User talk:Black Kite/Archive17

Talk Page archives: 01-02-03-04-05-06-07-08-09-10-11-12-13-14-15-16

Welcome back

Like the header says, welcome back. Synergy 22:14, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thankyou! Black Kite 22:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back. Ready for another deletion spree? bibliomaniac15 22:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Fully in line with policy, of course. Black Kite 22:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you back indeed. I hope you enjoyed your break. Seraphim♥Whipp 22:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I hope that everything was okay in the interim. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes thanks both. Black Kite 17:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Happy to see your name pop up on my watchlist again. Things are improving: I hope you got a chance to see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-08-11/Dispatches. You migth want to collaborate with Elcobbola on Part 2. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm looking at it now - looks very good. Black Kite 17:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I have just arrived home from camp, and what better a welcome than Black ktie returning? Much love, brother/sister! Shapiros10 ^{contact me}_{My work} 19:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back :) FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 00:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad to see you back as well. Horologium (talk) 10:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and welcome back from me too! Tony (talk) 14:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks all! :) Black Kite 10:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I just welcomed you back...

... and you're on AN. Thought you'd like to know. Synergy 05:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have informed you first. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 05:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

WG

Welcome back, now get to work :). You were a member of the Wikipedia:Working_group_on_ethnic_and_cultural_edit_wars and they issued a report, maybe you feel up to endorsing, dissenting, staring at the page? MBisanz ^talk 12:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

On Thorns I Lay article restored

(First sorry for my english, this is not my mother tongue. Hope my message is comprehensible though So, thanks for your intervention on this article yesterday. I had hard time with the IP(apparently an admin)that wanted to process a speedy deletion at all cost without caring the reliable sources(including allmusic, Rockdetector) and the discography which attested their notability.

I don't know which admin did it, but I wonder why this article has been been arbitrary deleted without any concertation or verification, when there are plenty of evidences of their notability all over the web. Aren't we supposed to process with a vote in such cases? Especially when a band has 6 albums on professional labels(Sleezy Records, Holy rocords, Black Lotus records), one should be prudent. Can a Admin arbitrary decide to delete an article when he is biased?

Anyway once again, thank you very much for your intervention and you sense of jugement! GreetingsFrédérick Duhautpas (talk) 12:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that you deleteted it. I checked the page of the admin who did it before restoring it and that wasn't you.( but now with the restoring I don't know anymore who he is). Anyway, don't worry, 1. I know and DO refer to Wikipedia policy in terms of verifiability. 2.if you just take a look to this article, you'll notice it does not lack of reliable sources here...As I said even sources including allmusic and Rockdetector attest their notability. Anyway even if an article doesn't provide sources, it's often easy for a user to provide them so I wonder why an article should be deleted, when it is possible to make anouncement or a proposition of deletion with a vote. I think this deletion was a bit excessive.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 13:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

ok, thanks ;)Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 13:16, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Idioma

No se hablar bien inglés, asi que si usred sabe lgo de castellano, lo discutimos, pero me parece que decir "Fetiche" a una persona por ser de otra raza, me parece racismo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elias Enoc (talk • contribs) 13:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC) El termino "Fetiche" es de por si despectivo. ¿Porque no se hace un articulo de "European fetixh" o "Withe fetish"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elias Enoc (talk • contribs) 25 August 2008 (UTC) ¿No se podria borrar el articulo "Asian fetish" o fusionarlo con otro articulo como "Ethnicity of performers in pornography"? Me parece que es un termno demasiado racista, ya que reduce a una persona a ser un objeto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elias Enoc (talk • contribs) 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Maltese Language

You block protected Maltese language. Unfortunately you protected a version that represented a MINORITY, unreferenced view. The majority view is what the SINGLE editor 78... was fighting, but is the view that is supported by the numbers and the references. Please consider working with the majority of editors instead of the single, fringe editor. (Taivo (talk) 21:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC))

• It is only semi-protected in order to prevent the 78... IP from editing it. Autoconfirmed editors can still edit it. Black Kite 21:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support your semi-protection. I've done the same at Relexification, an article that was of interest to IP editors promoting some of the same viewpoints. The latter article has been discussed today at both RFPP and AN3. I know that semi-prot is dodgy if it seems to be favoring one side of a dispute, but the evidence of IP socking appears strong. EdJohnston (talk) 02:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Malta/OpalNet user

