This is it. While I maintain a page of records, we wouldn't want to vote just to attain a record, it cheapens the process. I'll wait until Clown accepts before I vote for him. Besides, I understand that BD2412's law firm stands ready to challenge votes should any serious threat be made upon his record ;-). NoSeptembertalk10:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, he was supposed to tell him. In this case, it's all harmless fun, but "stealth nominations" could be subject to abuse if they were to become accepted practice. I suppose in effect it's currently a 37-way co-nomination... Alai17:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
yeah i know i was going to nominate him on april 1st ^-^ still at least i got the first support, good luck clownBenon10:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted texts
hi i was just wondering why you reverted the additions i made to the Sydney Church of England Grammar School i was not one of those people how continually edited the artice and made vandalism. i just added stuff to the future of the school as i am a current student i can tell that vandalsim was made by school boy's and i will speak to the headmaster about it. Edwardkindred09:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On the MC Hammer page (you've warned him once) and on the Eternals page. I've submitted both to WP:AIV, and both have been continuously vandalizing over the past 24 or more hours (I was reverting these same vandalisms last night on IRC). I'd appreciate some help with a block on them. Thanks, and good to finally run into you on wikipedia. ⇒SWATJesterReadyAimFire!04:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you already warned User:Xjoeyx92 about the vandalism in this article. Thanks! I'm going to revert it to its original state. You're welcome to look over it, of course, as I can't guarantee the accuracy of these numbers. :) SujinYH20:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2nd RFA?
Why not? Become a SysOp, that is. Today, all I see is you eating clowns left and right; with a mop you could probably make a sandwich factory with them all. I saw that your previous request failed, but that was 2 months ago; with nearly 6000 edits and a good amount of experience, I would gladly nominate you. I'm just asking you if I can, as I wouldn't want to offend anyone. MoP09:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what your thoughts are in this regard, but what would you think if I nominated you for adminship in early April; or do you think it is too soon since your last RfA. Wikipedia needs an editor like you to be an admin. Keep up the incredible job you are doing. I stand in awe of your edits. ¡Dustimagic!(T/C)00:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I fell out of my chair laughing at this one. [1]...look at the picture +text.....you need to make a sock account called "Can't sleep, clown is angry!" to get back at the anon! ⇒SWATJesterReadyAimFire!09:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I want to put the current version of Michael Tang in my archive so after it's gone I can put it in BJAODN. The problem is, I don't know how. Could you give me any pointers? TKE03:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indo-Fijian is a racially offensive term. I am a Indian born in Fiji and I know that the current racially charged government of Fiji refer to Indians as Indo-Fijians. But keep this mind, would you like someone to refer to you as a sub-category of another race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parik arun (talk • contribs) 05:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please review Wikipedia:Etiquette. If you disagree with the contents of an article, or believe that they are so offensive that they should not be included at Wikipedia, please discuss this on the talk page or bring the article up for deletion at WP:AFD. Simply blanking out a page though is considered vandalism. Hope that this helps. Can't sleep, clown will eat me05:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention that it just isn't true, Indo-Fijian is not a racially offensive term, if anything Fiji Indian is the racially offensive term --Xorkl00008:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
with respect to your question posted on my talk page, please see my comments at Talk:Fiji. Can you also remember to sign your comments with four tildes when you post on my talk page. --Xorkl00004:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would love your help.
Hi,
I know you are interested in christianity, and I recently started a new wiki over at wikicities which is on the subject of christianity. [2] is the site.
The goal is to have a knowledgebase on christianity from a distinctly "C(hristian)POV" rather than the NPOV. It is not meant to be a mere Christian Encyclopedia, but to foster a real sense of community. I'd like to include things like current events, news, stories, and anything that would add to both an understanding of Christianity, but also its enjoyment. I'm looking for help to build a resource that could really enrich the lives of Christians.
