User talk:Bottesini/archive3

; Archives
	1 March 2006 - 30 April 2006; 30 April 2006 - 11 May 2006; 11 May 2006 - 24 May 2006; 25 May 2006 - 17 July 2006; 29 July 2006 - 19 September 2006; 20 September 2006 - 14 November 2006;
	Current talk page

This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page, which can be found here.

Reverting vandalism - thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page - that guy bombarded me with stuff last week...seems his temporary block is over! Will have put in another request tomorrow. Thanks again. Libatius 21:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof

You are right, maybe there was a bug or something that caused that (VP approvals are done using VandalProof), if you look at the edit summary I used it looks weird (APPROVED: User:TedE, User:Ingoolemo; NOT APPROVED: User:, User:, User:, User:Bottesini; LIST EMPTY). Anyway, I added you to the approved list. Sorry about the problem. Happy editing! Prodego ^talk 21:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VP Disscussion

I responded with some questions... Please check back on that page every 5-10 minutes:-)Eagle talk 22:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Discuss

Anonymity

Hello! Thank you for the note; I merely replied to the anon where the link took me. I'm surprised that another editor would even comment regarding my comment to an anon. ;) I've noticed that many editors (myself included) ignore or nix such comments without breaking a sweat for fear of getting embroiled in troll wars. In any event, I will be more observant in the future. Ta! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 00:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cherem edit

why did you remove the citation here? Tom e r ^talk 00:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Hi. Using "vandalproof", you just reverted a valid citation edit of mine (on Cherem) as vandalism. I'll re-add the info now. Just to let you know. HKT 00:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I didn't notice that someone just left you a message about this. HKT 00:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I have already corrected it. — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 00:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you guys are on top of things...I'ma go take a nap. :-) Tom e r ^talk 00:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red hot Chili peppers

I'm trying to clean this page up a bit it's too much. I'm not vandalising anything maxcap 19:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article "Telectronics"

Hello Bottesini,

This is initially a request for guidance, possibly leading to informal mediation.

A quick perusal of the article page and discussion will be more informative than many words from me at this stage.

The first posting on the discussion page provides the underlying rationale of the dispute.

I have endevoured to reach resolution of the dispute by email correspondence with the disputant without success. He is obfuscative and provocative. Intervention by a third party might be useful.

I had considered going directly to a request for mediation, but as he is unregistered and unlikely to sign the request for mediation, I turn to you for guidance.

With appreciation Geoffrey User Geoffrey Wickham

Article "Telectronics"

Thank you for your rapid response in providing the "Telectronics-rewrite" page. The "rewrite" page, identical to the current (at time of writing) page, is in accord with what I consider to be an accurate and sufficiently complete Encyclopedic entry; so I do not wish to change it.

The dispute relates only to the repeated prior deletion of the names Jeffcoat / Nicks and the repeated posting of glorification edits by Chris Gray who declines to register as a User while continuing to post using multiple IP's. This old bloke is heading off for a rest too ! Cheers Geoffrey Geoffrey Wickham

PlagueRat

NOTE: This user has been blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia

Listen man I'll tell YOU something. It's not vandalism to make an article truthful and your little automated bullshit is sick. -PlagueRat

Cut it out buttassini, I mean it. Its not vandalism to make an article factually correct and you know it. -Plaguerat

"buttassini"... that's a new one. All I'm trying to do is maintain a neutral point of view on the article. If you provide a reference or other proof of factual correctness, then your edits or justified. If not, then lay off the vandalism. — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 17:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Kennedys sites

Dear Bottesini, Thank you for taking the time to look over the Dead Kennedys NPOV dispute and suggest that a compromise is necessary. A start has been made to that, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jello_Biafra , but another person is involved and is adding unsourced material to several sites to affect a hatchet-job of East Bay Ray, he’s been found on Dead Kennedys and East Bay Ray so far. I think this is what you folks call vandalism. He is saying Ray was an accountant, which is not true and deletes the NPOV flag on the articles. This third person’s ID is Rsm99833, and his actions are disrupting to the compromise discussions. What can be done? -- Bob

East Bay Ray

Just FYI, the change you reverted on is neither vandalism nor POV. Ray is a trained, certified accountant, was a working accountant before the band started, and continued to be an accountant for the record label after the disolvement of the band. Rsm99833 00:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And just FYI, if I deleted the NPOV tag, it was done by accident. Please review my edit history, in comparison to "bob", before making such judgements. Thanks! Rsm99833 00:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Outside of the tax douments he prepared for various people and organizations, it is rather difficult. So I'll leave it off for right now. Rsm99833 01:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It should be pointed out that the reversion of the edit concerning EBR and Guitar World was NPOV, non-vandalism, and can be verified by visiting guitarworld's web site. EBR is featured, but he is not the only one. Rsm99833 03:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My user page

Thanks for your help! - CobaltBlueTony 20:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

more vandals at my talk page

Get this guy too, please. 204.113.113.76 (talk · contribs) - Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony 20:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 15th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 20	15 May 2006	About the Signpost

Publicity surrounds Chinese site reusing Wikipedia content	German chapter prevails in Tron appeal
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Time 100 Gala, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

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.