Thanks for helping out earlier today - it's a long-running issue and help is appreciated. The IP's you banned are sockpuppets of a banned user - if you want to know more take a look at User_talk:Thatcher/Archive21#Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser.2FCase.2FMagdelenaDiArco_2 and Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/MagdelenaDiArco, and for the earlier stuff Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive158#Question_-_Ban_for_multiple_sockpuppeteer.3F and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive459#Sockpuppet_disruption_at_Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal.2FCases.2F2008-08-02_Sicani. As you can see it's persistent and covering dozens of socks. If you could just take the occasional look at articles about the history and language of Malta, and its relationship with Italy that would help enromously. Thanks again, Knepflerle (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

In fact, this seems to go all the way back to Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/Daddy_Kindsoul and Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Deathrocker#Log_of_blocks_and_bans. They've managed to get banned completely independently at least twice! Someone needs to collect all this stuff together into one place to make it easy to link to so that it's easy to reference when the new accounts inevitably appear. Knepflerle (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/9.0: Live

Is it better now? Gary King (talk) 22:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Closing AfD discussions

I agree that the Thunder Express one was borderline, and I should really have relisted, and I accept that I have made a mistake there. However, non-admins are allowed to close AfDs as delete, and then place {{db-afd}} on the article. I only close expired discussions, to allow administrators to focus on the current ones. Dendodge|Talk^Contribs 12:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Wait.... Let me get this straight. You closed an AfD and put db-afd on the article? When did we allow this? I simply must know. Synergy 13:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

We didn't, neither here nor there, and I wouldn't support it. Speedy deletions have to be done by the book, which in this case means the deleting admin has to check the consensus in the AfD discussion for himself, to prevent abuse, which in turn doesn't reduce his workload. --Amalthea^Talk 13:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering about the db-afd tag, but it clearly states that it is for situations where an admin closed an AfD as Delete but didn't delete the page. Black Kite 14:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I just want to let you know that I've talked this over with him off-wiki and he now understands why it was wrong. Synergy 14:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Black Kite 14:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't envy you deciding that Thunder Express AfD, BK. I was going to close it the other day, and I was so torn that I just decided to participate in it instead. Tan ǀ 39 14:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Bletchley and other stories

Hi, thanks for getting rid of the "Election Democratic" idiot. About Bletchley, it's currently listed at WP:RM under the "uncontroversial" section--while there is one in Shropshire, the Bucks one is the primary topic, but I can't move it because the redirect has edit history (arising out of the screw-up on the disambiguators). Something similar is true of Wolverton. Could you possibly fix that? Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to have troubled you. I've added Caldecotte (Milton Keynes) to the list, although that should be another easy one. Thanks a lot, --RFBailey (talk) 15:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!! --RFBailey (talk) 15:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Query on block

Hello. I was about to decline the AIV report on Onejar (talk · contribs) when I noticed that you already blocked the editor. However I am a bit puzzled as to why you applied an indefinite block since this editor had received zero warnings. Was it because of the largish number of pages (22 in about eight minutes) that this person blanked? I admit that I am always more than a little wary of indef blocking people who have not received at least a 4im warning. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 21:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply! I figured as much, but wanted to double-check. --Kralizec! (talk) 21:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

re: Wrong guitar image

Hi Black Kite. The image you are trying to add belongs in the Starcaster by Fender page. Not the actual Starcaster page. They are 2 totally different guitars. In fact I am not sure why there is even a mention of the "market ploy" model in the main Starcaster page? There should be 2 separate pages. But content about each model shouldn't overlap into the other. I will prompt the Fender taskforce of the Guitarist Project to look into the unneeded content spread. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 00:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I guess we overlapped each other on talk pages. I used to own a Starcaster 100 years ago. But I have no pictures. I have been told that a very old issue of a Canadian music magazine had pictures of me and some of my old, long gone, gear, including the Starcaster. But I have never seen the magazine myself and it is an out-of-print publication so I've never pursued. I never really cared much for the guitar model and did not have it very long. I think I traded it for a mixer? I will ask around. Some of my old acquaintances may have access to one and maybe can snap a pic for Wikipedia. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 00:42, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I will look. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 00:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Noticeboard