I know you are busy but I am actively seeking new sysops/admins to help me build this site up, and I would be positively thrilled if you could contribute in any capacity whatsoever. nsandwich01:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Will you please sign your acceptance? I've heard rumours that some crats are willing to fail it if you don't accept... NSLE(T+C) at 08:34 UTC (2006-03-26)
Finally
Hi. Though we have never met, I have come across your name (which is the coolest name I have come across) while RC patrolling. I really thought you were going to wait for April 1. Anyways, I don't see any problem with your RfA passing this time around. I really feel scared for all those vandals out there after you get your mop. All the best! - Aksi_great 18:16, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Your RFA
I have some pretty serious problems with the way your second RfA has been handled. I'd appreciate your throughts at WT:RFA, in the relevant section. Thanks. -Splashtalk18:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As with my first nomination, I trust the community to do what is right. With all due respect, as I am a primary subject of your concerns, I intend to abstain from any comment in this case. Can't sleep, clown will eat me18:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's your RfA, and I'd like to know why you accepted it in such a manner as to force the community to accept it. Abstention does nothing to fix that. -Splashtalk18:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you're going to refuse to explain yourself? It's not in the least unfair to have expected you to present an RfA to the community for consideration and discussion before it reaches the point of 60 support votes! You know very well that this is not the point of RfA, and a promotion on the back of such a forced acceptance would be one that I, personally, would decline to accept if it were me. -Splashtalk18:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your original statement is that you refuse to make any statement. That you refuse to say why would become an admin in such a fashion. Is that right? -Splashtalk18:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Can't sleep, clown will eat me. I must urge you to withdraw your RFA nomination and instead present it in the way which every other admin nominee has. While the way it was presented was not your fault, as the nominee, I believe you should show some respect for the RFA process and let there be an open discussion, rather than one behind closed doors with the decision apparently having been made. Thanks, Talrias (t | e | c) 18:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not aware of any precedent for this, but some pretty heavy accusations were made against me personally which could not have been further from the truth. As a result, I have withdrawn my nomination, removed all votes related to it, and will accept next month as I had originally planned. I hope that this is acceptable to all, but I realize that there are times when it isn't possible to please everyone. Can't sleep, clown will eat me19:01, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that was a brave move, and the right one. I'm sorry for what I suppose must be some ill-feeling towards me now; I hope that may go away with time. I imagine I'd have supported a properly-conducted RfA. -Splashtalk19:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that we will have to wait for April Fool's day after all!! - Aksi_great 19:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Oi. Then I wonder how many CSCWEM RfAs will be posted on that day. On another note, I didn't know about the RfA until the question showed up on CBDunkerson's RfA... -- Jjjsixsix(t)/(c) @ 05:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey CSCWEM, I've found it a little upsetting that Splash and Johnleemk have somehow seen your handling of your RfA in a negative light, and have posted my thoughts on it's talk page. I hope I have presented the situation in a fair way, but please take a look and comment accordingly if this is not the case. Look forward to voting again next month mate. Glen §τοĿĿ€ŖγŤč21:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and after reading through your talk page I did have, and still have, half a mind to block Splash for being so incivil and hostile. NSLE(T+C) at 00:59 UTC (2006-03-27)
Minor thing - The category tag had been removed a few times[1] [2] and a place to discuss had been created[[3]] before you restored it. It would have been preferable to leave this in the wrong version and take place in discussions rather than replacing it. brenneman{L}05:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RfA thanks
Thanks Can't sleep, clown will eat me/4, thank you you so much for supporting my RfA, which passed successfully 49/6/3. I am grateful for all the supportive comments, and have taken people's suggestions to heart. I will do my best to live up to people's expectations. If I can ever make any improvements or help out in any way, please feel free to let me know! Thanks again for your much appreciated support.
