User talk:Tyrenius/Archive5Notification of discussion at ANAs a courtesy note, a user - David Lauder (talk) - has initiated a discussion that concerns you. At the time of this message, it is located at #Out of Order. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 10:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC) Neutrality disputedI suppose I'm the one to blame for this, by giving a link to the 'Neutrality disputed' tag in the discussion on An Phoblacht. However, subsequently I notice that various Irish republican atrocities are now tagged with this, including the M62 coach bombing and the assassination of Sir Norman Stronge. In each case the tag refers readers to the talk page, and there seems to be (effectively) nothing to indicate why neutrality is disputed (so, presumably, the tag should either be removed or a reason given on the talk page). Please can we keep any discussion of this issue on your talk page. --Major Bonkers 14:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
At the moment he's edit warring over the wording of a sub page of the Irish Republicanism Wikiproject. I've explained on the talk page that he should just stay away, but he seems intent on creating problems. Can you intervene please? Thanks. One Night In Hackney 19:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I appear to be under attack by One Night in Hackney and Vintagekits. They are openly talking about how they can gang up together, see here. ONH has been very uncivil to me recently when I have engaged him. Vintagekits also deleted a comment of mine on the Northern Ireland page today [1]; and accussed me of disruption when I made a simple tidying edit after an article move [2]. Astrotrain 23:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Please see User:One Night In Hackney/Problems2- this is an attack page and should be deleted Astrotrain 07:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey. There's a weird situation at this article. A few months back, I posted a comment on the talk page that I thought the person was NN and the page was self-promotional. I admit I was a bit harsh in my words (and since then have read wiki and Jimbo Wales notes on civility and courtesy), and owing to my newness to this, was probably over the top. I then had a conversation with someone who claimed to be the person in the article. I apologized for being harsh, and he assured me he didn't write the article and wished it would be taken down. At one point I posted a comment asking how the subject of an article could have a page removed for privacy sake (not sure who the question was directed to as I didn't know the processes for deletion, or who to contact about this at the time). This same person then sort of turned on me, accused me of being insulting and so on, so I just decided to remove myself from the whole thing and posted no more replies. Fast forward to today, and he's posted again about having his page removed. I'm still not sure what the preferred process is, and I really don't want to step back into it and nominate it for deletion. Any thoughts? Freshacconci 16:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks for getting that into WP:SPEEDY. There seemed to be a lot of flak flying around so I didn't want to jump to any conclusions. Know better now. Happy editing. beekman 19:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC) Reference AdviseHello Tyrenius, I was just wondering if you could possibly give me some advice on editing if possible. I have now got my editing under control, and I am referencing all my work. [3] [4] .An issue has arisen in relation to a possible conflict in policy. [5] .Which states in the first paragraph, “The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is weather material can be attributed, not weather it is true." I have suggested the use of a number of referenced quotes by a number of authors,[6] but because they breach the terms of a consensus that was reached, (I apologise, I do not know how to source the information of previous discussions), I have been unable to use them. One of the quoted references I used was changed, that is, the quote was changed, but not the reference. [7]Have I got the policy wrong, or should I just leave it. I am enjoying editing, but I do not want to cause offence.--Domer48 22:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ted HarrisonNomination withdrawn -Nv8200p talk 03:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC) Okay, although I was well aware of Essjay's policy there, and I beg to differ. I would argue that such blatant personal attacks constitute vandalism, but nevermind. Glen 06:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Hamilton(s)I had a thought about this which I was reluctant to post to the Hamilton talk page in case it just resulted in further confusion. Presumably if Brendandh created a credible Hamilton family history article, which was able to show that most or all of the current uses world-wide were derived from his ancestors (and from what little I know I imagine it would be possible to do so), presumably it would be acceptable to create a brief {main article} type of header for the Hamilton disambiguation article per for example MacKenzie. Ben MacDui (Talk) 10:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your note. I had a look at the MacKenzie page and added a short note about the origin of the surname, which I hope is appropriate. Ben MacDui (Talk) 10:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC) RE Ted HarrisonYes, I am satisfied with the sources and would have changed to Keep, but the AfD was closed before I had a chance to change my vote. It doesn't matter, because the result was Speedy Keep anyway. Walton Vivat Regina! 17:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC) RfCWikipedia:Requests for comment/Astrotrain. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 22:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
