User talk:Alphachimp/Archive 12

Aircraft models flagged for business and econ project

Alphachimp, could you possibly take the business and econ project tags off the aircraft model pages? --SueHay

It's not a matter of just flicking a switch. Could you please link me to the relevant category? alphachimp 02:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you. I think some aircrafts were erroneously categorized as businesses. Thanks for explaining. -- SueHay 01:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Account creation blocked on username violations

Hi Alphachimp, I just noticaed (thanks to the HBC AIV Helperbot!) that you just blocked a lot of users for username violations and blocked account creation. WP:U states that they typically shouldn't have account creation blocked. Most of the names that you blocked with account creation blocks didn't seam to have any vandalism attached to them, and didn't seam to be major violations of WP:U to warrent account creation blocks RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 16:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woops! I'll go ahead and fix that. alphachimp 17:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I was mainly wondering if there was another reason. Thanks for fixing it RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 17:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's my monobook.js. I copied the block buttons from somebody else, and I'm trying to figure out how to remove the account creation block check. alphachimp 17:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:This is Moe.jpg

Hi Alphachimp, I was wondering, could delete this Image of myself for me? — Moe 01:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. All done. alphachimp 01:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Alphamonkey :) — Moe 01:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey What's up Dude?

how's is going? I missed you last night. I thought that we were going to meet out. Good thing you stayed home, those girls were pigs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pipa4 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

This Page

Can you semi-protect my new userpage, as I moved it. ~Step trip 02:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

all done. alphachimp 02:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ~Step trip 02:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you & your continual help

I want to thank you for your help with user 209.177.21.6. I have a slight problem tho because if i revert the last edit the IP address made I would violate the 3RR you can see history here. I don't want to put you in a weird position, but if you could see if you want to revert to my version or another previous version. Also, i believe I can make 1 more edit without breaking the 3RR here but I just want to make sure I'm doing the right thing because the IP address put up the AFD in the first case. MrMacMan 22:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Visual arts bot tagging

Hi Alphachimp. Thanks for following up on my request. I've already used AWB to hit the top-level Visual Arts category, which has very few articles at this point. It's really the complex series of subcats and articles within that constitutes the main problem. I'm not even sure how to have you proceed. I guess I'll go with my own area of interest: Category:Italian painters. Can you add the following to the talk pages of each entry listed in that category: {{Visual arts|class=}}

If that proves trivial and you have time/inclination to do more, I'd ask you to add the same to the talk pages of every article listed at Category:Artistic techniques. Cheers! Planetneutral 05:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite trivial, especially considering that I'm just using a bot (it does what you're doing using AWB, only in utomated form)). I'll do the work as soon as I can. alphachimp 05:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I figured as much, but didn't want to be overbearing in my first bot request. Very much appreciated. Is it tedious to do the articles listed at Category:Italian artists along with the articles in the subcategories (excepting Italian painters of course)? Same syntax. If that's relatively easy, it'd be great to do the same with Category:French artists and Category:American artists. If it's not, no problem at all. Thank you! Planetneutral 12:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi...why did Color code get a {{Visual arts}} tag? It doesn't seem to fit to me... (cf. Talk: color code). Thanks. Jhawkinson 14:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow. I didn't notice that the bot had hit all the subcats of Category:Artistic techniques. I'll probably have to do some reviewing of those subcats and remove the tag where appropriate. Thanks for pointing that out. Planetneutral 14:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see now that it was done thoughtfully and selectively, for which I'm grateful. I think Category:Color is the only one where there's a decent percentage of entries that don't really fit the scope of WP:WPVA. I'm not sure it makes sense to go back and remove the tag wholesale from the category, as there are some entries there where it makes sense. I think I'll just clean it up as time permits. Thanks again! Planetneutral 15:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing my user page

It's funny to watch him in action via the history file. He made two fresh entries near the top, then went to the bottom after you reverted him and saw he was busted from the day before. --CliffC 13:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Kerrysfrench

Does it really matter? It's been over a year, and I haven't made any kind of vandalism. Actually I've been doing quite a bit of anti-vandalism work with reverting edits. --Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 06:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. Why then do you want it unblocked? alphachimp 06:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True, I suppose I don't need it unblocked. It's just a personal thing I guess...using my original account. --Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 01:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent block of Ipsoorthometapara

