User talk:(aeropagitica)/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

Request

Can you please delete my account User:Saadsaleem and purge the talk and main page. I'll be grateful. Cheers! SaadSaleem 06:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I cannot delete your user account. Please see Deleting your user account for details of how to go about this process. (aeropagitica) 14:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism of Protagoras

At User talk:168.10.112.2, you apparently blocked the user for vandalism on 4 August 2006. The user blatantly vandalized Protagoras today, and I'm wondering if the IP address oughtn't to be reblocked. (It serves multiple users through the Georgia Dept. of Ed., but the contribution history seems mostly vandalism.) Wareh 14:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

As the last warning was a blatant vandal tag, I have reblocked the IP vandal for one week. Thanks for letting me know! You can report these vandal attacks at WP:AIV, which may get a quicker response than leaving a message on an individual's Talk page. Regards, (aeropagitica) 14:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Evil-ted™ complains about his username block

Hi. The owner of the Evil Ted (tm) account complained to unblock-en-l about the username block on their account. I would like to initiate a query as to why you felt the username was inappropriate or inflammatory; it doesn't seem obviously either to me on first inspection. Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert 20:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The username Evil-ted™ contains a special character, the trademark symbol, which has to be entered as ALT+0153, making the username difficult to enter correctly. WP:USERNAME recommends using Latin-based alphanumeric characters in order to render correctly in browsers. It can be changed to Evil-ted (tm) easily enough, as in your example above. This will render correctly in all browsers that are loaded with Latin-based character sets and requires no additional keystrokes in order to be typed out, as opposed to the existing name. (aeropagitica) 20:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I passed the info along to him. Are you willing to unblock him during the name change? Georgewilliamherbert 22:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I will unblock the account pending the change of username following the process given in Wikipedia:Changing username. Regards, (aeropagitica) 22:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Nishkid64's RfA thanks

Thank you very much for participating in my RfA, which closed successfully earlier today with a result of (60/9/4). Although, I encountered a few problems in my RfA, I have peacefully resolved my conflicts and made amends with the people involved. If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free talk to me. I hope I will live up to your expectations. --Nishkid64 22:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Please unblock...AOL User...thank you

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by (aeropagitica) for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "YJ2kool". The reason given for YJ2kool's block is: "vandalism.". Your IP address is 64.12.117.10. Tvccs 05:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

YJ2kool has now been unblocked. (aeropagitica) 15:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

User:205.202.240.133

I blocked the whole Nebraska Comm range on May 6th since CheckUser found out most of the AxelPMP and Nascar vandal ips were coming from it, as you could read on User:Drini/AxlPMP. Now this was a particularly nas spread to manyty set of vandals, since they weren't limited to en: but they spread to many wikiprojects.

1. 04:56, 5 May 2006 Drini (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "205.202.240.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 month (St of nebraska - div of comm. Death threats coming from that range User:Drini/AxlPMP)
2. 04:56, 5 May 2006 Drini (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "205.202.85.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 month (St of nebraska - div of comm. Death threats coming from that range User:Drini/AxlPMP

The block expired long time ago and since thay had calmed I never reblocked, but on the past weeks I've seen several of them resurface (I guess school started again ;) So feel free to block them (you couldn't find it on the blocklog since it was a rangeblock) -- Drini 15:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Block

You have blocked me from editing ANSWER, even though others are vandalizing my edits. I expect better from a DR Who fan who should respect freedom of expression. MagicKirin

Your block log says that you were blocked for 20 hours by Alphachimp on September 24. This block should have expired by now. Don't forget to sign your posts with four tildes, ~~~~. Regards, (aeropagitica) 18:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Longtail stingray

Sorry if I sound like a pest on my second day as admin, but I just wanted to remind you that you should check the article history before deleting a page. I noticed that you deleted Longtail stingray because it was a blank page, but when I went back to see the history of the article, I saw that someone blanked the article yesterday, and then Crzrussian tagged it for speedy deletion. I restored the page, though. You can see the log here. Thanks! --Nishkid64 19:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Now is the time to take a break from admin duties! Regards, (aeropagitica) 19:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No break! CSD G7, blanked by creator, so tagged. Nishkid is still green - and you're doing fine. Cheers. - CrazyRussian talk/email 20:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of confidence! We're all still learning, doing this job. (aeropagitica) 21:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh !@#$%. I take that back. I really need to get my eyes checked out. It was blanked by creator. My bad, aero. However, I don't understand why the creator blanked the redirect link. It's a valid redirect link that doesn't exist. Should I put it back in? --Nishkid64 20:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

If the redirect is valid then there is no reason for its deletion. If it redirected to another redirect page or to a deleted page then it is logical to delete it. Check Wikipedia:Redirect#When_should_we_delete_a_redirect.3F for details, particularly points 1,5 and 6. Regards, (aeropagitica) 21:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks a lot. This re-direct is valid. I did my own external research and found that these two animals were indeed the same, so I restored the redirect page. Thanks for all the help, aero. --Nishkid64 21:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