KittybrewsterAs I have requested not to breaches of policy on certain editors pages I have come to highlight it here. I believe Kittybrewster has once again breached WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA here. regards.--Vintagekits 23:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Vanity termI do apologize if my use of the word vanity offended you - in other AfD's I have commonly see self-promotional, or promotional pages, referred to as 'vanity' articles. Not to say the subject of the article itself is of a vain nature, but that the article itself is merely a promotional of an arguably non-notable subject. Again, I do apologize if this has offended you, it has merely entered my terminology based on previous AfD's I have seen along with the tag WP:VAIN which redirects to WP:COI. --Ozgod 04:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC) VanityYeah, I guess that was a little snarky. I think I've been seeing to many vanity pages lately on Newpages patrol. Realkyhick 05:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[8] - please resolve. It was a quotation. Also disrupting William Arbuthnot (artillery officer) - Kittybrewster 17:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Category problemI'm trying to create this category based on this discussion, but for some reason it won't work at all. I've tried the purge function and everything, but so far I'm 10 minutes into trying with no success. Any suggestions please? Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 23:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Federal Commonwealth Society AfDFrom what I can see, it was never listed on a log page. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 00:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC) Another category queryHow would I go about changing the name of Category:WikiProject IRA articles to Category:WikiProject Irish Republicanism articles, in line with the new name of the project? I assume there must be some way of redirecting it or something like that? Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 04:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC) FAC2I thought you should know that Campbell's Soup Cans is up again for FA. Thanks for your earlier input and feel free to give some more. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 04:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC) VintagekitsVK today reverted a lot of work I put into Flag of the United Kingdom [9] stating "remove incorrect POV information"- despite the fact that full references to government websites and original orders were provided. He also accussed me of vandalism on Talk:Celtic F.C.- see [10]. I had restored a reference to "first British team to win the European Cup" added back by User:Hippo43 as well as reverting anon vandalism ([11]) Astrotrain 00:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC) EtchingHi, sorry to bother you. Some time ago (17 Feb I think) someone speedily deleted "etching" , on the grounds that it only redirected to etching (art). The edit summary I think said etching (art) should be moved there. I just found etching gone, which meant about 500 redlinks (including one on an article on DYK ...). I have moved the page, but because "etching" had its own talk page, I can't move the talk page. Etching was in fact the old title until another editor decided to move it a few months ago, and the talk pages seem to be the same. Anyway a notice said I needed an admin to sort it out. Please pass to a colleague or let me know if you're too busy. As the redlinks have gone, I can't see it as urgent. I asked another admin at the time, but nothing happened.... For background: after the last move to etching (art), which I & others objected to, we had settled at a situation where Etch has a disam page, but "etching, etcher, etchings" redirected straight to etching (art) as that is what the vast majority of links were referring to. The alternative meanings are about making microchips etc - they got "etchant, etched". Many thanks Johnbod 01:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Bit of help needed here please. Can you take a look at the last paragraph, relating to the 2006 shooting of two people? The only source is an offline one, and it states no other outlet reported the story. The BBC have a report of O'Hare's spokesman denying any involvement. There's also an Irish newspaper which you might not be able to read without registering, so I've pasted the relevant content below.
Found some more information as well actually.
