User talk:Acalamari/Archive 036

Happy 3rd Wiki-Anniversary!

It has been three years since you joined Wikipedia, so I would like to wish you a happy 3rd annual First Edit Day!! I made this and this video dedicated to you and your honor where you were here for three years already. NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 00:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks NHRHS2010! Acalamari 16:48, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Did you see the two videos I made for you? NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 19:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. :\ I've been busy the last couple of days, and my internet hasn't been at its usual speeds recently. I'll try to look later and tell you then. Best. Acalamari 16:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First Edit Day

HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!

from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE

Wishing Acalamari/Archive 036 a very Happy First Edit Day!

Have a fantastic day!

From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

Vatsan34 (talk) 07:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Vatsan34! Acalamari 16:48, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA spam

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3

Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 18:59, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm baaack!

Hello! As you may know, I retired last spring, but I have been visiting Wikipedia much more often than I thought I would. I feel rather refreshed right now as I make this edit. Feel free to respond on my talk page. Hope you're having a great day/night! Schfifty3 02:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Acalamari 15:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did I forget to thank you? ..

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 04:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much!

Thanks for the rollback rights. I'll use them well. (That means, of course, responsibly) :) The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User rights management

I was shocked to find that you granted Felyza (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) rollback after the editor made only 45 edits. I can only assume that was a momentary lapse of judgment/error. Toddst1 (talk) 15:27, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What, exactly, is the issue? Majorly talk 17:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was puzzled by this at first, but it seems that Toddst1 removed rollback from Felyza. To answer your question, Toddst1, I reviewed the editor's reverts at the time, and every one I looked at was a good one. I do not look at edit count, only quality of reverts (something I've done ever since rollback was introduced for non-admins), and since rollback is easy to remove, I don't like high standards being attached to the tool (if we apply high standards to something that can be removed easily, then even with a faster desysopping system, we'd be unlikely to ever reduce high RfA standards). I'm actually surprised that Felyza had their rollback removed after only a few bad reverts out of what appears to be loads of good ones since being given rollback, and that they appeared to have recognized and acknowledged their mistake and attempted to fix it. Surely someone who does that should be given a chance with their rollback tool rather than have it taken away from them immediately? It's not like Felyza dismissed the concerns brought to his talk page. Acalamari 18:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, but I really think the editor needs much more experience. I left a note to that effect encouraging the user to reapply after s/he gets the gyst of how things work around here. It's clearly not a case of deliberate abuse - rather, misuse due to lack of experience and/or attention. Toddst1 (talk) 18:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hi! Thank you for granting me rollback. Of course, I'll use it in accordance with the rules. Regards, Trivelt (talk) 18:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Have fun. Acalamari 18:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

How do you make templates? If there is a help page for this redirect me there if you don't feel like explaining, please. --ŁσςhĢσσbïï --Loshgoobii —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loshgoobii (talk • contribs) 23:30, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not sure what type of template you want to create, but to start a template in the template-space, type in "Template:" followed by whatever you want the template to be about. For example, if I wanted to create a template on links to types of trees in California, I'd type in "Template:Types of trees in California". Does that help? Let me know if you need more advice. Best. Acalamari 23:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine now. Thank you for your help! --User:Loshgoobii

A project you might be interested in

Hi, I've recently created a project which, broadly speaking, will help to develop and support the enwiki community. At this stage, we're currently calling for individual proposals on how to improve Wikipedia. If you're interested, sign up and add your ideas here! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jwesley78