So why did you not block user:Zibral? I warned him for deleting the SD tag, which he was warned not to remove. I didn't report him for creating non-notable articles. Ctjf83Talk 01:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Holly Ann Collins

Hey, just as a heads up, I made an edit in your userspace in order to take User:Black Kite/HAC out of article categories. I'm also wondering why this article has gotten the attention it has. Your userspace copy is one, but there is another at User:Americangrantedasylumnetherlands/HollyAnnCollins. I don't really see any problems with yours but I see the other as a POV fork (intended or unintended) simply based on the contribution history of the owner. A post on BLP/N was made a few days ago but no one has responded there. anyways, I'm really just writing this to let you know why I made the edit in your userspace. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

King Dedede

Would you mind removing the SSB fighter category from the redirect page King Dedede? Thanks. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• Done. Black Kite 09:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the block/unblock

Sorry about that :(. I just remembered to relook at the arbcom and seen that it was a 1 year ban from November 2006 to November 2007 and removed it ASAP but noted that you already blocked them but the editor must be watch since they're doing there own OR POV pushing again. Bidgee (talk) 14:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

arr don't worry, If I had of looked properly then it wouldn't have happened. Thanks fo keeping an eye on the article! :) Just hope we don't go back to the same old issues we had with the editor as it was rather messy. Sort of hard for me to remember it's 2008 since I was living in Darwin for just over a year back in 2007. Bidgee (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The Final Warning

Could this warning be relieved? Or if at least I uploaded another image here in English Wikipedia without proper copyright, would I be blocked from editing and how long it could last? Please answer in a simple way; I'm not good in understanding much of complicated English phrases and sentences.Kampfgruppe (talk) 14:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. This greatly helped me.Kampfgruppe (talk) 14:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Desktop Destroyer

I notice you have nominated my article for deletion. Visit my talk page and reveal in FULL the problem with it. I do understand the GENERAL problem, however I am struggling to find the OTHER problems about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micky 1234567890123 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay... thanks.Micky 1234567890123 (talk) 14:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

FPAS RFC

As a participant in the recent discussion at WP:ANI, I thought you should be informed of the new RFC that another user has started regarding FPAS's behavior.

• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Future Perfect at Sunrise

Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 15:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Palin

Honestly, when I first saw that link to the placename disambig, it took me at least fifteen seconds of staring to figure out how it was different from Palin. So I agree they should probably just be merged together, but as long as it's not, I just don't see the point of including a relatively lengthy description of a disambig page with two listed articles, on the Palin page. Propaniac (talk) 22:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of article "David Lale (British cellist)"

Hello Black Kite.

Thanks for the automated message questioning the notability of this article (now deleted).

One of the reasons for creating this article was to clarify the confusion over the identity of this cellist and another cellist of the same name (page David Lale (Australian cellist). Hence the disambiguation page David Lale.

Would you be able to give me access to the "David Lale (British cellist)" article so that I can improve it? Was there a particular notability aspect (coverage, reliability, sources, etc) that was particularly weak?

Many thanks, --Untrammelled (talk) 11:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello Black Kite.

Thanks for the feedback and for restoring the text of this article to User:Untrammelled/Lale. I have modified the text to include two named major UK orchestras and references to concert diaries and a newspaper article which confirm a couple of performances as soloist.

I hope that this is enough to make the article acceptable. Regards, --Untrammelled (talk) 10:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei at AN/I

The words added were mine -- posted accidentally when not yet ready for others to read. Look, and you will see that I replaced my understandably controversial words with more more modest ones; ergo, this is both permitted and proper. --Tenmei (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Kay Sieverding's user page

My user page was deleted and blocked. I had originally thought that I could write what I wanted about my background as long as I take responsibility for it and I had posted it under my real name. I thought that I had made the changes demanded and am now very confused about what to write.

Is this an acceptable user page?:

Kay Sieverding completed a master's degree in city planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1977 under her maiden name Kay Anderson. She has no criminal record. She was involved in civil litigation supervised by federal Judge Edward Nottingham. She has no criminal record and no rule 11 c. 6 orders were ever issued against her. She has never been involved in a jury trial nor a summary judgment hearing.