I'm leaning towards removing it completely as it seems to be just speculation that he might be involved, so do you think it's best to remove it? Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 02:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
stuck in disappointmentHi. Since you put me onto the Stuckists I have been researching them and in particular their website. Though initially excited, thinking they were a group interested in promoting interesting, solid ideas and by corollary eliminating bad and empty ideas, I was pretty disappointed with what I saw: a whole lot of very bad art/illustrations/self-indulgent and poorly-educated craft works, etc. Sigh. (though there were of course some good pieces too). Where is the bright beast? Where is the good art? Am I just getting old? Is my recent love of Jordaens a bad sign? Well, is it? Yrs, Lgh. Thanks for the reply: I was by no means suggesting you are POV in your approach - you are admirably NPOV from what I have seen of your work; indeed I was only suggesting I had looked at the Stuckists and found them wanting - ie my personal POV - that's all. Cheers, lazy Lgh the sometime artist and perennial dilettante. I politely asked him yesterday not to mark edits as minor edits unless they were minor, and Seraphimblade has mentioned it before. The contributions from today show he's ignored that completely. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 00:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
QuestionHi, Tyrenius. I've been looking for the template (or method) of editing a page so that an anon/unsigned contributor's addition can have "this unsigned edit was made by {ip address} on {time/date}" but have had no luck finding it. Is it an admin-only thing or have I just not looked hard enough? Cheers. Bastun 17:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Tyrenius, could you have a word with User:Bus stop relative to this discussion. Bus stop's made false and defamatory statements concerning an editor who made a vandalistic edit on Michael Richards. Thanks. (→Netscott) 20:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC) There is no reason why Netscott needs to contact Tyrenius about this. Netscott should be able to just explain his point of view to me, which he has not done. Netscott contends that the two edits by a particular editor to the Michael Richards article are vandalism, but that they are not of a racist nature. I disagree. I think they are racist. But I have asked Netscott more than once to tell me why he does not see the comments as racist. Netscott still has not attempted to explain that to me. Regardless of whether Tyrenius thinks the edits are racist or not, this is a minor issue that could be resolved by Netscott communicating with me. Bus stop 21:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC) Article adviceHello Tyrenius, I am working on a number of articles, all of which revolve around the period 1835 – 1852. The subject matter is Young Ireland, which would include subjects such as Daniel O’Connell and the Repeal Association, The Nation newspaper, the Irish Confederation, and the potato blight of 1845-1851. Two articles in particular have caught my attention, Repeal Association,[12] and Repeal (Ireland)[13] Neither is referenced, and the information is either inaccurate or misleading. As my edits on Young Ireland [14](which will be referenced) for example will link to this material, it will totally confuse readers. How do I go about having these articles a) combined, and b) reduced to stubs? I would edit out the information completely, only I lack the confidence.Thanking you in advance for the advice, Regards --Domer48 21:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC) eclectic blueTyrenius, I salute your eclecticism. FYI, I have in my life been commissioned (and executed) precise copies at full size of Tintoretto's 'Susanna and the elders' (a bizarre and very modern work when looked at closely) and Boticelli's 'Allegory of spring'/ La Primavera; which nearly killed me and took six months. I learnt a hell of a lot doing them. Chapeau to you. Lgh 23:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC) ThanksThanks for your help on Philip Evergood. I am trying to learn the Wikipedia processes as fast as possible. I do appreciate your suggestions and assistance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.26.56.252 (talk • contribs).
DessieCan you take a look please? I've slightly amended the lead to reflect his release status, and added plenty of other information to the main body - some of which might need trimming down slightly. Apart from the last paragraph I'm pretty much finished possibly. Also I've posted on the talk page about the use of the word injuring which I don't think is enough. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 06:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Bernd FaschingThank you for your readiness to improve the article. English is not my first language, so I'm always happy to have people who correct spelling, grammar, and syntax. If you try to improve the matter of the article, I'm pleased too! But be careful, please! Your last changes or the article about Bernd Fasching led to misunderstandings. You removed exactly these parts that count in the world of art history. So I canceled most of your changes. Thank you for your understanding, greetings from Austria, --Moerd 09:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
User:Bus stop againYou know I would honestly appreciate it if you could set this editor right. His commentary, "And more than that, it is racist to call Michael Richards a racist." is so off base and asinine. While it is true that his calling this vandalistic editor's commentary "racist" isn't that big of a deal unfortunately given the nature of such off base commentary, Bus stop is very likely going to be biting newcomers in the future. Obviously that's wrong. I respectfully request that you try to set this right. Thanks. (→Netscott) 16:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC) Look -- I am not going to be "biting" newcomers. I realize I was (slightly) wrong for attacking that particular comment by that particular editor. He/she was probably young. I should be more careful. To that extent, I stand corrected. But there is a principle: It is racist to call Michael Richards racist. I don't think it is necessarily off base to refer to some vandalism as being of a racist nature. Bus stop 16:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