I see you just gave this user rollback rights, which he promptly used to revert an edit I did, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Groupon&diff=324924439&oldid=324884252, which he marked as vandalism. Non-neutral - Ok. Vandalism? Certainly not. Well-sourced? Yes. Accurate? Yes. Maybe take this rollback right away? I'll look for a reply here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.113.11 (talk) 08:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. That revert was made using Twinkle, not rollback, plus, he was given rollback rights three days or so ago, and that revert was made recently, so I don't see how that's a "prompt" revert of your edit. Wouldn't it be better to talk to him about his revert rather than ask me to remove his rollback rights? It is normally better to talk to the user you're in conflict with first before asking other users for input. Best. Acalamari 16:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. He's angry about this. His edit to Groupon was reverted b/c it violates NPOV. He also posted a "warning" on my user talk page. Jwesley₇₈ 21:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section to discuss this on the IP's talk page. If he wants to make a claim that Groupon.com falsely advertises their sales, then we'll need to find this published from a reliable source (e.g., a news article). Jwesley₇₈ 00:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, discussion will be a good thing. In future, when reverting edits like that, I suggest that you use a manual edit summary with an explanation rather than an automated one: it'll prevent situations like this in the future. Best Acalamari 00:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It's hard to determine somebody's intentions when patrolling RC. Decisions like that are often made in about 30 seconds. My perception was that the edit was an angry Groupon customer who was wanting to retaliate, hence, Vandalism. (Apparently this was not the case.) I think he would not have been so mad if the revert's comment has said "Good Faith" instead. Jwesley₇₈ 01:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Acalamari, would you please address this issue. He keeps placing (what I consider to be attacks) on my talk page. He also questioning whether I have an affiliation with Groupon.com. The guy is being unreasonable. Jwesley₇₈ 19:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He also removes content from the IP's talk page. My understanding is that this is not allowed by an IP user. Jwesley₇₈ 19:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another admin has looked at the [IP] talk page issue. Jwesley₇₈ 19:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's anything I can do at this time. However, I would like to note that the IP is entitled to remove comments from their own talk page, but at the same time, you are entitled to remove comments from your own talk page. Best. Acalamari 16:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. I was reported to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Jwesley78. Since you were tangentially involved with this issue, you might want to make a comment. Jwesley₇₈ 17:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting announcement

Just checked the tool that shows you how many people watch a page, and it turns out that my talk page now has 200 watchers! Of course, some people might remove me after this posting, so I might end up going back below 200 for a bit. :D Thanks to everyone watching me. Acalamari 00:50, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback Rights

Hi there, I was recently granted rollback rights by yourself. I've noticed that when I'm reverting and using the rollback rights, it's not displaying TW (for Twinkle) or HG etc. I don't think that this is a big thing but any idea why it wouldn't be doing this? --5 albert square (talk) 00:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 5 albert square, I don't know what's causing it, as I'm not a programmer of Twinkle nor Huggle. You could try posting to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), as someone there might know. Best. Acalamari 16:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreviewer

Hi, thanks for the permissions upgrade. Appreciate it. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 23:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 03:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Do you provide copies of deleted articles or know an admin who does. I need a copy of The Word Alive. It needs to be the second nomination though. --Łoshɢooþii ^talk 05:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If a user asks for the deleted text of an article, I do restore the text they request to a page in their userspace (unless, of course, the text is something that should stay deleted). Do you want the text so you can improve the article in a userspace-subpage of yours and then move it back to an article when you're finished? Acalamari 16:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I asked for unprotection of the page here and was told to make a draft of the page and present the request again. I want a copy of the page that I had created so that I could make it better and present it on the requests for unprotection. It was only deleted and salted for lack of notability. --Łoshɢooþii ^talk 17:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The text is at User:Loshgoobii/The Word Alive. Hope that helps. Best. Acalamari 17:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! --Łoshɢooþii ^talk 18:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 18:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Question (rollback rights)