Hello. You recently blocked Ipsoorthometapara (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and they have asked to be unblocked. Upon review of their talk page, block log and contributions, it is not immediately clear to me why you chose to block this user. I'd appreciate it if you would explain your rationale on their user talk page, and advise on whether or not their unblock request should be granted. Thank you, Sandstein 10:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'm responding over there. alphachimp 18:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Essjay has retired

I know that Wikipedia is not a soapbox, and that I should not gossip, but did you hear about the Essjay Suitation? ~Step trip 17:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, about 18 hours ago. alphachimp 17:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Figures, I'm always about the last one to know about these types of things (by the way, do you like my new sig?). ~Step trip 17:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I think your signature is a little bit too long and big. Sorry :/ alphachimp 17:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is this one:

~Step trip 02:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's better, but I'd much prefer something that's less that 2 lines. Check out WP:SIG for some guidelines. alphachimp 18:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copying images to Commons

I recently uploaded some images here, but they are free use and I want them to go to Commons instead. I already added one to Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons which will probably take a year. What should I do? --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link me to them. I'll delete them here and you can upload them to commons. Regards, alphachimp 07:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Stanley Vaughan Heenan

From a search I have just done, it appears that you have recently deleted an article on Patrick Heenan. I didn't realise this until after I submitted a carefully-worded and fully-referenced article on the same person (Patrick Stanley Vaughan Heenan), and did a search to back-link existing references. Any comments or suggestions for improvement would be appreciated. Regards, Grant | Talk 06:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your article looks great. It's well referenced and written. Suffice to say, I would not delete it. For the purpose of reference, I've restored the original article beneath your diambiguation page (see the history of Patrick Heenan). The primary difficulty with his original article was that it did not assert the notability of Heenan. You seem to have done so. Good work! alphachimp 07:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone is vandalizing my user page.

Please block this person or tell it to leave me alone. --Prolancet 19:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user is removing sockpuppet tags. I'm accusing him of sockpuppetry and as such, he is not allowed to remove the notice from his page for ten days. This is not vandalism. Yankees76 19:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello

im curious as to what was vandalized on a wikipedia article. obviously it was led to my IP address because i do not have an account. however, i have never edited anything on wikipedia. i live in a dorm, and a lot of people use my computer casually, i.e. check facebook, myspace, etc. im not sure if my dormmates did anything or not, but i just want to clear my name.

thanks

Blocked

Yeah, I must've misread the timestamps. Thanks for the heads up :) --Sylent 00:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not blocking a vandalist

Hi Alphachimp,

Here you decide not to block a user because it wouldn't be recent (enough) (what is not MT?). Looking at the user's history though, he is very clearly a vandalist, and has always been. Would you please explain to me, I want to learn, why not to block this user. You know that the next time he visit Wikipedia, he will only vandalize again, and I can't keep watching him.

Thanks

JackSparrow Ninja 18:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His last edit was on March 2. We're trying to stop vandalism in progress on AIV. We can't do much good when we're blocking vandals from 5 days ago. "Not mt" is an indication to admins watching the page that the list is not empty. alphachimp 18:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block of IP 81.145.241.50

I'm confused by the recent block of IP 81.145.241.50 which I had left a comment about on WP:AIV.

"Before listing a vandal here make sure that: The vandal is active now, has received a proper set of warnings, and has vandalized after a recent last warning, except in unusual circumstances."

Active now? Nope. No edits in the last hour.

Received a proper set of warnings? Nope. Never received a last warning.

Vandalized after a recent last warning? Nope. Again, never received a last warning.