(→Netscott) -- How can you compare Adolf Hitler to Michael Richards? What I see in the case of Michael Richards is just about the equivalent of a temper tantrum. It was an emotional outburst. It covered the span of five minutes. No physical violence was involved. He apologized. It was an isolated incident. He appears sincerely upset and ashamed of his own behavior. It took place in a comedy club. He was trying to be outrageous -- that's what comedians do. He is not therefore open to a lifetime of potshots by anyone inclined to seek and find a scapegoat for the evil of racism. Bus stop 17:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Re. your post> Re. your post- he's on a long wikibreak. Try emailing him instead. Tyrenius 04:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC) I am new to Wikipedia. How do I generate an email address from a Wikipedia user ID? --Sean grim 17:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC) Vintagekits 3Vintagekits (talk · contribs) today made this edit [15] to Talk:Celtic. He said "Aside from the fact that term British actually makes my skin crawl"- which is a racist and offensive statement against all Wikipedia editors from the United Kingdom; and described another editor as a "Scottish monarchist" which is also a violation of WP:NPA (Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views). Astrotrain 19:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
This situation is being dramatised out of all proportion. Vintagekits has explained clearly that one comment was in the context of a discussion where another editor had stated already that "many, perhaps the vast majority of, Celtic supporters would object to the term "British" in reference to the club". For Vintagekits to reinforce this by saying that the "term British actually makes my skin crawl" is hardly tactful, but not a racist attack on every British editor. Vintagekits is of course arguing very poorly by making an ad hominem appeal and mentioning "Scottish monarchists", i.e. addressing some purported motive of the editor, rather than presenting a proper argument to address the edit, so he should desist in future, but it's hardly a gross slander and the net effect of this is simply that it weakens his case. Please note WP:DR#First_step:_Talk_to_the_other_parties_involved:
The complainants have patently failed to do this, but seem to be intent on milking the situation for all it's worth. This is not in wikipedia's interest and is just as grievous as any supposed fault they are complaining about in the first place. Astrotrain, David Lauder and Counter-revolutionary show every indication of fanning the flames, not trying to put them out. Their comments on Vintagekits are unnecessarily provocative, not conciliatory. Sustained behaviour of this nature is more likely to result in action being taken against them. There is certainly an appearance of "ganging up", which has been evidenced previously. One user posts on my talk page against another, who answers, then everyone else piles in (I am not including Calgacus here). It's getting to be completely predictable to the point where I could write the comments myself. This is more indicative of party political allegiance than individual intelligence applied to try to find constructive solutions to problems. Tyrenius 00:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC) Complaint[16] contains accussations of sock-puppetry and implied canvassing. Uncivil. No AGF. - Kittybrewster 00:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I think the closing admin can look at that. Users should not edit another user's talk, unless in extremis, e.g. violation of WP:BLP. See WP:TPG. Tyrenius 00:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC) I think this is now a good article, meriting a peer review. - Kittybrewster 23:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC) Your outside viewOnce again you come into the fray with a sensible response. Thanks for that. Hopefully the other editors who are unreasonably (imho) preventing such wording from entering the lead will take your suggestion to heart and refrain from further blocking a better lead for the article. Thanks. (→Netscott) 03:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Am I close to getting your support yet? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 22:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC) Breach of WP:NPAGiven the banned you gave me for this comment accusing someone of POV pushing, can you please see this direct and blatant breach of WP:NPA here. Its getting a bit much when someone comes out with this kind of comment.--Vintagekits 00:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of a portal pageHi Tyrenius. I've been hard at work trying to get the Portal:Visual arts ready for featured portal candidacy. One of the peer reviewers strongly believes we need to transition from 'Selected quotation' to 'Selected quote,' as that is the more common portal usage. So I need to move Portal:Visual arts/Selected quotation to Portal:Visual arts/Selected quote, but the latter page already exists. In fact, I created it before it occurred to me that quotation was really the more proper word. So much for proper English. Anyway, could I enlist your help to delete that second page (which is presently blanked and effectively orphaned), so that I (or you, if you are so inclined) can move the former to the latter? I know this is probably outside of your normal admin work, but you'd be helping the portal immensely. Cheers. Planetneutral 00:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Michael Richards updateSorry I didn't see the "consensus" remark. The info I added is factual and can be watched on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBqf52s-l_s). I will post it in the Discussion section and give it some time for responses before I read add it. Please let me know if this is an appropriate action. Thanks. Jtpaladin 17:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC) VintagekitsVintagekits is a serious disruptive and very rude influence on Wikipedia. Those of us who are attempting to compile a decent encyclopaedia according to the Founder's wishes feel harrassed, threatened, and oppressed by his frenetic attacks and arrogance all of which he dresses up under Wikipedia rules. It is unacceptable. You are an administrator who has in the past given him substantial support. Will you look at this activity or shall I waste most of a day preparing a massive charge sheet? David Lauder 09:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
RfCI wish to report a number of offensive and incivil comments made by Gibnews that he has refused to retract despite requests.