Thanks for the help with the Geneva High School article. I wasn't sure if I should put all three years the high school was established, so thanks for doing it for me! Someone with more experience obviously can't be wrong. :) Wlmaltby307:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think the current article version is essentially vandalism. I'd turned it into a redirect to the original subject of the article and suggest reverting to that and warning the editor who has changed it - what do you feel is best? Dlyons493Talk09:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If are going to request something to be deleted and invite people for discussion , you could at least have the courtesy to go and actually DISCUSS the matter on the discussion page.
Yes, I requested Jimbo wales for deletion knowing full well it wouldn't happen, because yourself said it was 'unwiki' to go create 'autobiographies'. Well sorry mate but I'm not the subject of the page I authored, however jimbo, unknown to the mainstream.... You get the point. I didn't know wikipedia was only the home of the rich and famous. Minor authors should also be represented.
I removed the article from the Manly site because the author of the article has not consented for it to be re-produced, and the article is part of a book sold that has copyright. The author emailed me to ask for it to be removed, this is the 4th time Ive had to message wikipeople and no-one has wrote back replying. That article is in breach of copyright, please have it reverted back to my edited version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbryce858 (talk • contribs) 07:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see that Swatjester has provided you with proper instructions for tagging a copyvio. If you need any other help just let me know. By the way, you can sign your posts by adding four tildes (~~~~) like so: Can't sleep, clown will eat me07:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for supporting my RfA. I’m proud to inform you that it passed with 75 support to 1 oppose to 2 neutral. I promise to make some great edits in the future (with edit summaries!) and use these powers to do all that I can to help. After all, that’s what I’m here for! (You didn’t think I could send a thank you note without a bad joke, could I?) --HereToHelp13:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Help
I am requesting help due to User:Jeffrey_O._Gustafson abusing his power and using it remove comments made by other users, specifically me:
The sixth was not a mistake on your part, your edit comments clearly show what you intended to do. As for the others, they are not self explanitory, you violated policy, I warned you, you proceeded to flaunt your power as an admin by ignoring my warnings and continuing to violate policy, I have now taken the action I promised I would and brought to the attention of another. Your coming here and mocking Wikipedia policy further as opposed to showing remorse for your violations and taking it seriously are just further evidence that you do not respect the policy as it stands, and that is unhelpful and unappreciated.
Don't know why I continuing this here, but I've been up for an extraordinary amount of time. First, it was a mistake - you see, the edit summary is generated automatically with the rollback function. There is no second. WP:AGF etc and goodnight! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*>20:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PROD
Hello there. You have proposed the article Gerald Hastings for deletion without providing a reason why you think the article should be deleted. When proposing articles for deletion, please consider adding your reasoning like that: {{prod|Reasoning goes here}}. See also: How to propose deletion of an article. Adding your reasoning will aid other users in considering your suggestion on the Proposed Deletions log. Thank you.
PS: And now after the template message is through, pre-emptive congratulations on your likely-to-be-successful RfA! Sandstein15:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Sandstein, I must have come across this while categorizing articles one evening, and proposed it for deletion due to it being non-verifiable (even after attempting some alternate spelling combinations) and without sources. I've updated the page with this reasoning. Can't sleep, clown will eat me18:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you noticed, but lost in the massive support set, down at the bottom of the page, someone has a question for you. JoshuaZ03:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You've been added to the safe list, and I will let you know as soon as the app's available for download. By the way, good luck in your RfA--I can't believe they still haven't made you an admin yet. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AIV
Water under a bridge.
