contribs)
 * Please only make civil comments. And, no, we will not leave editing of the article solely up to school advisors, that is a clear conflict of interest. Useight (talk) 17:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

A school however should not apply to these rules. The athlete in question is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of fact. Steve Marcelle has been a member of our Wall of Fame for the last three years and thanks to his accomplishments has allowed our sports programs to flourish. After receiving his National title and Gatorade Wisconsin Athlete of the Year both Nike and Gatorade made substantial contributions to our school. The school recognizes him as a highly notable alumni. The argument above was also civil contrary to your belief as I requested formally that you would stay to your areas of expertise as I would stay to mine. Your rejection of the article on the athlete in question was based on your opinion of his accomplishments not being up to par and not based on fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The elegant professor (talk • contribs)
 * Saying "quit making a mockery", when I am obviously not mocking anyone/anything is incivil. Now, the question is not opinion vs fact, it is truth vs verifiability. Regardless of whether any of that is true, and I do not doubt that it is, something being true is irrelevant. It needs to be verifiable. Please see the first sentence of that link, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." If you can find independent, reliable sources that cite this information, that would be good. But things like being on a high school's "Wall of Fame" is not noteworthy enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. However, winning a National title, might be. Also, if you could end your comments by signing them with four tildes ( ~ ), that would be really helpful. Thanks. Useight (talk) 17:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

http://ramblinwreck.cstv.com/sports/m-track/mtt/marcelle_steve00.html Look at his highschool accomplishments and you will see he won the Nike Outdoor High School National Championship which I have mentioned countless times. Your comments on this accomplishment not being large enough was indeed a mockery of the athlete and the school itself and was considered highly disrespectful. THis quote "I do not believe this individual to be notabl enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia." is your opinion as you clearly state "I".The elegant professor (talk) 18:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We're getting far from the point. My opinion is irrelevant; your extrapolation that I am somehow mocking the school is irrelvant. The only thing that matters is whether this individual meets the Notability requirements and specifically the notability requirements for athletes. If you believe that that source is indicative of Steve Marcelle's notability (not as judged by you or me, but by Wikipedia), create the page and source it. Useight (talk) 18:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Notability
Hi, Useight. I'd better not opine on the article the Professor wants; I know nothing of notability in sports. But these records the subject has set are, going by the link provided, apparently school records, so, well.. yeah. Bishonen | talk 19:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC).
 * It looks like he also set the Wisconsin state record at 68' 0.5", it's mentioned under the "High School" section. I still doubt that alone will be sufficient, though. If the article is created, I would not be surprised if an AFD followed. Useight (talk) 19:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Er, well, the Wisconsin state meet record. For highschoolers. So.. Bishonen | talk 19:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC).
 * Touché. Useight (talk) 19:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

 * 21:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Chris Brown
I intend to fix a few items on that disambiguation page, but first a few page titles need to be decided. One got moved twice for some bizarre reason. There are multiple Chris Browns in the NFL, but either the middle name or the position should be used in the title, not both. The other one is Chris Brown (fullback), which got the position in the title (which was renamed again after he changed from tight end to fullback). Perhaps it should just go by the middle name?  Enigma <sup style="color:#FFA500;">msg  22:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that is interesting. Personally I'd prefer using the position rather than the middle name; I think that would make it easier for the reader to find the individual about which they desire to read. It does pose the problem you mentioned of athletes switching positions, but I would imagine that that is a rare enough occurrence that we can deal with it a on a case-by-case basis. Useight (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you move the Chris R. Brown one to Chris Brown (running back), then? I just think the page names should be consistent. Until there is another NFL running back named Chris Brown, I think it best.  Enigma <sup style="color:#FFA500;">msg  00:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. Useight (talk) 01:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Account to look at
Edit-warring, copyright infringement, mild incivility etc.  Enigma <sup style="color:#FFA500;">msg  00:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking now. Useight (talk) 00:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Smile!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Acalamari 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, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * Yay, thanks! Useight (talk) 00:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

HI!.....
Adopted another user? And I see you have been doing a good job in the wikicup... I'm doing so hot.... I also see that you have been an awesome wikipedian twice... well ok. See ya!-- Spittle spat  01:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's good to see you again. Indeed, I have adopted Vantine84. And I have been marching my way through my NFL Project, which has gotten me a lot of mainspace points for the cup. But more importantly, I've now created articles for hundreds of NFL seasons. And being an Awesome Wikipedian twice was an amazing honor. Useight (talk) 02:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Signature
Hey Useight how's it going? I read through the WP: articles on signatures, "raw" signatures, Wikimarkup, etc. I can't find anything that can help me make a different signature. Any suggestions? Vantine84 (talk) 11:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you taken a look at the rules at Signature? After that, you can click on "my preferences" at the top of the page. In the "User profile" tab, there is a text box in which you can enter the WikiMarkup that you want to use as a signature. For example, you could type in: Vantine84, which would make the "Vantine" link to your userpage and the "84" bold and link to your talk page, like this: . Or you could change the color scheme, something like:  Vantine  84  , which looks like this:  Vantine  84 . You obviously can alter the colors selected, but there's some ideas for you. Useight (talk) 17:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

You'd better know about this
 – iride  scent  16:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC) 
 * Woah. Okay, good to know. Thanks. Useight (talk) 16:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

NFL playoffs prior to 1933
Hello. I happened to be working on some early-era NFL articles and I noticed you have posted season articles for many of the 1920s teams. While I appreciate it, I have one big issue with your work.

In most of the articles, it states that for every team, "They failed to qualify for the playoffs for the second consecutive season." or something similar. The problem is that there were no playoffs in the NFL until 1933, so mentioning that they "failed to qualify" for something that did not yet exist is quite deceptive. Perhaps leaving that section blank would be best for those articles; for the ones I've edited so far, which are a few in the 1921 season, that's what I did. Thank you. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I know. There was just an "NFL Champion", the team with the best record, but I couldn't think of a better way to word that on the articles. I did want to show the drought, though, but I don't like the sound of "failed to become NFL Champion for the fifth consecutive season". I guess leaving it blank until something better can be used is a good idea. If you think of a good way of putting it, I'd be glad to go back through the articles, and there are a lot. Useight (talk) 18:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. Roughly 200 articles fixed. Useight (talk) 21:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK update
Hello. Did You Know is due for an update, and it seems none of the regular DYK admins are around. Can you do an update? I can give instructions. Shubinator (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am around, but I've never done it before. What are the steps? Useight (talk) 22:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Upload the next pic from Commons to en and protect it. (Tag it with ) 2) Copy hooks from queue 5 to T:DYK. That's the main part done. 3) Reset the time 4) Bump the count to 1. 5) Clear queue 5 to look like this. I'll do archiving and credits, you don't need to worry about that. Shubinator (talk) 22:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'm going to give it a shot. Step one will be the most difficult, as I do not deal with images. Useight (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I'll watch for stray errors. Shubinator (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. I think I got it all taken care of. If not, please let me know; I'm heading out to the store in five minutes. Useight (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. One minor quibble: The en pic source info, etc, should be copied from the commons version. Thank you! Shubinator (talk) 22:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think I got it now. Useight (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Perfect. Thanks for all your help! Shubinator (talk) 22:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)