I regard his continued actions as nothing more than disruptive trolling, and I request you take appropriate action please. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 11:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Suitability of An Phoblacht citationsI see that Mr Darcy is on a Wikibreak. Under the circumstances, please could you take an interest in closing the discussion on An Phoblacht that he began (I'm sure that he wouldn't mind).--Major Bonkers 15:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Constant edits to Michael Richards articleI'm noticing quite a few edits being made to the Michael Richards article despite the consensus. What's going on? Jtpaladin 16:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Advice soughtTyrenius, I wonder if you could possibly help me. I made some edits to two pages,[[20]] [[21]] and inadvertently neglected to sigh in. Is there any way of rectifying this, as queries relating to edits will not know who to address them to. Thanking you in advance, and sorry the inconvenience, regards, --Domer48 20:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Have you seen this?it looks like they need you to sign it to certify it--Vintagekits 22:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I was writing this the other night as I got blockedFurther to our recent discussion. I have on a number of occasions tried to discuss issues rather than get into edits wars with the above editor as can be seen here. This has been fruitless and you have asked me to stay of his talk page unless totally nessessary. However, as I have pointed out before I beileve that this editors think that he has carte blanche to carry on in any manner he wants towards me with complete impunity. Here you asked me to avoid Kitty however today he has come onto my talk page and been uncivil towards me in an issue that did not concern this editor in any way (see here. I am getting pretty sick of this and its coming from all angles now. Secondly, I have add nn prods to a number of artciles of Baronets in which no notability is asterted within the article. However, again this editor has gone through each of the artiles and removed the tags without adding anything to the article. (I got to this point and realised I was block for 3RR). That is as far as I got and I saved it to word instead. I would still like some action taken over Kittys comments.--Vintagekits 23:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
pLEASE INTERVENE. - Kittybrewster 01:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Please continue on article talk page. Tyrenius 01:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
It'll still be there tomorrow. Tyrenius 02:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC) RefstartThanks for your fast response and comment on the Template Talk page. I will not move to change anything. --Anthony5429 00:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC) Canvassing by Kittybrewster[22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34]. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 22:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
"!votes" is an indication that users' statements are part of a debate not a majority verdict. Canvassing of this kind is completely unacceptable. People notified are not those likely to be interested: they are those who are likely to have opinions sympathetic to the canvasser. Tyrenius 00:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
WikiprojectSounds like a good idea, only I'm clueless about how to go about it. The project stub was deleted when I tried to get a category for it, and I know there's some way of adding things like that to the existing template but I'm not sure how. One Night In Hackney303 01:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Please restore the correct edit history for Jonathan's Law. Thanks in advance. Ombudsman 04:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi there-- I have been impressed with your dispute resolution in the past, so I was hoping you might look at the above article. It has tons of unsourced statements and photos, and an IP editor is being very abrasive about getting it to conform to policy. You can see some of my suggested edits in the history. Other projects beckon, and I need to step away from this for a second. If not, perhaps someone you know could look. Thanks! Jokestress 04:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your comments here, I have removed the contentious claim, but given a short reply explaining why it was there.--Jackyd101 06:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC) ThanksFor looking after my user page when I was away. I'll be trying to make one or two contributions when I can. Very best wishes, --Guinnog 16:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC) User:Jonto - breach of CIVIL and NPAJonto, who has been previously blocked for NPA on myself has been engaging in edit waring on the List of British flags page. He reverted my good faith edits here by stating they were vandalism the exact reason he was blocked last time. I asked him nicely not to do this here but was met with taunts and more incivility and then a personal attack on both myself and Padraig here on Astrotrains talk page. I am not going to reply to this as I dont not want ot inflame the situation and I will also not edit the List of British flags until you advise what the best course of action would be. regards--Vintagekits 00:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Bellinghaus has his own website and a blog. The page was started by him (User:Mmmovie) to promote himself and rail against those he percieves are Marilyn Monroe's enemies. Wiki is simply not the place for that! IMHO, it is vandalism. > You have rather missed the boat here, as the AfD was 2 months ago. Sorry, I only reactivated by account today after over 