Thanks for the positive feedback, always nice to hear. I hadn't heard of the rollback feature before your message, but it sounds like a very useful tool. So yes, I'd love to have rollback rights! I'm looking forward to all the time it will save. Thanks again! —Zach425 ^talk/contribs 00:36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted. Remember though that rollback should be used to revert blatant vandalism/spam, and that using it in revert-wars or to revert edits you disagree with can lead to its removal...and note that some admins don't even give a warning before removing the right. If you would like to test the tool before using it to revert vandalism, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. That all being said, happy reverting! Acalamari 00:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted - I try to avoid such nasty things as edit wars anyway. I'll give the test page a shot. Thanks for the rollback permission & guidance! —Zach425 ^talk/contribs 01:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, so do I! You're welcome for the tool! Acalamari 01:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback rights

I responded to your comment here: User_talk:Zacherystaylor#Question Thank you Zacherystaylor (talk) 16:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback offer

Hi Acalamari. Sorry for the late response. Yes, I'd love rollback. Thanks. Anirishwoman (talk) 22:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I've granted rollback rights to your account. Remember that the tool is for reverting vandalism/spam, and that using it in revert wars or to revert edits you disagree with can lead to its removal...sometimes without warning, depending on the admin that notices any misuse. For practice, you may wish to take a look at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck! Acalamari 00:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreviewer

Hi Acalamari. I recently applied for the Auto-reviewer privileges and was declined by User:UpstateNYer. I, with the utmost respect, that you take a second a look at my application and reevaluate it. You can find my request here. Thank you for your time and consideration. Mkdw ^talk 21:14, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to reverse the decision, but I will leave a comment. Best. Acalamari 00:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thank you for taking the time to leave a comment. Hopefully this can be resolved easily. It's quite painstaking asking someone else to patrol list these pages on my behalf. Mkdw ^talk 19:20, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I hope that my response to you above didn't come across as dismissive in any way: the reason I wasn't going to immediately reverse the decision is because that would lead to problems that can easily be avoided. As such, it was better to leave a comment to resolve the issue. Thanks. Acalamari 19:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PCD

Hello, have the dolls really split up? I am really sad by this news, I was looking forward to their third album and Nicole has come along as she does and has wrecked it--David (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday, fellow 29/11/1990 baby! Have a great 19th birthday Baberlp (talk) 05:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, Baberlp! A very happy 19th birthday to you too! Acalamari 16:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I won't offer you beer, then. Happy birthday! :) Kafka Liz (talk) 16:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's also almost 9:00am here, and I haven't even had my morning coffee yet. :\ Thanks for the note, Kafka, it's really nice to hear from you. ;) Acalamari 16:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, we're old enough to have beer at this age ;) (but I must admit that I hate the taste) 193.60.83.241 (talk) 17:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, above comment from Baberlp. I wasn't signed in. Hope you're having a good one! Baberlp (talk) 17:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Also, I wanted to congratulate you regarding your university. Good luck! Acalamari 17:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, one step closer to geezerdom! –thedemonhog talk • edits 21:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Thedemonhog! Hope everything's good with you. Acalamari 22:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday Acalamari

Hey, Acalamari. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!-- Vatsan34 (talk) 17:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday indeed, Acalamari, and thanks for granting me rollback some 20,000+ edits ago. Hope you have/had a fantastic day, and Best Wishes always, Jus da fax 01:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unprotection Lady Gaga discography

If I understand correctly you are admin who protected Lady Gaga discography. I'm requesting you reconsider the semi-protection of this article. My view is that it's been protected incorrect because it's a highly viewed article having a high about of edits - leading to a over protective response, but given a quick review of the edits I feel the level of vandalism as a proportion of edits is not high enough to warrant protection and that WP:AGF is being overruled without justification. SunCreator (talk) 01:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SunCreator, I've actually just responded to your post on Talk:Lady Gaga regarding the protection of that article. However, I have to log off for now, and won't get to anything here until later. Best. Acalamari 01:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good. I've replied on Talk:Lady Gaga. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leona Lewis

Ah well, I was already aiming for a revert and yours took place before mine. I reverted to an earlier version though - sources didn't support Polish-born for the assailant, etc.---- Larrybob 20:49, 5 December 2009

No worries. Thanks for your anti-vandal efforts and for making sure that unsourced information isn't in articles. Best Acalamari 20:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Thanks, I aim to use it carefully. G~~ain~~Line ♠ _♥ 00:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thankspam

Hello, Acalamari! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with a total of 93 support !votes, 1 oppose and 3 editors remaining neutral. While frankly overwhelmed by the level of support, I humbly thank the community for the trust it has placed in me, and vow to use the tools judiciously and without malice.