Please don't revert an administrator's decision on this page; it's intended to be cleared off quickly, reversions here can make the page messy. Per the page's instructions: If an administrator removes the vandal listing and doesn't handle the matter to your satisfaction, take it to the administrator's talk page, the administrators' noticeboard or Wikipedia:Requests for investigation, but do not re-list the user here. Which one did you have an issue with? Use my talk page, please don't revert me on AIV. · Katefan0(scribble)/poll16:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for the revert was it appeared that you had made a mistake; in your edit summary you listed the vandal as inactive for an hour when in fact it was active within the past 15 minutes. Sorry if you felt as if I stepped on your toes there, as that was not the intent. Thanks. Can't sleep, clown will eat me16:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. Which one was it, though? You reverted two separate decisions -- one of which I blocked and the other I didn't. I blocked the named account (User:Tomkurts), but the other one you could well be right on. Anyway, I'm not offended at all, and am glad to look again at any discrete decision (may well be that I removed the wrong IP report). (Looking back now.) No, the other one was User:70.50.200.120, which hasn't edited in two hours. · Katefan0(scribble)/poll16:15, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That is in fact exactly right; my clock was bunged. <handface> Well, anyway. He's been stopped for almost an hour at this point, so I'm still inclined to leave it.. but if it starts back up again, by all means, put it back. Thanks for making me fix my clock. =/ · Katefan0(scribble)/poll16:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your email address on file with WP
For some reason gmail won't send to your email address, not sure if its changed or if gmail just hates your email address, either way, it bounced. Congratulations on reaching WP:200 by the way :) Regards -- Tawker06:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. The bounce thing is some sort of strange Wikimedia bug, but eventually the mail does arrive. I've also posted my email address in plaintext on my user page, in case of wikimergencies. 8-) Can't sleep, clown will eat me06:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've nominated the article Brian Doyle for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but I personally don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Doyle. Add four tildes like this ˜˜˜˜ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article Brian Doyle during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. --Tbeatty17:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to clarify something with you so you don't make this mistake in the future. As it is currently written, registered users cannot log in at a blocked IP. This is even true for sysops. Thanks for the vandalwhacking! —BorgHunterubx (talk) 02:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the insights BorgHunter, that is awfully strange (and unfortunate) that not even a sysop can log into a blocked IP. I could understand not being able to create a new account on a blocked IP to prevent throwaway vandalism-only accounts, but not an already established account... Is this something the developers might be able to correct? Can't sleep, clown will eat me04:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tawker and a few of the developers have discuss making a fix for it. The best fix would probably be to have anyone with over a certain number of edits (say 100) be able to log in through a blocked IP. This seems technically doable but I just learned about it from one of Tawker's answers in his RfA. JoshuaZ04:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Addresses in this Class B subnet belong to my university. Apparantly my reputation has lead my roommate to go on a vandalism streak, including an attack on my user talk page. Thanks for the swift action taken against him and I support the block imposed as a result of your WP:AIAV alert. --ZsinjTalk05:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I don't have a cite-worthy source at the moment. I definitely understand the need for sources. On the other hand, there are lots of other unsourced claims in the article, like:
Future Problem Solving has also started a club at Pearland High School. (The club is not mentioned on the school website, and the official school websites are the only sources given, except for the two sources on the two alumni.)
Despite the wide number of clubs, the administration spends very little on the majority of them, favoring to spend most of the budget on Football. (unsourced and arguably POV)
The Academic Decathalon team made it to state this year and won more than twice as many medals as the previous year. (unsourced, club not mentioned on the school website)
These are just a few. Perhaps they should all be marked with {{fact}}? Otherwise, it could seem as though we are picking and choosing which facts we'd like to verify or promote. Johntex\talk13:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Where did you originally obtain the information from about Goodman? If you see additional areas which cannot be confirmed through the sources already provided within the article, yes, I agree that they should be marked with {{fact}} or removed until a reliable source can be cited. Can't sleep, clown will eat me15:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a fan of ZZ Top and I have college friends who are from Pearland. I remember at the time Goodman was arrested, the Houston Chronicle and the Pealand Reporter both had articles mentioning that he had attended Pearland High School. Neither of those papers seem to have on-line searchable archives from that time period.
There are so many facts in the article that are not verified by the School websites, which are the only sources given for the article. I listed a few of them above. I think rather than marking each one {{fact}}, we should mark the article {{sources}}. What do you think? Johntex\talk15:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
