This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
== WhodunitQuery bug ==
Now that the computer with VandalProof and the Query program is connected to the net again, I did some poking. Apple and Wikipedia:Articles for creation got results like charm. It was when I added the subpage (Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Today) when it returned 'Article not found'. I think it doesn't recognize subpages. Can you remedy this? It would be a great help at AFC and other processes that are prone to receiving unsigned comments (like Ref Desk subpages). - Mgm|(talk)21:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, I think I may have found the problem. Somehow I input that %2F should be converted to a colon (":") rather than a slash("/"). Is it erroring when you start the query or when you initially load the page? I can't understand wonder why this would make a difference upon loading the page. Let me play around a little bit, and once I think I have it fixed I'll upload a patch. Thanks for your patience. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, for some reason everyone has started asking me if I'm leaving. What, can you guys smell fear all of a sudden or what? But no, I have no intention of leaving in the forseeable future. Master of PuppetsFREE BIRD!01:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I figured it out, it was this edit. I used (cover your ears) Metallica lyrics because I'm listening to the song, and as it is a song about suicide, some people saw it as me saying I'm leaving. :P All cleared up now, though. Master of PuppetsFREE BIRD!01:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Vomits at the sound of Metallica) You should really try some better music. Though I would note that, as much as I detest Metallica, I really like Apocalyptica's covers of Metallica's songs, like "Fade to Black", "For Whom the Bell Tolls", and "One"--you may want to check them out when you get the chance. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I mean the old Metallica, not the new one. If you still vomit, you, sir, are dead to me. No, you aren't, you're free to like what you like :). And besides, I like a lot of artists, including the better ones such as Queen, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppellin, Rush (note: vomiting at any of those may cause me to go get admin powers and block you). Anyway, I'm gonna go hunt down these covers you speak of. Cheers, Master of PuppetsFREE BIRD!01:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Queen's decent, Floyd's a little annoying at times but still good, Zeppelin never did much for me, and Rush is alright. None of them make me vomit quite like Metallica--I probably wouldn't mind them as much if everyone wasn't so damn obsessed with them. But yes, the old Metallica, prior to the black album, was a hellofalot better, though still not great. I'm a much stronger fan of German bands like Rammstein (obviously), Letzte Instanz, Subway to Sally, In Extremo, etc., and I also like a lot of Ami bands like Manson (only during Twiggy's years with the band though; everything else was/is shit), Rasputina, Shadows Fall, Machine Head (band), Killswitch Engage, The Doors, etc. If you like real metal, not the "metal" that Metallica is known for, you should check out some Swedish melodic death metal bands like In Flames (one of the best live shows I've ever seen, I might add). Anyway, I could go on and on and on about music, so don't get me started :-). Long story short, you have bad taste in music, but at least you're not leaving WP! AmiDaniel (talk)
Bad taste in music? Well, I never! :P Floyd are Gods, I point to Echoes as an example, or Atom Heart Mother, or Wish You Were Here; I like Rammstein, and no offence to them but they add a little hilarity into their music. The Doors, however, are awesomeness in a spoon. Oh, and real metal is Steppenwolf, who defined the sound. They, too, are one of my favorites. Master of PuppetsFREE BIRD!01:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, "Wish You Were Here" (and Rasputina's cover) was freakin' incredible, along with "Darkside of the Moon" and the entirety of The Wall. Not offended by the fact the R+ adds humor to their music; that's what I like about it--they take it seriously but they don't have their heads so far up their ass that they can't have fun. Steppenwolf I'm not too familiar with, though I have heard some of their stuff. I'll have to get back to you on that one. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of which, someone needs to close that RfA. Oh [AmiDaniel], if you need any help with your [soon to be] new admin abilities (I assume not, since you were a sysop on test.wikipedia), let me know, anything, from range blocks to selective deletions, I know how to do it. Prodegotalk01:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. I've been patiently waiting for the 'crats to close it, but I guess I'll just have to wait some more :-). Now back to the master there, if you want Apocalyptica with drums you should check out their stuff from Reflections, where they brought in the drummer from Slayer (I can't think of his name at the moment). I didn't care to much for the album as I was really amazed by their earlier cello work, but they also ventured quite a bit beyond Metallica, to cover artists like Floyd, with that album. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And actually [Prodego:], I'll probably need some help figuring out how to do range blocks. I know there's something I have to append to my monobook.css, but I forget what. I haven't really played around with those on the test wiki, so I would definitely appreciate some assistance with that. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We don't in America either. They were somewhat well-known in Germany (and they actually played Ozzfest, though no one here knew them), and I'm absolutely in love with their music. Especially their work from Soundtrack to Your Escape and The Jester Race. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Range blocks do not require you to add anything to your monobook file (it is in the sitewide file). I can explain it to you; do you use g-mail? Also do you know how the Mediawiki namespace works? Prodegotalk02:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh really? I thought I read somewhere that you had to add something to some file somewhere. I get (to some extent) how to edit within the MediaWiki namespace, though I've only made one edit myself. I don't have g-mail, but you can send me a message on hotmail. Let me first go read that over again and see if I can figure it out myself before I have take up more of your time with it. Thanks for your help though! AmiDaniel (talk) 02:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, woops I just got confused. That line has to be added to LocalSettings.php, but that's nothing I have to deal with, is it? Can I just input 142.177.0.0/16 as the IP address to block and have it block that entire range? AmiDaniel (talk) 02:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. (Note though that that would block a huge range of addresses, the max allowed by Wikipedia). You may want to get g-mail, it hides your IP address when you send e-mail, and some people do try to stalk admins in real life. Also, Special:Allmessages is indespesible when editing the MediaWiki namespace. However, I have only made thirteen edits to the Mediawiki pages myself. Prodegotalk02:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot what I was going to say because I'm so angry that Essjay closed it before Linuxbeak, ruining my chance to get first congrats, and that I am on my sixth edit conflict. FARK. Enjoy adminship, and please block me as your first abuse of power. --Avillia(Avillia me!)02:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(trying to avoid a third edit conflict) Thank you all so much, both for your congrats and your support on my RfA! I'll do my best to get thank you notes out tonight or tomorrow sometime (I've got, what, 150 or so to write?). Now, I'm off to WP:SPLICE to help with some requests that have been sitting there for a day :-). AmiDaniel (talk) 02:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's alright. I got yelled at the last time I "spammed," so hopefully I can avoid that this time. I think I'll do it around 3am, when all of you are sleeping, so as to avoid that :-). AmiDaniel (talk)
No, I insist. It'll be very funny to a select group of people out there, who know who they are. Plus, I have a fancy little thing I've been needing a excuse to try out. --Avillia(Avillia me!)02:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now that you are an admin, you absolutly need to redesign your userpage, I see overlaping boxes and it isn't XHTML transitional. It just looks bad for an admin to have that. ;-) Prodegotalk02:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, alright. I just might do that. To be honest, I never really cared that much for userpages and rarely look at others' userpages (and so I assume others rarely look at mine). It's always been more of a place to put myself into certain categories and add random tidbits/useful links that I find. If anyone else would like to redesign it for me, go right ahead! AmiDaniel (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I don't why admins tend to be shy about performing history merges. Just finished up three requests at WP:SPLICE, and while they're a bit messy, they're really quite a piece of cake. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on your adminship! Like I said when I voted for you, I was surprised to find out you were not already an admin. I always thought you were one for some reason. Keep up the good work on VandalProof (even though I haven't used it, I've seen it used many times in the histories of pages). WIKIPEEDIO02:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello AmiDaniel. Thank you for your strong support at request for adminship which ended at the overwhelming and flattering result of (160/1/0), and leaves me in a position of having to live up to a high standard of community expectation. Of course, if I make any procedural mistakes, feel free to point them out and I look forward to working with you in the future, Blnguyen | Have your say!!!03:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your inputs on Subbhulaksmi.... Maybe people do misspell that way.. I guess we'll retain the pages. Alternatively, is it possible to find the number of hits to the page in the past year or so? That could tell us if it's an important typo. Nevertheless, I don't think it's such a problem to retain it. Regards:Karthik.raman05:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is one rather complicated method to figure out the number of hits a page gets, but I can't recall it off-hand at the moment. Generally, the philosophy on redirects is that redirects are cheap and should only be deleted if they are cross-namespace or rather absurd alternate spellings. You can read more about that on redirects for deletion page. AmiDaniel (talk) 05:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you will find that at least a hundred people will verify the fact that christopher curtis is not unknown.I would have written more, but I was tired and was just putting up the beggining of the article tonight. If enough people vouch for it will you return it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by God MK2 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Beyond the topic's lack of notability, the article was also clearly an attack page with statements like "Chris Curtis is one of the most annoying and unintelligent cripples of all time." Wikipedia maintains several policies prohibiting personal attacks and encouraging unbiased articles. If you can find reputable sources that confirm his notability and agree to address the topic in a unbiased tone, I will have no problem restoring the article; however, I will not restore it or allow for its recreation if the article remains an attack. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Australian Army Cadets