2 years. > Also you left an edit summary which is a violation of WP:BLP. Please do not insult people, as it can result in your being blocked. Sorry, but pointing out the obvious - that he has not done anything of note - is not an insult, much less, a violation of WP:BLP, IMHO. Worc63 05:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC) BARNSTAR!Thanks for awarding me my first barnstar. If you really liked the Neaira article, please add a comment to Template talk:Did you know. I still haven't completed the translation (its only about 80% done). It's neat that someone recognized it :-) Deatonjr 05:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC) Is there any way for this to be semi-protected please? It's a content fork from the main article, and it's already attracting edits like this from an IP editor who repeatedly made similar POV edits to the main article (see edits prior to 22 January). I'm aware the protection policy isn't supposed to be preemptive, but as it's likely to keep happening and it's a fork from the main article it's worth a try at least. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 01:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Tyrenius, just wanted to express my appreciation for the enduring assistance you provided with the editing and discussions on the Michael Richards article. From the looks of things as they stand now, it should be fairly smooth sailing from here on out. Thanks muchly. Cheers. (→Netscott) 06:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC) Vandalism of ArticlesTyrenius, how do you go about having users blocked, who engage in nothing but vile and vulgar edits. I am referring to the Irish Potato Famine Article. Some examples of which are [[36]], [[37]], [[38]], [[39]], [[40]], [[41]], [[42]], [[43]], [[44]], [[45]]. This is only three days of it and it must be so disheartening to editors, who have to deal with this type of behaviour. Thanks for your time and patience, Regards --Domer48 20:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
GDFL questionVintagekits is thinking about trying to resurrect this article, which was merged as a result of an AfD. I've told him the correct way to go about it is to work on the article in the project preparation area then take it to deletion review, and I've already had to re-redirect another editor's attempt to unilaterally recreate it. However I wondered what's going to happen to the page history if it's been worked on it a different place to the current article? One Night In Hackney303 00:44, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
your noteThanks for your note. If you feel strongly that the decision was the wrong one, you can take it to WP:DRV. The effort may be more profitably expended elsewhere, perhaps neutralizing the article. Best wishes and happy editing. Bucketsofg 01:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC) Vandal report to Tyrenius; commentThanks very much for the information Tyrenius, very helpfull, Regards --Domer48 16:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC) NOVA and copyright violationTo User:Tyrenius, Please see comment on my talk page [46] and at the Nova article discussion page. There has been no copyright violation. Statements asserting otherwise are misrepresentations of the facts. Malangthon 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank youThank you very much for the wonderful information and help. This really is appreciated at a time when my belief of how an Encyclopaedia should be created is under attack. Well maybe not under attack as more being ignored. The subject in question is an artist called Baron Barrymore Halpenny, who I have found newspaper cuttings about and seen his work. He also created a first day cover for the Isle of Man Philatelic Bureau when he was 14 and a friend who is a keen stamp collector is getting me a copy. I was hoping to scan it in and upload it to the article, as fair use. I have also asked who created the Bruce Barrymore Halpenny article to give me a list as to the books the artist has done artwork for, as he has the books to look it up, but I don’t think he’s been on Wikipedia for a bit, and is probably on holiday. He would be able to clearly show notability. Thank you again and I hope to work with you in creating the Wikipedia as a true independent and reliable Encyclopaedia. Goldburg 11:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC) Recreation of articlesI wasn't too sure about that. I knew that there were some restrictions, but I did think that once deleted, an article couldn't be recreated without some sort of due process, which appears to be true to a point. Although I can't think of any deleted article I'd want recreated, it's good to know this. Freshacconci 14:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC) VA-related deletionsNew items on the list used to appear on my watchlist, now they don't. Any idea why, or if I can do anything about it? Thanks Johnbod 17:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC) What is the reasoning for deleting Halogen Software? This was all information about the company and was all vendor neutral?! Please inform me of the reason for deletion!! Thanks - Kanata500 March 20 Campbell's Soup CansI have resolve the fair use issues. Would you reconsider support at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 15:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC) EssjayHi, Tyrenius. I must ask you some couple things about Essjay. I haven't been here for about weeks, cause I am very busy in my real life. Anyways, I know Essjay retired from contributing Wikipedia about 2 weeks ago. Essjay(a.k.a Ryan Jordan) was Wikipedia Bureaucrat, arbitrator, administrator, and wikipedia employee. Many of wikipedian trusted him so much before he left the wikipedia. For best of my knowledge, the reason he left wikipedia is that he lied about his personal information. Is there any other reason that he left the wikipedia? I know this became most important event in Wikipedia, and New York times. Could you please explain to me what other things were happening to him? Your response would be appreciated. I hope you can reply this on my talk pages. Best regards. Daniel5127 | Talk 05:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC) u a stalker?hey why u stalkin me? ur not my boss ar you? if you are wach you doin here? anyway youd not sak me as theres no poor fool like me thatd work the crummy hours for such dud pay.