MagicKirin blocks

MagicKirin (talk · contribs) is doing same to Hugo Chávez. Sandy 15:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Now warned about the WP:NPOV policy. (aeropagitica) 15:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Sandy 15:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

MagicKirin 16:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC) These are not bias edits they are facts. Hugo Chavez is associated with Cuba, North Korea and Iran and proudly admidts it. The bias seems to come from my detractors who are not open mindedMagicKirin 16:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC) MagicKirin

User:B&W Anime Fan

Hey -- just to let you know, this user is requesting unblocking. I assume the edit was in response to that user's edit on Wikipedia:Vandalism, but personally, I don't see the edit in question as disruptive, just improperly performed: (added "[[France|Oral sex]]" when should have added "<nowiki>[[France|Oral sex]]</nowiki>".) Is there another reason I'm missing? Mangojuice^talk 18:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It looks like three admins agree with my reasons for blocking; subtle vandalism is still vandalism. (aeropagitica) 00:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Your block of 207.234.225.92 (talk · contribs)

Hi, you recently blocked this IP address indefinately for vandalism. This is not a user account and the IP address does not have an enormous record of vandalism and disruption, and therefore I beleive that this block is out of order. Please reconsider. Thanks. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 12:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Done. (aeropagitica) 12:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Boy, are you quick or what? :D — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 12:08, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

K3m1xx (talk · contribs · block log)

Just a query as to why you blocked for only 31 hours? I thought it was your everyday one off vandal but the usage of hangon and the talk page at least implies a sockpuppet. –– Lid^(Talk) 23:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I was tempted to indef-block but I thought that they could have a second chance. Maybe I should go with my gut instinct. If they do return to vandalise at that account again, an indef block would be in order as a vandalism-only account. (aeropagitica) 00:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Also can you salt Tariq Sabri please? I userfied the page when it was first posted on the 28th but he seems to have continued to continue making it. –– Lid^(Talk) 00:11, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Help

Thanks for deleting my test. It clearly did not do what I thought it would. What I can't work out is how to fit all this information on Lords reform into some kind of useable hierarchy.

Part of what I need to do is to provide more details of the various proposals. Now the information is very specific to House of Lords reform, so I don't want to have a general page, but I'm struggling to work out how I should add the information. Help would be appreciated Mike 20:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

A good place to ask for help with this type of issue is Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance). (aeropagitica) 20:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Help with User:IHaveAColdThatsAwesome

User (IHaveAColdThatsAwesome (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) has made several nonsense edits, and now claims that addition of Category:People who carry swords and lots of people to it is not vandalism (see talk page). I don't have the authority to make him stop, but the edits seem not-so-coincidentally silly. Comments? -Patstuart 22:57, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I have replied on this editor's Talk page and commented on the CfD debate. (aeropagitica) 23:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Wiki-Off

I think I should be able to make a page since the idea is real and actually really fun to do. Please restore it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by A.blue.wave (talk • contribs)

Firstly, sign your comments with four tildes, ~~~~. This helps editors to respond to comments. Secondly, the concept already exists at Wikipedia:Wiki Game, so there is no need to recreate the deleted page. Thirdly, if you would like to contribute to Wikipedia in a constructive manner, please look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Missing encyclopedic articles for starters. Lastly, new comments are added to the bottom of my Talk page and not the top, as it says at the top! (aeropagitica) 19:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Deletion Removed

Your opinion on whether FlowFighting is a "non-notable mixed martial art style" has been removed since the standard format used here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PraMek has held for over a year. Since the individual in question Scott Sonnon has been the USA National Team Coach of two martial art styles, and trained numerous world and Olympic champions, his record stands firm unless you can otherwise provide reasons to the contrary. If you would like to request a vote, that is fine. Please use the standard voting format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by B-ham (talk • contribs)

Once again, the existence of some article (PraMek) should not necessarily be viewed as a precedent or an open invitation for other articles - that article does not constitute a "standard format". Also, the article was on FlowFighting, not Scott Sonnon, so Sonnon's record is irrelevant. In any case, the request for a vote has been honored - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FlowFighting. fbb_fan 04:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the spam

I'm glad to see the many linkspam edits by 62.0.86.97 got cleaned up. Thanks and good job.-Crunchy Numbers 03:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Morewellian

Thank you, dear, for the patronizing comment. The article that I created was what we in the biz call a "stub" and will be filled in shortly. Give it time. It would have been more helpful if you were to have googled for the term and filled in the stub.