Except in unusual circumstances? Must be this one...but it didn't seem unusual to me... --Onorem 18:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not rigidly bound by that process. I decided that in this case (libelous vandalism) a block was merited regardless of the warning level. Coincidentally, they did receive a last warning, albeit after the most recent edit. alphachimp 18:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They received the last warning after I left the comment about them not receiving a last warning, but oh well. I disagree with your decision, as I don't see how it's a preventative block, but you're the one with the buttons...and I actually don't agree with the policies I'm talking about. --Onorem 18:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks

I guess I should also say that I found these blocks [1] [2] unnecessary. These users did not vandalize after the last warning. One of them had even stopped almost an hour ago. I believe that it doesn't make much sense in warning vandals that they will be blocked if they don't stop, if we block them anyway even if they do stop. Sorry! :-) --Hús ö nd 18:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I judged their pattern of vandalism to be too strong not to block. Warnings only mean so much. That said, you're welcome to unblock them if you'd like. alphachimp 18:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I respect your decision. I just find it a bit corny when I try to remove entries from WP:AIV stating that the users did not vandalize after the last warning, only to immediately discover that I was too late coz someone else has blocked them meanwhile. I too consider the severity of the vandalism when deciding whether to block a vandal that has not received a full set of warnings, but still, never block if they have not transgressed a warning. --Hús ö nd 19:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Hi, Alphachimp. Just a quick note to say thanks for your support at my RfA. Will be meeting you around AIV no doubt! Thanks. Bubba hotep 21:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging Bot for European Union Project

Need bot to tag all articles within the sub cats: Category:Eurovision_songs with: {{European Union|class=Start|importance=Low}} . --Parker007 19:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Due to issues with overtagging, most of the bot operators who can assist you will not blindly add subcategories. I recommend creating a user or wikiproject subpage where you can list all of the categories that should be included, depending on how deep you want to go. Also, you can use WP:AWB to do this yourself if you want to! Simply create a bot account (such as User:ParkerBot, or User:WPEUBot, but there are no required conventions on naming). Then you can download WP:AWB and request approval at WP:RFBA. Once approved, your bot will receive a bot flag and someone will allow you to use WP:AWB. If you still want someone else to do this, and would like a list of all subcategories to use as a starting point for the final list, just post here and tell me how deep to go - no edits will be made until you approve the list. ST47Talk 13:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still want someone else to do this, and go as deep as possible. :) . --Parker007 18:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm doing it. alphachimp 19:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thnx :) . --Parker007 19:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the bot hasnt even started it? Did you instruct the bot to do it? --Parker007 05:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Woops! I'll get on that. alphachimp 07:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) --Parker007 21:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

question regarding user page editing

A while ago I was banned indefinetly for editing a friend's user page. I just wanted to ask you about the rules regarding user page editing. If I edit a friend's page, in a manner that they are ok way, can this still be considered vandalism by someone else and result in a block? I just wanted to make sure I don't run afoul of the community. Ipsoorthometapara 08:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just don't introduce insults or weird comments to the page. You should try contributing to mainspace instead. We've got a lot (1.6 million) of articles. alphachimp 00:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have had the audacity, to block me from editing Wikipedia. Well, allow me to retort. I have not tried to vandalize anything, but merely told the whole truth as opposed to the partial one ,which you apparently favors. If you and your sycophantic entourage can't handle that, then fuck you and your fascist website.

FreedomOfExpression

Ok... alphachimp 15:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry for spamming. I'd like to have some guidance. how did you know I was spamming? Well, anyways, sorry. °o°Smartie960°o°Smartie-Pants-So Smart 00:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing the spam, Alphachimp. Stevage 00:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, it's a pleasure. alphachimp 00:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You rock, Alphachimp! :P Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 00:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:ANNAfoxlover

Hello. ANNAfoxlover has apologised for spamming and promises to stop. Would you have any objection if I unblocked her, since she has promised to stop? Thanks. --Deskana (talk) (review me please) 01:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason not to. Go for it. alphachimp 01:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd discuss it with you first. Thanks. --Deskana (talk) (review me please) 01:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I really do appreciate you asking me. alphachimp 01:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANNAfoxlover spam

Thanks for deleting ANNAfoxlover's spam on my talk page. I assume you're doing the same on other pages (will check contribs). Again, thanks for doing the sort of admin stuff that I can really appreciate. - AMP'd 02:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I see this is true, and for this:

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I award Alphachimp the Working Man's Barnstar for his thorough cleanup of talk pages that have been spammed. Keep up the good work. - AMP'd 02:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! alphachimp 15:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After the above comment I thought I'd let you know (if you didn't already... ) that others (such as myself) do not believe it was a good idea what you did. Sure deleting spam from articles and even article talk pages as well is a good thing, but it is my belief that you should let the user decide what do with stuff that is on the user's talk page. Mathmo ^Talk 04:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested to know that your post was discussed (and criticized) on the [WikiEN-L] list. When a user starts spamming, I don't think twice about undoing the effects. I understand that you may have objections, but you too have the ability to revert my actions (which I see you did). alphachimp 15:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove a message on my User Page?