This was a work in progress as i did not have the time when i created it to complete it. When it is finished it will. It has nothing to do with my userspace. It will connect to alot of other pages though. Feedyourfeet07:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have restored one revision and moved it to User:Feedyourfeet/Australian Army Cadets. Please work on it there, and once you feel it is up to par, please move it back to Australian Army Cadets. I hope this works for you. Thanks for your understanding, and I hope that you'll continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need help with anything. AmiDaniel (talk) 07:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Could you please delete it. Also it is in mainspace to people can help add to it. Also i have added "In order to keep this page small in filesize and clean I regularly delete entries." so people know that there edit could be deleted. I have not seen a policy not permitting that, Is there one that i have missed? Feedyourfeet08:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I've also restored the edit history of the article in the mainspace--in the future, please contact me before recreating content. As for your talk page, it is considered very bad form to remove any messages without properly archiving them. Typically pages are only archived at around 32kb+, not every time a message comes in, and it is very frustrating to others to have their messages immediately deleted after being posted. AmiDaniel (talk) 08:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent; thanks for the prompt assistance with that. "ZRM" is where we want her to be, but it's good to know we can move her back and forth at will. And I'll be keeping an eye out in case anyone cuts-and-pastes her again. Bolivian Unicyclist12:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Problems with installing VandalProof.
Hello! I hope you are fine. I think I have a problem installing this software. Whenever, I try to install this, the message Setup cannot continue because some system files are out of date on your system. Click OK if you like setup to update these system files for you now. You will need to restart Windows before you can run setup again. Click cancel to exit setup without updating system files. However, when I re-start my PC, this proble still persists. And how do I find out if I already have the necessary system files installed? I am using Windows ME and I have IE installed on my computer. However, when I surf the net, I use Crazy Browser. The version of my IE is later than 5.5. I think that I have a Me installer problem. And how do I install the necessary components? If this does not work on my PC, I would find it relatively hard to fight vandalism in Wikipedia. Is there any other way to do this? I am very keen to help out, so I hope that you can give me hints on how to combat vandalism by using this software or is there another way? Thanks! --Siva1979Talk to me14:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's with your removal of my db-band on this article? It looks like a real band article, true, but if you look closely you may notice that the band has never had a charting release or been signed to a real label, and in short fails any criterion of WP:MUSIC. mgekelly15:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it falls short of WP:MUSIC, but I think that it's something we should let an AfD discussion decide. A7 is, in my opinion, only for the most clear-cut cases of non-notability, i.e. "Bob was a funny man." I prodded the article as a non-notable band and will keep it watchlisted in case the prod gets removed. I might note that the article has been around since 27 Feb 2003, so there's really no hurry to get rid of it. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Correct AmiDaniel. A7 applies to articles about a person, group... that do not assert the importance or significance of their subject. Note the bolding. Also note that G1 applies only to patent nonsense. (Another thing many admins forget is that static IPs should be blocked for a maximum of a month, dynamics: a max of 24hrs) Prodegotalk21:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was. These are just things that a lot of admins mess up (along with CSD A7) so I thought I would mention them as well. Prodegotalk21:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm - I don't think that this page does assert the notability of the band anywhere. But I'm happy with what you've done now anyway, mate. mgekelly02:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks! I still remember what a difference it made once I was finally welcomed, and I really do think that to be one of the main deciding factors between the next great admin and the next Willy on Wheels so I do my best to welcome whomever I see. Thanks for the barnstar! It'll go nicely with the new design of my userpage :-). AmiDaniel (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ooooh. Me likey. I didn't even realize that changes were going on! Still needs a little bit of work, but it looks a hellofalot better! Thanks! AmiDaniel (talk) 00:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have a few changes. First, the "Vandalism Stats" needs to be colorized just like the UBXs. Also, Either widel the "link box" or widen that border next to the link box, because there is an empty space. Also, on the "hide/show" box, the "show" is a little hard to see. --GeorgeMoneyT·C00:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vandalism Stats can't be colorized due to the nature of VandalProof. I wish AmiDaniel could make that a template with {{{params}}} for the colors. Also, the show can't be changed. It's a issue with the colors. The show clicky is defined in MediaWiki.css/Monobook.css... I could try and track it down and hand-incorporate it, but it would be very messy. --Avillia(Avillia me!)00:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Tell me how you want it to look and I can rewrite that within VP so that every time it updates, it restores them in the same format. Let me go take a look at Prodego's sandbox--I'm all for getting rid of a bunch of my userbox and a lot of my little ramblings. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You removed the CSD tags from this and there's been an interesting development. Subject continues to add POV material to his own article, even after he agreed to let a "third party" [his quotations] edit it. --JChap00:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Holy bajesus that AfD has gotten out of control. I still think it was wrong of me to close it early as a speedy, and I think it best to let the AfD run its course--but my god! Let me ask around about whether it's appropriate to remove these gigantuous essays from the AfD, just for the sake of clarity. The consensus among experienced editors thus far seems to be delete/userfy and/or let someone else write the article. Let me talk to Roger and some other more experienced admins and see what they have to say about it. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pacific Coast University School of Law article
Dear AmiDaniel,
As a first time contributor to Wikipedia, on behalf of myself and PCU where I am a recent graduate, we appreciate your help and the editing done by Bobak Ha'Eri, Esq.