Cheers, C.J. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjcollier (talk • contribs)

User:208.108.164.52

I just gave 208.108.164.52 a final warning for continued vandalism on Bellefontaine, Ohio even after you blocked this address. Could you help us ensure this person does not continue to vandalize Wikipedia? Thanks! -- SwissCelt 16:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Now reported to WP:AIV. It is best to place vandal warnings for admin attention there rather than on an individual admin's Talk page, in case they are offline. This IPvandal will be blocked if they vandalise again. Regards, (aeropagitica) 16:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for that permanent block, much appreciated. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 21:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imransiddiqui

I would like to know how to fix the blocked article so that it can be put back on line after making the relevant corrections. I guess most people of the world have no idea about the broadcast situation in Pakistan that is why it came as a shock. But I am willing to fix it in order to follow guidelines and procedures observed on this forum. Regards, Imran Siddiqui —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imransiddiqui (talk • contribs)

First, sign your Talk comments with four tildes, ~~~~. Second, you have to provide a link to the article in question or at least give me the name in order to understand what the request for comment is about. (aeropagitica) 07:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imransiddiqui - this is the article in question, yes? I have taken a look at the deleted content and I don't think that there is any way that it can be saved. Please read Wikipedia:Your first article and Help:Starting a new page. Be aware that articles should be sourced and referenced and not contain any original research on your part. The speedily deleted article above fell foul in all of these areas. (aeropagitica) 07:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 66/11/5. I learned quite a bit during the process, and I expect to be learning a lot more in the days ahead. I will be taking things slowly (and doing a lot of re-reading), but I hope you will let me know if there is anything I can do to improve in my new capacity. -- Merope Talk 12:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Hwang Seong Gyeong unblocked

I'm going to assume good faith and give this user a second chance since he protested and he hadn't exhibited a trollish pattern yet. --  Netsnipe  ?  21:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Royal High School

Thank you for closing out this debate. Can you please restore the history for GFDL purposes? Silensor 21:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. (aeropagitica) 22:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Flameviper

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. I have re-inserted your comments on the affected page. Sorry about that. I was having an edit conflict and I guess I may have accidently removed your comments. Thank you for pointing this out to me! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 08:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Abuse Report

Hi user Nagarajachar has used very offencive and abusive language against me and my family in my talk page which is very rude and i am really upset about it, he has made personal attacks could you please take some action. Though he has not left his signature or time.Thanks--Ganesha1 08:52, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. Next time, please report this type of incident to WP:PAIN, as any given admin may be away from their computer and this will delay the response, if one is warranted. (aeropagitica) 11:50, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for ur help , will do it appropriately next time.--Ganesha1 14:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:RfA Withdrawn

Hello! I have withdrawn your RfA on your behalf. The point that I wanted to make was that becoming active in XfA discussions and citing policy and guidelines when you do participate is a good demonstration of your grasp of the Wikiprocess, besides showing your civility and interest in topics. Please don't be disheartened by this event! No one who participated is your enemy; everyone who contributed wants the same thing that you do, to see you improve your editing skills and Wikiknowledge. Try again in ~2000 edits, using this time to learn about the above and to make friends on Wikiprojects. Regards, (aeropagitica) 12:22, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that for me. Not disheartened at all. All of the oppose votes I saw were contructive criticism, minus Daniel.Bryant's which frankly was an editcountitis vote to me ;-). I'll try to get more involved in the xfd process next time around. Thanks for taking part in my rfa! - Mike (Trick or treat) 17:35, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for your support in my RfA and first congratulations. :-) I really appreciate it, and will defintely let you know if I have any questions! Best, Irongargoyle 20:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 91/1/4. I can't express how much it means to me to become an administrator. I'll work even more and harder to become useful for the community. If you need a helping hand, don't hesitate to contact me. NCurse work 15:26, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Tobin bronze

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. (aeropagitica) 07:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. The article Tobin bronze was not a test but a mistake, as the 'b' in bronze should have been upper case.

I do however please guilty to still learning! Super Impose 12:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA: Malber

I've removed my listing and posted a response to most of your points on the RfA page. I thank you for keeping the discussion civil. You are the only person who brought up the User:DyslexicEditor thing, so I thought I'd address it: take a long hard look at the editor's comments at ANI and the editor's tendentious editing history with the percieved cabal.

Also, I think it's unproductive for an admin to have sprotected their talk page. What if a newbie or anon has questions? -- Malber (talk • contribs) 15:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your civility remarks - politeness costs nothing! Good point about sprotection, I was thinking much the same thing last week, so I have now removed the status. Regards, (aeropagitica) 16:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Panda & Angel

Please explain why this band does not deserve an article. according to WP:band, a band deserves an article if it "Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...)." Well, they have been featured on msnbc at [1] and they have been featured in numerous independant music magazines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Senti mental (talk • contribs)

Firstly, the article title should go at the top of your comments on my Talk page, so that I have something to which I can refer. Secondly, sign your name with four tildes, ~~~~ in order to make it easier to reply to your comments.

To quote from the article; "..the band released [their]first self titled ep in June of 2006." The criteria found at WP:Music states that a band is notable if it;

"Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)"

If you would like to develop the article in a Sandbox user sub-page before publication then please do so and the article can go up for AfD if the evidence provided is equivocal. (aeropagitica) 19:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm okay i see what [you're] saying Senti mental 19:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks from StuffOfInterest

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 52/6/1 (~90%). It was an interesting process which gave me a chance to learn a bit about myself and about the community. My intention now is to slowly ease into using those additional buttons on my page. No use being over eager and mucking up the works. The support of all those who went over my record and/or rallied to my defense after the big oppose vote was instumental to the success of this review. Again, thank you! --StuffOfInterest 11:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)