KV5 (Talk • Phils)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 51 supports, 4 opposes, and 3 neutrals.

MrKIA11 (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uncle Remus

Hello friend,

I monitor the article Uncle Remus. The last editor added something that I think is valid, but not properly formatted. It has to do with citations and facts in dispute and not something that I have ever dealt with. Could you look at the last edit and make it look pretty? Thanks. A Softer Answer (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the text to a tag and made some other minor formatting fixes...I think that's what you wanted? At any rate, it's nice to hear from you...good to see that you're still around! ;) Acalamari 20:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello, Acalamari, I was wondering if I might be able to acquire rights to rollback, understanding of course that it is an anti-vandalism tool and not to be used haphazardly. I am trying to work towards patrolling of recent edits, along with new pages, and thought that it might help. Today, for example, I did two reversions of vandalism ([1] and [2]) on the René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle that might have been more easily reverted with this tool. Your consideration is appreciated. Moogwrench (talk) 09:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted: you're right that the tool is not for reverting edits you disagree with nor to revert-war, and that the tool can be removed if misused (note that some admins don't even bother to warn editors about rollback errors). This all being said, rollback is very useful for reverting vandalism and spam, and does make things much easier. Have fun with your new tool! Acalamari 16:48, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate your willingness to extend me the use of this tool and I will try to always use it for its intended purpose with intelligence and wisdom. Moogwrench (talk) 16:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello, Acalamari, I was wondering if I could acquire rollback rights. I do understand that it is an anti vandalism right and must be used carefully.Cathar11 (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Cathar11, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request on my talk page. You are right that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam, and that using it to revert anything else (by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse, and some admins will also remove rollback from accounts that have been blocked for revert-warring, even if rollback was never used in the revert-war. This all being said, rollback is a very handy tool for dealing with vandals and spammers. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 16:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding if certain canvassing is inappropriate

Alcalamari, I am sorry to bother you I would appreciate it if you could offer me an opinion on this canvassing edit made by another editor. It kind of raised a red flag with me, and I was wondering if it crossed the line into campaigning? If so, as an editor involved in some of those discussions already, what would be the most appropriate response? Again, sorry to bother you but I am still newer to WP and looking to get a feel for these things without stirring up the hornet's nest, so to speak, more than I have to. Moogwrench (talk) 02:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Moogwrench, I'm not familiar with the dispute nor its subject so I'm not able to speak from an expert point of view on this matter, but I'm not sure canvassing is a huge thing to worry about in this case. The editor who was contacted recently posted to the talk page of the dispute ([3]), so I assume they are already aware of what's going on. That being said, if the editor who posted the message starts to contact users who aren't involved with the dispute to get support, my suggestion would be to talk to the editor to get them to stop, and if they persist, post to WP:ANI (you'll get better, faster, and more input if you post there rather than contact an individual admin for help on matters like that). Hope that helps. Best. Acalamari 16:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice. I appreciate it. Moogwrench (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brittany Murphy talk page

Yup, it looks like we were both restoring at the same time. I'll delete from the first section; it's more relevant to the latter section. Daniel Case (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Thanks for any help you can provide here, too. How sad and terrible this all is! Acalamari 21:50, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moving "Role-playing game"

Hi. Back in July you locked "Role-playing game" to prevent vandals moving it. Now it needs to be moved for legitimate reasons, see the consensus formed on the talk page, where there is only one editor objecting to the move.