--Zedco 11:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Help with my articleHey Tyrenius, Could you help me get my page for Halogen Software back up. I think most of the article was encylopedic, minus the product information. If I remove this information will the article be ok to post again. As for the resources I added to some related pages, these are all vendor neutral articles. Some are written by Halogen, but the articles themselves are all neutral pieces about performance management. Help! Kanata500 18:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Personal attack by AstrotrainI regard this as a personal attack and totally uncalled for. Please take appropriate action, thanks. One Night In Hackney303 17:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Kerlin Gallery/InfoHe was blocked for his username. Now that it is different, the reason no longer applies. Accordingly, he is no longer blocked. Do his edits justify a block for some other reason? — Dan | talk 00:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC) okok ill let you off. but i have had them followin me befor in the office. my radar is always up and trakin. --Zedco 09:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Breach of NPATy, things have calmed down as of late however this edit can not go uncheck. Weggie should not be allowe lay into GiollaUidir like this.--Vintagekits 17:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Help on User:Vintagekits?Hello, I wonder if you can help me please. An editor you have previously blocked for personal threats is repeatedly posting a blatant vandalism warning on my talk page for an edit on Provisional Irish Republican Army. My edit is to the effect that the Provisional IRA is involved in racketeering, and I have provided a reference for this. User:Vintagekits disagrees politically and accuses me of blatant vandalism, when in fact of course it is just a political disagreement. If I remove his blatant vandalism tag from my talk page, he makes threats. Is there anything you can do about this? Thanks. CreativeLogic 19:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, everybody please calm down. The article's protected so it's not going anywhere at the moment. CreativeLogic, less accusations please and WP:AGF - don't accuse editors of lying. Discuss content with them and you will find a reasonable response. Also this edit [47] is completely unacceptable as a violation of WP:BLP, editorial opinion and not sourced. Vintagekits, it is not considered fitting to leave warning templates on the pages of established users. They are intended for new users. Good faith edits are never vandalism, and WP:AGF. Put your points in a reasonable way to the other editor and discuss them. You're rather quick on the draw with "reporting". Don't threaten: just try to reach a resolution with the other editor. Users are allowed to remove warnings (or other material - preferably not in the middle of a discussion, though) from their talk page. I can't do anything else on this right now. Tyrenius 20:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
WP:BLB Warning??Why on earth did you delete the SF-IRA page at 20:20 then leave me a warning at 20:24? Could you also detail how exactly I apparently breached this policy??GiollaUidir 21:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Re: BarnstarThanks for the barnstar. As far as adminship is concerned, once again, I do not want to be an administrator. What is it about that that people find so difficult to understand? – Qxz 05:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
TírghráCan I you have a look at this please.--Vintagekits 14:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC) I've entered the fray, so to speak. Hopefully the article can be unoprotected sooner rather than later, as was working on it on and off prior to going to Barcelona. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 17:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
When I started editing here, I read the rules and it said that Wikipedia was supposed to be an unbiased neutral encyclopedia. Yet checking the edits of various people, such as the one above, I am frankly astonished. Here we have a BNP and IRA supporter eagerly praising his pals. And a so-called "administrator" in cahoots. How can this "encyclopedia" have any credibility whatsoever? If I supported the IRA killing machine, and joined the BNP, would you all be happy? Instead, when I try and challenge this, you accuse me of "vandalism" and "trolls". My God. CreativeLogic 22:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Just telling the truth, something that seems to be in short supply on these hopelessly biased pro-IRA editorial articles. CreativeLogic 22:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC) Tyrenius, User:CreativeLogic has made a personal attack against me on my talk page, which was reverted by Vintagekits, can you warn this editor against this sort of behaviour.--padraig3uk 22:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
SF and IRAPlease see from this link that the IRA and SF are 'inexorably linked' in words of the spokesperson for the PM of the United Kingdom and Great Britain and Northern Ireland [48]. Please therefore use this link rather than simply deleting references to the links between SF and the IRA. A yahoo search will provide multiple media references in the same vein. Does WP:BLP extend to organisations? Please demonstrate this to me Weggie 23:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