Condensing the article and adding headlines made the article much better, and I apologize if any of what I added seemed too promotional or wordy.
As the previous article indicated that it was a stub, I just added what I could out of our school's bulletin.
Our Vice Dean Charles Hicks, Esq. has requested one slight change to just one sentence in the final edit by The Wikipedia editors, and that change is described in the email (copied below) which I sent today to Bobak Ha'Eri at the email address listed on his page.
Here is a copy of that email for you.
Should you have any questions, please feel to contact our Vice Dean Charles Hicks, Esq. at:
vicedean@pculaw.com
or at 562-961-8200.
Thanks again,
Sincerely,
Robert Campbell, JD
pcuoutreach@pculaw.com
- - -
Dear Bobak Ha'Eri, Esq.
The Wikipedia
Dear Bobak Ha'Eri, Esq.:
Thank you so much for editing our article on The Wikipedia for
Pacific Coast University School of Law.
The Vice Dean of our Law School just requested one minor change in
the first sentence of the last paragraph which I have changed to read
as follows:
"Although it is required to follow the restrictions of the State Bar
of California but is not subject to the restrictions of the American
Bar Association, the school can offer legal education at lower cost."
Should you have any questions, you are welcome to contact our Vice
Dean who is Charles Hicks, Esq.
His email address is:
vicedean@pculaw.com
His telephone number is:
562-961-8200
Thank you again for editing The Wikipedia article and for all the
legal editing you do for The Wikipedia, which is a great resource.
Sincerely,
Robert Campbell, JD
Pacific Coast University School of Law
Pacific Coast University School of Law, is located at 1650 Ximeno Ave., Suite 310, Long Beach, California 90804-2150, USA. Telephone: 562-961-8200
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pcuoutreach (talk • contribs) 01:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Maybe I don't have my head screwed on right, but this is a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Why can't he make the necessary changes himself? — Nathan(talk)02:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PYRAMA Topic
Please restore it. As I stated in the article, the forum is very important to the gaming community. Not to mention I worked on the article for several hours, making sure to include key facts about it. If you don't restore it, I will. - Bagel701:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will gladly restore this article to your userspace, i.e. at User:Bagel7/PYRAMA; however, I will not restore it to the main article namespace as the topic is simply not notable enough to warrant inclusion in the encyclopedia proper. I'm sorry that you feel your work went wasted, but Wikipedia maintains standards of notability for a reason. If you restore it again, the page will protected from recreation. If you would like for me to userfy it, however, I will do so gladly. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, userfy it, but please make it on a separate page from my own userpage. Mine is already too full - Bagel701:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is that available for admins now? :-O. I saw them playing around with it on test.wiki and was wondering if that was just for devs or if admins would get it too. How does it work? AmiDaniel (talk) 01:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, that was my error. I accidentily nominated an old version of the page for deletion when I meant to nominate the current page for deletion. Vandalproof has been working great for me outside of my errors in learning how to use it, so thanks again for developing and sharing it! Fabricationary02:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, no I'd say that was the program's error, not yours. I'm guessing this is probably related to similar ampersand bugs it's been having--even when you try to nominate an old version for deletion, it should post the tag on the current version, not create a separate article. Let me look into it a bit; I'm sorry about that. In any case, both of the articles got deleted, so all's well that ends well! AmiDaniel (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apartheid (disambiguation)
1) Why are you editing when you are "away"
2) There is a consensus (see Talk:Apartheid (disambiguation) - that one editor disagrees does not justify reprotection, especially when he's almost out of edits. I suggest you keep it unprotected for another hour or so and then check again. I'm quite confident the "edit war" will end once Moshe has extinguished his three edits. Homey02:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for having my status set to away--I always forget to change that. What I see when I look at the history is a very recent edit war with you and Calton on one side and Moshe... and Humus Sapiens on the other. While I see majority support for one version on the talk page, I'm not sure I see a clear consensus--especially given that edit warring has just fired up again. As the article was just protected yesterday and the disputes haven't yet ended, I feel it appropriate to leave it protected for at least one or two days, let you all sleep on it a bit, and maybe you'll all be able to cool down. Given what happened immediately after the article was unprotected, I don't think it's a good idea to unprotect it just yet. You're both very close to violating 3RR so simply waiting for him to be blocked won't serve your cause, and I might note that while 3RR is policy, it doesn't mean that you have an automatic three reverts per 24 hours, and the philosophy of "let's wait for him to get blocked and then implement our changes" does not seem particularly productive. AmiDaniel (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. It's no problem--at least I'm not the only guilty of that! It's nice to know that other admins agree with my blocks :-). AmiDaniel (talk) 04:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Question, if you don't mind