The article currently describes "pen-and-paper" role-playing games, but a decision has been reached that the term "role-playing game" equally applies to computer role-playing games, so the page should be a disambiguation page per WP:PT. The existing page should be moved to a disambiguated name, which has been agreed on after long discussion to be Role-playing game (pen-and-paper), in order to maintain the history and talk page.

Could I impose on you to move Role-playing game to Role-playing game (pen-and-paper) and then to move Role-playing game (disambiguation) to Role-playing game? Cheers, Ryan Paddy (talk) 06:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just gone ahead and removed the move-protection from the page, as it's been there for over a year and it should be okay now. I'll allow you to perform the moves, as you're familiar with the situation. Best. Acalamari 16:22, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That might be a bit premature - what Ryan didn't say is that the page is just entering mediation so it might be better to leave it protected to prevent fait accompli arguments. Percy Snoodle (talk) 17:47, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I advise Ryan Paddy (and others wanting to move the article) not to move the page while mediation is in progress, despite my unprotecting of the article. Acalamari 18:40, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

Merry Christmas

A Nobody^{My talk} is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 04:21, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!

Merry Christmas!

Once again it is festive season, a time where festive decorations are displayed and gifts are swapped; but what about the true meaning of christmas? The true meaning of christmas is about the fight for freedom and how in times of hardship and misery, one person leads their people to freedom as a great warrior; for those who fight for a cause are warriors and those who fight for a worthy cause are great warriors. Such an act earns respect and honour; but most importantly, brings happiness to their people. So to achieve this as happiness lies in other people's happiness and greatness lies in how you deal with little people, we selflessly think of others in the hope that they will be happy this christmas.

Hi Acalamari, have a very Merry Christmas and A Happy New Year 2010!
Set Sail For The Seven Seas

Set Sail For The Seven Seas 343° 36' 0" NET 22:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And now... yes, you've guessed it

Here's wishing you a happy end to the holiday season and a wonderful 2010.
Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:01, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very Late Thank You

I can't believe I forgot to thank you for giving me rollback! (I'm not being sarcastic.) Thank you for granting me rollback! Really, thanks! Sorry for thanking you this late, by the way. --Ha dg er 00:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, Hadger! For the record, though, you did thank me here, but no worries. ;) A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you! Acalamari 00:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for guidance.

Hi there. I saw you're currently active at RPP, so I thought I'd just run a quick question by you.

I'm trying to deal with an IP that's constantly edit warring at Wildcat formation, inserting nonsense about how he invented the formation. The 3RR noticeboard seems to be irregularly patrolled, so by the time they get around to dealing with requests, they've often gone stale, though the problem will soon resurface.

I reposted the request there and have since asked for page protection, as well. I'm just wondering if you know whether I'm better off trying to deal with these problems at one board or the other, or if there's an altogether separate route I should be looking at.

Feel free to just respond here, as it'll show up in my watchlist. Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 23:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Bdb484, I've just spent the last few minutes looking at this. Assuming what the IPs have been inserting in the article is a hoax, then the page should be protected to prevent the continued addition of the hoax. Unfortunately, I'm not familar with the article's topic, so I don't know if the information they are adding is false or not. Acalamari 23:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Do I need to provide more information establishing the hoaxiness, or just wait for a sysop who is more comfortable with the topic? — Bdb484 (talk) 23:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I've semi-protected the page for a week. I suggest starting a discussion on the talk page in case the hoax gets re-added after the protection expires. Acalamari 23:58, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll do that now, but I'm hopeful that a week off will be enough time for the vandal to find something more constructive to do with his life. Things must be boring on break from Mizzou. — Bdb484 (talk) 04:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

If there is a musician notable enough to have an article, does that mean that an album page may be created for every album he is in, even if the band doesn't meet notability? I read the wiki albums thing but i still don't understand. --Łoshɢooþii ^talk 00:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean, to give an example, that if a notable musician is featured on the album of a musician who is not notable, an article can be created on the album of the non-notable musician? If that's what you mean, then as far as I'm aware, no, as notability doesn't transfer from the notable artist to the non-notable album. Acalamari 17:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OMG