Hello, I'm ASDFGHJKL, and I was wondering, why did you remove a message from ANNAfoxlover from my page? ANNAfoxlover was asking me to sign the sig book, after I asked Jimbo Wales to sign her's/his. Just asking...--ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 02:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because it was spam. When someone posts over 100 identical messages and has few if any encyclopedia contributions, red flags should go up. alphachimp 15:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ASDFGHJKL, if you want it on your talk page, just revert Alphachimps reversion, I think Alphachimp did us a great favor with all of the reverts, so if you want it back there, just re-add it, simple as that.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 00:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

Thanks for reverting the random vandalism on my page by some AnnaSomethingSomething. Your userpage is very neat and pleasant to look at. I like how your userboxes and barnstars are organised icon-like in the column on the right. I was wondering if you could tell me what is the name of the font used in your talkpage. AppleJuggler 06:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nice compliment. My userpage was inspired by a user who chose to leave, Gurch. The talk page font is created by transcluding User talk:Alphachimp/header onto this page. The relevant font is Trebuchet MS. Feel free to copy anything from my page if you're so inclined. alphachimp 15:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A spectrum of Comments

Thank you for removing the two instances of Spam posted on my page by ANNAfoxlover. Another thing, could you delete the AJMS redirect page, as the acronym has more uses than Andrew Jackson Middle School.

P.S. How come the unblock page is viewable by me even though I am not an Admin? Cheers and good day, ~Step trip 21:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. What page are you talking about? I'm guessing you mean a mediawiki page. alphachimp 15:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

IT says "This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know." Shouldn't it say "if he makes a mistake, please let him know" ? --Dexter_prog (talk • contribs • count) @ 15:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. The message was created by substituting a now-deleted (I think) userbox. I've fixed the grammar. Thanks! alphachimp 15:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

How do you know how many edits you currently have? Thanks if you reply! Zhouf12 19:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Where did you come up with the name of "AlphaChimp?"

You could use a fancy edit counter, but you'd probably be better off just counting. Alphachimp came somewhere out of the dark recesses of my mind.... Feel free to use it other places on the internet if you're so inclined. :) alphachimp 20:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Special Page

I was referring to this special page (or at least I assume that It is a special page). Cheers and good day, ~Step trip 21:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is. That's quite interesting. I tried unblocking through my bot account. As expected, the functionality was limited. It looks like it's only the page that's visible. alphachimp 06:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my User Page. I was browsing the history log and I saw it, so thanks. Flubeca 02:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, no problem. alphachimp 06:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alphachimp Bot edit count?

Where can I see the list of the latest version of Alphachimp Bot edit count. Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits has been updated to february 2007, but doesn't include bots. And the Interoit's counting tool only goes up to max 45000 pages, and stops. --Parker007 06:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about interiot's tool? When I do check the bot's edit count, I often have to click OK to have the script continue in Firefox. It usually takes about 5 minutes to run. At last count the edits were a little over 75,000 total. Coincidentally, I'm probably going to get to your bot task over the weekend. I'm quite busy here in real life. alphachimp 06:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP block should be Schoolblock

Thank you for taking action to stop the editing of 167.21.254.11. I believe this is a good candidate for a longer block (6 months). Could the {{schoolblock}} template be used? HokieRNB 18:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did use {{Schoolblock}}, and I blocked it for nearly 6 months. I don't understand what you're asking for. alphachimp 21:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I was looking in the wrong place. I thought that the talk page would look different, but now I can see in the log that it is blocked for 6 months. Thanks. HokieRNB 21:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for reversing the vandalism at my talk page. --Freiddy 18:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alphachimp/Archive 12

Hi

I was just wondering why you did this and how it is spam. Reply on my talk please WikiMan53 (talk • contribs • count) Review Me! 23:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding The ANNAFOX edit

Thanks for your help. How did she do that? Did she have to go around and type it every time? WikiMan53 (talk • contribs • count) Review Me! 14:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images to Commons

Here's the list:

These are the images I want copied to commons (or at least the first four). Copy the first four to Commons, then delete the rest. Thank you. --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Wikipedia
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

AfD

Can you delete and protect against recreation this page and this page, I have heard horror stories about prank message headers, and I don't want to be a victim of those stories. ~Step trip 01:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather not. Protecting those pages against recreation is silly, considering that you could recreate them with any other name (such as User:Steptrip/Prank1, etc. alphachimp 05:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Backpacking

Hi, I was wondering if you could add the new project template {{BackpackingProject}} automatically to any articles relating to Backpacking. This new project is just getting off its feet (with only one member, I need to recruit, but several people have emailed me with an interest in joining) and I hope that the addition of this template will let this newly created project gain support in the wikipedia community. Thank you -Leif902 01:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a couple of pending bot requests, but I'll get on it as soon as I can. alphachimp 05:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fyi

I just tagged Alpha chimp for CSD. you must be doing good work to attract this sort of attention! best, bikeable (talk) 17:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

haha, thanks for the heads up. alphachimp 05:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rklawton

Thank you for supporting my nomination. I screwed up, and I'm sorry. I should have talked to you first. RaveDave posted my Welcome message, had nominated several of my images for featured photo, and had mentored me off and on over the last year. You were one of the first to suggest Admin and really got me thinking in that direction. Since Dave hadn't brought it up, I thought you would be a great nominator. When Dave finally did, I went with the guy who helped introduce me to Wikipedia editing. It "completed the circle" in my mind. It was also inconsiderate given your efforts on my behalf. I should have talked with you about it first. A co-nomination or some other compromise would have been great. I'll make it up to you some time, and that's a promise. For a guy with so much gray hair, I sure have a lot to learn. Rklawton 03:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was offered a conomination, but it seemed silly (there wasn't much more I could provide). Honestly, it's fine. My goal was only for you to become an admin, not to engage in the frivolity of an online pissing contest. I sort of realized that it was something like what you described above. So yeah, keep your chin up and congrats again on the position. It's great having you here. alphachimp 05:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/To be sorted

You speedied List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/To be sorted - did you preserve the list anywhere else? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a cross namespace redirect to Wikipedia:List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/To be sorted. alphachimp 04:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 09:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot messing up in January

See this edit. I think it messed up ever use of {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}} because it didn't make sure a | or a }} came after CopyrightedFreeUse. Could you run it to fix those instances back to the right template? Thanks, Yonatan ^(talk) 14:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, there were only two other instances of this and I fixed them. Yonatan ^(talk) 14:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with AWB

Hi.

I have just been accepted as a user of AWB. Unfortunately, AWB crashes everytime I try and use it. Sometimes it works for a bit, and may (or may not) complete a task, other times it will crash before it has even logged in. I have re-downloaded .NET Framework 2.0, and have also redownloaded AWB - should I do anything other than unzip it to a standard folder?

I have no other clue as to what the problem is. Can you help - or point me in the direction of someone who can?

Many thanks,

–MDCollins (talk) 20:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you've done everything right. I'd suggest checking with WT:AWB. Otherwise, there really isn't much I can do to help. Sorry. alphachimp 22:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway, I have already commented there, but nobody seems to want to answer. :-( –MDCollins (talk) 00:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you block this user he or she is a vandal

Could you please block the 24.147.39.239 IP adress because he or she has made a vandalous edit to ] Disney Channel games( please check revisions)please block he or she so it doesn't happen again don't bother(sorry for rude language, I'm kinda in a bad mood) to delete the edit I will delete it myself Thank you sincerly, 01:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

There's only one instance of vandalism, and you didn't warn them. I'd rather not. Check out WP:TT for a list of warnings and WP:TW for a useful tool to apply them. Regards, alphachimp 16:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:194.66.96.121

Could you please ban this IP? He has been consistently warned against vandalism yet continues to do it. His latest "work of art" is the Toad in the Hole article which I reverted. Thanks. --Averross (u♠t♠c) 12:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another IP to ban if you could please. User talk:142.227.29.250 --Averross (u♠t♠c) 12:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This report is probably pretty dead now. In the future I'd suggest warning the user (check out WP:TT) and reporting them to WP:AIV. alphachimp 16:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brittonmuhulan