My user talk page was just reverted by someone who I warned for vandalising, possibly as retribution. Is it a bad thing to revert a talk page if the only messages on it are irrelevant now, and have been replied to?
Sorry about that. I simply reverted the vandal's edit based upon the edit summary, and then when I saw that it blanked your talk page I reverted myself. I personally find it to be very bad form/etiquette to remove messages from talk pages without archiving, but that's your decision--there's no policy or even guideline to support my view :-). AmiDaniel (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, had a little Strongbow tonight, so buzzing a bit. Knew the template was wrong, glad you fixed it (and protection) up for me. Cheers!!! - RoyBoy80005:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And then get on IRC! I don't give a fark if you are busy! Also, I don't think administrators can see IPs. You gotta reference what block triggered the autoblock or the secret IP number I think it shows. --Avillia(Avillia me!)05:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It actually wasn't me who unblocked you, but you're welcome :-). Once I found the autoblock it had already been released... now to go try and find out who it was who unblocked you. AmiDaniel (talk) 05:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, seems to be working this time. Yes, I've seen that lovely slop of words several times during the last week. I'll have to scrub my talk page with lye soap. As the secured sign in has been hit by the autoblocker twice in as many days, should I report the experience on the AOL advice link you offered me? Thanks for your help. WBardwin06:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gawd, I don't know what to do about this whole Juggernaut Bitch thing. I just can't believe the number of autoblocks that one guy's blocked has caused--hopefully the devs will soon come up with a way to disable autoblocking because this is just getting ridiculous. I'm glad you're back editing, hopefully for more than 10 minutes this time! If you have any further problems, feel free to email me or tack up your well-used unblock template again. Sorry about all this! AmiDaniel (talk) 06:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
congratulations on becoming an admin
Hi, congratulations on becoming an administrator! I'll let you continue to improve wikipedia with your hard work. Sorry for the short message, but I gotta go. Cheers. --Starionwolf06:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apartheid (disambiguation)
I must admit I am somewhat troubled by your actions on this page. You basically placed all of the blame at my feet for "edit warring" against the consensus. Did you even look at the article's talk page? Samuel Blanning, Alex Bakharev, Humus Sapiens, and now 6SJ7 have all expressed agreement with me, also it is clear that the wikipedia disambiguation guidlines state that those articles shouldn't be listed there. I am trying to assume good faith in this instance but I find it hard especially considering you only warned me even though User: HOTR had accumulated 3 reverts before I did, and was actually blocked just yesterday for his violation on the same article.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk06:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IP address 24.4.193.231 has once again vandalized a page, this time the rugrat article. In a current afd on one of the articles written by him, he said he has changed and is no longer a vandal, yet he has done it again. Could you please watch him/block him if he does this again. Judging from the amount of warnings and blocks he has recieved, i'm suprised he hasn't been blocked indefinetly. Thank you, Thetruthbelow(talk)06:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any vandalism coming from that IP in the last 3 hrs. I'll keep an eye on him, but I'm pretty sure he's off to bed or something. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that was all I was asking. He seems to be a pretty active vandal, and on the afd he created multiple accounts just to vote his way. Not so good. Thanks again, Thetruthbelow(talk)07:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've also closed the AfD he opened as a bad-faith nom. Given that twenty people voiced support for early closure and his abuse of sockpuppetry, I felt this was appropriate. AmiDaniel (talk) 07:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down. There are a couple of issues with the image that need to be addressed. For one, you currently are displaying this image at User:Micoolio101/Micoolio101's Photo Album. Fair use images are only allowed to be used in the one article, not in your userspace. Please remove the image form your userspace. Two, you have not provided a fair use rationale--why you are able to use the image in that article. If you cannot provide one, it will be deleted. If you have questions about how to do this correctly, please ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, as I can't say I'm 100% sure about the whole process. Sorry for the inconvenience, but please refrain from reverting the OrphanBot's edits and removing other deletion notices. Note as well that you have seven days to provide a fair use claim for the image before it will even face deletion, and given the tremendous backlog at WP:COPYVIO, you may have even longer. I wish I could help you more, but I can't. AmiDaniel (talk) 08:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WHAT LICENSE DO I USE THEN???!!! NOW I'M REALLY PISSED!