If not acceptable, what information should I put in my user page? Self-represented access to courts is vital for democracy 19:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey BlackKite, without me making a formal request, could I ask you to please keep an eye on the above-named user and his or her edits to pro se. I believe it's an example of a single-purpose account being used disruptively to turn a wikipedia article into a half-baked analytical essay. Repeated OR violations and misuse of primary sources. He or she has some kind of an axe to grind, and is grinding it on wikipedia. I think early administrator review could help avoid edit-warring. Thank you.Non Curat Lex (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Ulster Defence Regiment

Thank you for your timely intervention. I would like to make a request that User:BigDunc be permanently blocked from editing the Ulster Defence Regiment page. His only input for the last two months has been disruptive, despite many attempts to draw him into constructive dialogue on content. Everytime he appears he is nibbling away at the content by introducing well poisoning issues, accusing others of POV issues but maintaining his own POV stance throughout. If something isn't done this article is going to finish up on a permanent block and no-one else will be able to introduce valid non-POV content. You will see an incredible amount of work has been done recently and it has been suggested to me that I should apply to have its status upgraded to "B Class". There wouldn't really be any point if this type of editwarring and gaming were to continue. I'd appreciate your views but I've also posted messages to several other admins who are familiar both with Irish issues and this article in particular. The Thunderer (talk) 17:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I was keeping an eye on the UDR article and you've gone and protected it. Now I am sad. In the few days since it was unprotected there has been substantial work done on the article. A sizable proportion, probably a majority, of the edits have been constructive. I would much have preferred to have left the article unprotected and to have employed the enforcement provisions of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles to prevent undue disruption. Would you reconsider the protection? Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind either way. I am deeply concerned about BigDunc's motives. He advised me a month ago that he'd acquired several books (at some cost) on the regiment. As there are only two histories in existence I assumed they were the same two I have. Like a puppy I hung around him for days, nay -weeks and pressed him to contribute, but thus far he hasn't. All he seems to want to do is to change what he describes as POV and make the article look as if it is poorly researched (from his latest attempt). As you can see I have no problems working with other editors on the article and actually welcome anyone who is willing to change synthesis if it looks too POV - or even if it's just poorly worded. It would be nice to see someone else stepping in with more facts - good or bad. As things stand it is a reasonable, authoritative and well referenced piece on a very remarkable part of modern Irish and UK history. It would be shame to let the nibblers come in and remove the bits they didn't agree with simply because of POV. The Thunderer (talk) 17:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

And again

No sooner than the ban is lifted than User:BigDunc is straight back in there putting {{nowiki onesource]] tags on stuff as innocuous as the music and uniforms of the regiment. Notwithstanding the fact that there were picturs in that section over the weekend which proved the uniforms. Pictures removed as non free content by another admin. This is the type of disruption I am talking about. This editor is determined to make this article less than it actually is. I have reverted the edits, at the risk of breaking WP:3RR myself but respectfully request you go in and have a look and see if you agree with me. The Thunderer (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom enforcement 2

Could you please explain why I have been put on probation for inserting a valid tag? BigDunc^Talk 20:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Situation worsening

Call it paranoia but I believe this is kicking off again at Ulster Special Constabulary. I am genuinely feeling hounded by User:BigDunc and now that User:Domer48 has joined in I feel I am in for a rough ride, so I have filed another equest for assistance at ANB. The Thunderer (talk) 20:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Mmph! Good luck, Black Kite. You have my sympathies :p I'll probably be on later tonight and I see what I can sort out. Email me if you need anything immediate, and I'll get on it - Alison ^❤ 21:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I've no wish to cause a drama Black Kite. I posted the second report at WP:ANB because I felt you were doing enough on one article. If you feel you want to handle both situations then I for one am delighted. I am now feeling threatened however because I see references starting to be made to User:GDD1000, WP:COI, and "former UDR Member" in an effort to denigrate my efforts and harrass me, something which I thought was all over after Alison kindly intervened in July.The Thunderer (talk) 21:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm seeing that too, and it needs to stop. It seriously doesn't help at all. Black Kite - good call on the Arb sanctions possibility for all. I'll certainly endorse that - Alison ^❤ 21:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Alison. It helps to have someone involved who is familiar with past problems. I was starting to feel like a drowning man, although Black Kite has been making fair decisions and doing a good job. The Thunderer (talk) 21:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