Could you please ban for continued vandalism of Anarchy. User talk:Brittonmuhulan. Thank you. (Hope I've gone about this the right way). Ian Goggin 16:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked the account as vandalism only. In the future, I'd suggest reporting them to WP:AIV. You can get a much quicker response there. alphachimp 16:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block review

You blocked a South Dakota school system IP for 3 months [3]. That ain't right. Please unblock? - NYC JD (interrogatories) 00:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before you, I had blocked for 4 hours precisely b/c this is a shared computer at a school etc. etc. - NYC JD (interrogatories) 00:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This entire thing really relates to a debate relating to the appropriate length to block a shared IP address. As you know, there are two camps: the low time camp, and the high time camp. I believe that school IPs should be given long-length blocks when they demnostrate they are unable to handle editing privileges. alphachimp 16:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 12	20 March 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream"	News and notes: Bad sin, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding block to User:198.148.217.30

I am writing you since you ar ethe one who imposed the block. I am the one who reported the abuse, and am still kinda new to Wikipedia's policies. Since the source of the v is a public outlet (I am thinking either a school or library), doesn't WP have methods by which to notify source admin and let them filter out the nonsense before it ever makes it to WP? It would seem counter-productive to block out a school or library, even thoughI am aware that it is current policy. Understand that I am not whinin' to you; I am curious about how WP approaches this topic. -Arcayne 17:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't blocked from reading. They're only blocked from editing. Typically the blocks only cover anonymous users and account creation, so legitimate users should not be affected. you can check out WP:ABUSE for information about abuse reports. To be honest, I've always been a little hesitant about reporting vandalism to systems administrators, seeing as I'm not an official representative of the Wikimedia foundation. alphachimp 02:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't edit anything or use wikipedia wrongly. There was only one topic I created on the wiwaxia. I'm serious. Someone may have hacked my account (adam1990) or something. I have barely used it. Sorry for the inconveineince, but it wasn't me.

Unless you can tell me I've done something wrong. All I did was borrow images (public domain). -adam1990

I don't know what I have done wrong. I also could have been hacked by another account. I'm serious, I only created one topic (wiwaxia), and that was it. I borrowed free domain images, but that is all I have done. Sorry for inconveinence. 69.182.166.75 21:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)adam1990[reply]

Never mind, it wasn't the wiwaxia topic, it was something else.

Uh, then what was it? alphachimp 02:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why was i blocked?

Hi. A few months ago i was blocked on my IP for 6 months for Vandalism. I was wondering WHY? i have never ever edited pages with this comp cause i have no idea how to so i was wondering if you could un-ban me please.Oh and btw my IP is 24.64.223.203. Ok ttyl bye.

--Kyle129 08:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)kyle129[reply]

24.64.223.203 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is an IP shared by a large number of users, many of whom like to vandalize. Just edit with an account (like you did). It's that easy. alphachimp 05:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:206.166.83.50

I see you've blocked this IP for 6 months. The block log and contribution history for this IP makes it quite clear why. The IP belongs to a local computer lab, and I've talked with the labbie about tracking down the offender. When I have some time, I'd like to remove the block, monitor usage, and work with him to help identify and address the culprit. Obviously, I'll only remove the block when I have time to monitor usage. As a result, you may see some rather strange additions to the block log, and I thought it would be easier for all of us if I explained my actions in advance. If you have any suggestions regarding this activity, don't hesitate to let me know. Cheers, Rklawton 19:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

go for it. Feel free to change or remove my block if you see fit. I really like the sounds of what you're talking about. alphachimp 23:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mistakenly created account

Hello Alphachimp. I was working over at WP:ACC, and I accidentally created the account User:pdhoffman when I meant to create the requested User:phdhoffman. Is there any way to delete the pdhoffman account? Thanks, jwillbur^talk 23:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but you can request usurpation from a 'crat. I wouldn't worry too much about it. Just make the correct account name. alphachimp 17:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block 216.226.108.201"

Please block "216.226.108.201" again. S/He did numerous vandalisations and this one 2 the Lauryn Hill page. Lilkunta 14:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They haven't been warned recently, so I've done that. Please use warnings (found on WP:TT) and report them to WP:AIV if they exceed their final warning. Also, your font, although pretty, is driving me crazy. :) alphachimp 17:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those crazy usernames you're making