CreativeLogicHi. Thanks for your comment. I'm not convinced the guy is a sock of an established editor (though he obviously created a new account to continue his trolling). Seems more like reader with a bee in his bonnet about the IRA. That said, his presence isn't constructive and I'm sure he will get himself indef blocked soon enough. I'm 99.9% sure there is nothing to his claims of being threatened but in the interests of WP:AGF, and having recently dealt with a case of off-wiki threats in relation to an Israeli/Arab dispute, I'm willing to give this guy an opportunity to prove it. The editors claims in the previous case seemed unlikely also, so I'd rather waste a few moments indulging a troll than miss a genuine case of editor abuse because the guy responded in an uncivil manner. Rockpocket 00:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Tyrenius, I think he's back again, Provisional Irish Republican Army, can this page be semi-protected to stop anon editors vandalising the article.--padraig3uk 11:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Deletion of talk page commentsThank you for your comments on Talk:Nova (English school in Japan). As an admin, I wonder if you could offer some assistance on talk page policy. A month or so ago I was in discussion with User Talk:David Lyons regarding deletion of comments and warnings from his talk pages. It is my understanding that user talk pages should be archived, not deleted. However David Lyons said that users are allowed to change their user pages (including talk pages) as they see fit. More recently User talk: Osakadan removed some warnings I had left him (user did not sign his comments), and David Lyons jumped in to defend his deletion. What is your opinion on the removal of comments and where would I find a definitive answer to this issue. Thank you Sparkzilla 01:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Bad ArticleThis article is very incorrect: Viscosity_(printmaking). There is something called viscosity printing. It was developed by Stanley_William_Hayter. It is not a planographic process, as this article says. It is an intaglio_(printmaking) process. The article should be retitled "Viscosity printing." Then the process could be described. I would try to rewrite it. Question: How do you change the article's title? Bus stop 00:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Your noteYes, I agree with your points, of course. Let's see what he says. Crum375 04:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Re: Anna SviderskyWell, I feel the article is more about her murder than about her as a person. As such, I feel the article is out of balance. It contains much about her murderer, which should be included in his article, not Svidersky's. Furthermore, a couple of references are really weak, e.g. number 3 or even non-existant like numbers 10 and 11. Finally, one might even wonder if it passes notability or that it should be a redirect to her murderer. Errabee 04:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
AfD for Halogen SoftwareThe Halogen Software article is better now. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halogen Software. --Eastmain 13:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC) WP:ATT talkThere is a reply/request under the new topic you added there. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 20:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC) FAThanks. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 06:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Nadia Russ is asking that the deletion page, and all trace of her, be removed from Wikipedia. Freshacconci 21:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC) User talk pagesHi Tyrenius. What is the position with regard to removing content from user pages? Specifically, if a user has received 3RR warnings, is s/he entitled to remove them? If not, and they persist in removing them, where can they be reported? Thanks. BastunBaStun not BaTsun 22:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks :-) BastunBaStun not BaTsun 22:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Hmm. I'd got as far as filling in a 3RR report template for the 5 reversions on Dublin, and had just gone to User_talk:Seaned's page to get the warning diff when I saw he'd already been blocked (though without a report on WP:AN3) - and the warnings which I knew he'd previously removed [49] had been restored along with warnings about not reverting warnings... so current practice seems a little inconsistent. BastunBaStun not BaTsun 18:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC) MongoHi Tyrenius, thanks again for trying to straighten things out with Mongo. I've decided to take it an RfC sometime after Easter (I'm going to be away next week). I though you might like to comment on a draft statement user:Thomas Basboll/Sandbox of the dispute in the meantime. Any advice you might have would also be appreciated. Best, --Thomas Basboll 15:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC) AfD nomination of Chris FullerAn editor has nominated Chris Fuller, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Fuller and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 18:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC) JontoJonto has made another personal attack on both me and Vintagekits on Template talk:UKFlags, he has already been blocked before by you for this, can you either do something about these repeated attacks, or let me know what the process is for reporting this abuse on WP.--padraig3uk 00:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC) RfA thanks |