There are a number of issues here right now, yes. Black kite is doing awesomely, as he does :) However, I do agree with his even-handedness in applying sanctions here. The separate issue of DuncNDomer's campaign of "you're a sock so I can treat you like dirt!" isn't going to wash with me and they need to get over that and stop badgering you. If they have other issues, fine - let's hear them. But this sock stuff - nope! - Alison ^❤ 21:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

You have heard them Alison and have refused or ignored them from both Domer and myself. BigDunc^Talk 21:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

What's annoying me more than anything is the fact that I've been able for several weeks now to be an integral part of the Wikipedia community: editing other articles, joining in discussions, trying to be the voice of reason on Ireland related articles and helping people. When this happens though it all goes to pot because I spend all my time asking admins for help, trying to maintain the integrity of the UDR page (in particular) but now the Ulster Special Constabulary as well. I've purchased books to help me with research and quotes and to ensure I have a better understanding of the articles I contribute to. Then I get accused of POV, even though I'm constantly inviting other people to reword, restructure, contribute and generally improve the articles, especially the synthesis and POV. All of which is immediately evident from the history and talk pages I've been to. Nor am I the only one who's objecting to the intervention by BigDunc (in particular), you can see that other people are concerned about the spurious editing too. I wish I had a solution but unfortunately I don't. All I can do is call on you good people for help, even if it makes it look as if I'm bleating like a lost sheep. The Thunderer (talk) 21:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Re User:Future Perfect at Sunrise

Hello. I have a question for you: are you communicating with User:Future Perfect at Sunrise off WP (through IRC or e-mail)? ktr (talk) 21:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Another thing: by checking Wikipedia:Successful_adminship_candidacies, I couldn't find anything about your request/nomination for adminship and the ensuing process. Could you give me the link to it? ktr (talk) 21:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Comment

Are you going to comment on this editor constantly reverting my edits here and here were he just changed a referenced quote and not till I brought it to your attention did he change it and it still is not right. BigDunc^Talk 18:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Well are you going to comment, you have put me on probation for IMO nothing, yet you wont even comment on the actions of another editor. You said you would apply sanction evenly so far I dont se it. So I request that you reconsider your decision to place me on probation for what were valid edits. You did not even ask me the rational behind my edits you went straight to sanctions. BigDunc^Talk 11:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I would support the removal of sanctions. Despite the recent spat I consider BigDunc to be a good editor with regards to Irish affairs and I would appreciate his input into the articles I am currently interested in editing. My only codicil, if I'm allowed to express a preference, is that the edit-warring, well poisoning and POV pushing ceases and we agree to work towards the common concensus of improving Wikipedia, including much more discussion on how to keep articles free of unwanted synthesis and undue weight.The Thunderer (talk) 11:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I would agree to them if you do. We both feel that the other is pushing a POV maybe it is time we both had another read of WP:AGF, lets hope Black Kite is quick to act on this proposed resolution, because as it stands I feel as victimised as The Thunderer does followibg recent episodes between us. Look forward to your reply Black Kite. BigDunc^Talk 12:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I will now leave it to Black Kite's judgement but I feel that the matter is resolved. The Thunderer (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which succeeded with 71 support, 14 oppose, and 5 neutral. Thanks for your participation. I hope I serve you well!

--Smashville^BONK! 23:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Opinion Sought

Hi Black Kite, sorry to be a nuisance but I feel I need a third opinion at Talk:Attacks on the Ulster Defence Regiment. An admin has proposed that the page be deleted and although changes have been made to appease the points he cited as the cause for doing so, he is still making representation in favour of removal. I believe a neutral view is needed here and would appreciate your comments.The Thunderer (talk) 08:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with PROD and I'm not quite sure what you mean, even after reading WP:PROD. Would you be kind enough to elaborate on what I or the editor who placed the PROD tag should do to address this issue correctly? The Thunderer (talk) 09:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

So basically, because I have removed the tag and informed him and made changes to the article to make it less likely to breach policy, then he'll have to list it for discussion and get concensus to delete, if such a concensus exists? The Thunderer (talk) 16:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Black Kite 16:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Got it now. The Thunderer (talk) 17:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

IP block

One of your previous blocks/unblocks is being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Sceptre ban evasion. May be time to reinstate. - auburnpilot talk 00:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

early removal of logpage from afdo

Hello, you recently removed the Sept. 01 log page from Afdo before all of its discussions were closed. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks, Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 01:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)