Please, calm down. There is no reason to get upset over this image. If you have permission to use the image on Wikipedia, or you have reason to believe that the image can be used, then you must provided a detailed fair use rationale under the image's summary. Simply providing the source is not a substantiated claim of fair use. You may want to contact User:Carnildo about this as he knows a lot more about image copyright problems than I do, and he seems quite willing to help if you would just calm down and act reasonably. Also try asking at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions as I suggested before. The unfortunate truth is that there likely is no fair use rationale for the image--if you just found it somewhere on the internet, there probably isn't one, in which case the image must be deleted. That's the way copyright law works. I'm sorry for the inconvenience, but please take a deep breath and settle down. AmiDaniel (talk) 09:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. Continual reversions and replacements of copyright information on this image will result in your being blocked from editing.
You changed the license so you could place that template didn't you! Well why don't you use your brains and change the license to the right one yourself!!
Micoolio101
I'm not the one changing the license template--you are. The fact of the matter is, I'm not sure there is a right one. If you can't provide a reason why this image qualifies under fair use on Wikipedia, then it will be deleted. If you have a legitimate reason to believe that using the image on Wikipedia qualifies under fair use, then add the reason to its summary. I don't have one. I posted the warning on your page because you have repeatedly attempted to falsify the image's licensing, which is completely unacceptable. AmiDaniel (talk) 09:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the image one last time. If you have any problems then you can change it yourself. I'm giving you permission.
Hi Daniel, I am asking a valid question he is making an invalid accusation could you please help me to show him that if he is posting a tag there should be a reason for it thank you TheLightning09:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Daniel, I am asking a valid question he is making an invalid accusation could you please help me to show him that if he is posting a tag there should be a reason for it thank you TheLightning09:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for sorting the edit merges so quickly. I have checked the edit histories and they look fine. I apologise for creating the problem in the first place.
No problem at all! You have nothing to apologize for; I've made similar mistakes myself. I'm just glad we were able to get it fixed. Feel free to contact me if you need any similar assistance in the future. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, he is also blanking and rewriting his own comments on my talk page, as well as false-signing. 66.207.102.147 and his related sockpuppets are nothing if not persistent. Themindset16:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Oh, looks like Cyde just s-protected. Hope everything calms down over there, drop me a note if the vandalism starts up again, before or after it's unprotected. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Brent Corrigan
Thanks for unprotecting that page. Is it possible to write on the talk page that restoring the same problematic edits as before will result in being blocked? It's useless to have known bad editors when the vandal has to be "warned" three times before anyone doing vandal patrol will do anything about it. SchmuckyTheCat21:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I'm afraid you're still going to have to do it the same old-fashioned way unless you have reason to believe that they're all coming from the same person. Try adding hidden notes to the page in problem areas and see if that helps at all. I'll keep my eye on the page, but feel free to drop me a note if you start having the same problems, or if you think the article's ready to be completely unprotected. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I want to know How I can overcome these two problems:
Abusive use from Wikipedia by Catholics,by example to term free distribution from Bibles by protestants as a PROFANE use from Bible.
Or articles as spiritual warfare are edited in order to delete any reference to evangelical theologians. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Guillen (talk • contribs) 00:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Oye, VandalProof. I have been so caught up playing with my new admin tools that I forgot all about it! lol Let me go take a look. 01:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