Sorry, I accidentally rolled you back while going through recent changes. Sorry, It wasn't a comment on your edit, just clumsiness on my part. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:40, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries: you fixed your error, and besides, those mistakes are easy to make! Acalamari 17:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I think the main reason was I was trying to get the circulation going in my fingers after a quick excursion into the outside world. 'Tis cold out there :) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback question

Hello. I have found your user-page because you are an administrator who grants rollback privileges. I am performing academic research and I am particularly focused on usage of the rollback feature. I have imported en-wiki dumps into MySQL for analysis, and flag RBs by parsing revision comments for the "automatic comment" left by RB edits.

My question: In February 2009 and the months preceding it, about 200k RBs were being performed a month. Beyond that, usage of the RB feature seems to decline sharply; in September 2009 I show only 1k RBs. Can you help me understand this? Did the automatic revision string change? Did the use of anti-vandalism bots (with their slightly altered RB strings (which I don't try to parse)) become so prevalent that no one does it 'manually' any more?

My current research has found no reason for this 200x change, and I hope you can help. Of course, your help will aid my research -- which in turn will help the Wikipedia community in combating vandalism. West.andrew.g (talk) 16:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I must say that I don't think I have heard of this decline before, but I'd say that there are a variety of factors that contributed towards it: it could range from people who heavily used rollback becoming more reliant on tools such as Huggle to rollback-reliant people taking breaks, or from bots designed to do mass amounts of vandal-reverting to errors in the tool database not picking up rollbacks correctly (I seem to remember the rollback default edit summary being changed to contain a Wikilink). This all being said, 200,000 rollbacks down to 1,000 is a huge drop, so it is very interesting that the count dropped by that much. Hope this helps. Acalamari 18:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

Hi I was wondering as an administrator if you could provide a neutral opinion on dispute I've had with user Bold Clone (talk) on the page the Fallen I was just hoping you could go over the history Revision history of Fallen (Transformers) and help us out to make a decision, It would be much appreciated The Movie Master 1 (talk) 02:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eminem discography

Hey Acalamari, there are constant acts of vandalism regarding sales in this page. There are sales added without source or contradicting current source. Can you please semi-protect this page, since most of the vandalism is coming from anonymous editors. Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done for two weeks. Acalamari 23:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Acalamari

Would you consider protecting the article Lula, o filho do Brasil ? It is about a movie. It seems to be under recurrent attack by some Brazilian editors, IP's of different political views. 189.102.151.185 (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done for three days. Please discuss on the talk page. Thanks. Acalamari 23:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Acalamari: This IP 201.0.202.118, who is vandalizing Lula, o filho do Brasil was banned 3 months in Portuguese Wikipedia by multiple registrations/accounts and vandalism (his accounts are banned forever). He is vandalizing lots of pages there. He must be banned here too. Please, punish him. 189.4.240.56 (talk) 00:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm not familiar with any vandals on the Portuguese Wikipedia, and as such, am not informed enough to block the IP here for a long time. I suggest posting to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, as someone more familiar with the Portuguese Wikipedia than me will likely see your posting and be of more help to you. Thanks! Acalamari 03:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 01:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time and consideration. As a gesture of appreciation, may I share a rhetorical question from the Analects of Confucius: "Is it not pleasant to learn with a constant perseverance and application?" --Tenmei (talk) 19:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping: I sent an e-mail detailing a plan. I wonder if critical commentary or questions might be within the ambit of your expertise and interests? --Tenmei (talk) 16:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reckless reversion by Sweetness46

Please take a look at User talk:Sweetness46. This user appears to have a problem with reckless reversion of good-faith edits. I'd take away their rollback privileges if I were you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.61.79 (talk) 03:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've left them a note. Acalamari 18:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]