Hi there. I was wondering why you were making such obviously invalid usernames. Now I see [4] ... Great idea! Flyguy649^talk_contribs 05:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, I'm testing a mediawiki functionality. Don't worry, I don't normally create accounts like TESTINGUSERNAMEBLACKLIST (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Penisfuck123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). ;) alphachimp 05:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the Penisfuck one might be a preemptive username creation. Anyway, I hope it works. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 05:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

I sent you an e-mail. Did you receive it? --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I've responded. alphachimp 17:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, something has to be done about him. --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disallowed usernames

Hello again. I see from a comment above that you are involved with some functionality that blocks inappropriate usernames from being created. I'm having some promblems that may be related. While working at WP:ACC again, I tried to fill several of the newest requests, but every time got a message saying "The username you have chosen is disallowed because it contains some forbidden string, such as an offensive word." But the usernames didn't seem offensive, they were:

555michael
cybernerd1999
scottlaverdiere
DeathbyWiki
jawdrops

It seems that every username is being denied. Do you know what is going on? jwillbur^talk 23:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it seems to be fixed now. jwillbur^talk 23:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ugh. It looks like it was dealt with. alphachimp 00:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(VP) Fix Users list.

It is corrupt. Can you fix it? → p00rleno (lvl 85) ←ROCKS ^C_RS 17:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I really have no idea how to. Try asking Amidaniel (talk · contribs) or Betacommand (talk · contribs) alphachimp 04:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

your JS

there is a boug in your quickblock, change addTab('javascript:('+QuickBlock+')("31 hours","Blocked for 31 hours due to recent vandalism. If this is a shared address, please register an account to avoid collateral damage.",1,1)','31ao','p-block-31h'); to addTab('javascript:('+QuickBlock+')("31 hours","Blocked for 31 hours due to recent vandalism. If this is a shared address, please register an account to avoid collateral damage.",1,0)','31ao','p-block-31h'); etc... _→AzaToth 17:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get right on that. What's the issue with it? alphachimp 04:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin actions

No...I have nothing against you, nor any knowledge of your actions. I'm just remarking on that because it's not the first time SBHarris has been 'up against an admin' on one of their calls. I have been as well, a few times.

Saying that, I have the utmost respect for good admins. I'm an admin over at another site, wrangling ~85000 users (about 1000 active) and I know it's a difficult and thankless job. However the system here is, in my considered and experienced opinion, very broken in regards to keeping admin actions within the spirit and letter of the 'law' (policy and guidelines and processes) consistently. I've been involved in a number of cases where admins just weren't being fair, reasonable, responsible, and/or respectful of others volunteering their time, and that's just not right.

And so, my (still hate this name) WPAdminWatch idea is a meager and not-fully-thought-out concept to try and fix a broken system. Ideally it would fix itself without such a thing, but I'm just not seeing process in that regard (an example...if a newbie has a dispute with an admin being unfair and breaking rules, how does he know what steps to take to correct that? How many hours would you expect him to put in to work on correcting it? At all stages is the admin in question required to participate in dispute resolution procedures?). Basically, dispute resolution and dealing with admins is balanced so heavily against the 'little guy' that admins too often have free reign in their actions, knowing that it's unlikely someone will expend the massive effort needed to get the situation solved.

Anyway, I reiterate...I have a healthy respect for admins in general. In certain cases, however, individual admins have acted poorly and gotten away with it scot-free, and that needs to be dealt with by changing the way that works. --Kickstart70-T-C 09:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. It sounds interesting. There definitely is somewhat of a learning curve standing between new users and protesting admin abuse. To be honest, we probably want it that way, if only to deflect frivilous requests. The trouble is the legitimate requests that are blocked. Anyway, I really hope I didn't seem upset when I posted on your talk. alphachimp 06:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "Dildo"

I think we should be really careful with adding names to the username blacklist. Yes, usernames with "dildo" in them usually refer to sexual acts, but the term itself is not inherently bad, IMHO, and I think we should only list really clear-cut cases. I can certainly see that others will disagree with me in this case tho, so we probably should move the discussion to MediaWiki talk:Usernameblacklist (or maybe even to WT:U). --Conti|✉ 15:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]