King's stuff

Hey

Who are you?! You've been editing my school's page.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.6.227 (talk • contribs)

King's stuff

yes but do you actually know anything about the school? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.6.227 (talk • contribs)

Question

I noticed that you removed my article about "Hard Spell" the same minute it was posted. I was curoius as to what the problem with it was : are you against all people's writing or mine in particular? Does Wikipedia not accept personal accounts? Perhaps it should to give it a more human feel. It's not even like you took the time to read it. Please don't dismiss my writing for these reasons, and if you reply please do so in the tone of constructive criticism. Thankyou in advance Megan Potter 88.111.117.228 21:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User page renovation

Hi Bottesini. Your page looks like a joy to redesign — it's already very well-organized. :) Before I start, do you have any preferences on color schemes and other aspects of design? Cheers, Sango 123 (e) 21:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Edgar Meyer picture

I couldn't find any copyright owners for that picture, could you perhaps help me on that? I recently uploaded that same image to Commons and tagged it with the same copyright template (I've been doing Finnish Wikipedia article of Edgar Meyer). --Jacofin 23:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grey's Anatomy

Why did you revert 71.246.31.114's change to Grey's Anatomy? It was correct, I watched the show last night when it happened. RossPatterson 02:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Kevin Parratt

Hello,

I'm trying to make the article about Kevin Parratt as accurate as possible. If you change my work what should I do? If you have particular knowledge about the artist then please contribute but don't reverse my work.

Regards,

Oliver —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturalhomes (talk • contribs)

Blanking an article is not productive work. — ßott e siηi ^(talk) 20:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you tell me what 'blanking' is please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturalhomes (talk • contribs)

Thanks... So what if I write an article about someone who then says they don't want it to be on wiki. How do I remove it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturalhomes (talk • contribs)

Actually I'm sure you could help me. If I take a picture of a person, eg. a notable member of the public, and then write a factual article about that person on wiki, am I allowed to publish my photographic image? Are there any restrictions? Could the 'notable person' rightfully have the article removed? Thanks, Oliver —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturalhomes (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the help. So others know... Bottesini may appear a bit unhelpful at first but this is not the case. I appriciate the help and advice I have received. Naturalhomes

One last question... What are the criteria for 'notable'? Kevin Parratt is a professional artist selling works in Norway and the UK and has been selected for the Australian government art collection. Is that 'notable' Naturalhomes

What a sweetheart you are. Naturalhomes 09:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Baked Potato

seriously, baked potato *is* a traditional northamptonian dish. I was just in the process of changing the link to Faggot (food) to avoid implying the other uses of the word. I'm trying to find references on google but there's nothing there - the tradition dates back to the 2nd world war (i believe) where meat was scarce. my wiki username is user24, but I'm not a regular contributor so I tend not to login for small changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.62.25.11 (talk • contribs)

Well, the reason it was removed was because of the faggot link. Anyways, it is still my opinion that the paragraph shouldn't be added to the article, but I'm not going to stop you. — ßott e siηi ^(talk) 20:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, I thought it might have been the faggot link that did it, but why don't you think it should be added - it's exactly this type of thing that gets completely missed by the current culture*, and should be preserved/recorded in an encyclopaedia. I guess if you think it's too small to be worthwhile, but still... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.62.25.11 (talk • contribs)

baked potato is a pretty archaic dish - i've just been told i'm wrong about the 2nd world war thing and that it actually goes back to at least the 1890s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.62.25.11 (talk • contribs)

Initial redesign completed

Hope you like it! :) Is there anything you'd like for me to tweak? Cheers, Sango 123 (e) 22:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. Sango 123 (e) 22:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm wondering the same thing. The show/hide boxes don't always default to "hide", and I don't know what causes them to do so. Sorry. :) Regards, Sango 123 (e) 00:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam #1

You are receiving this message, because you signed up to my spamlist

I'm sorry if this spam seems a little weird, but it is the first spam.

Dear people:

User:Iamthejabberwock needs a new name! Would you please suggest a username for him. The reason for this is because he doesn't want to get confused with User:Thejabberwock.

please help

Thanks, --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 00:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available

After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features here. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to Rob Church, I now have an account on test.wikipedia.org with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my simple history merge tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to download and install version 1.2 and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your suggestions for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --AmiDaniel (talk) 02:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vandalprooflock.jpg

Not to start a revert war or anything, but the version with the Wikiglobe violates policy; the globe can't be used without permission from Wikimedia corp., as it isn't GDFL. If you want, you can make a version without the globe, that'll be fine; my version is just a filler until someone else does something. Cheers, Master of Puppets ^{Your will is mine.} 19:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK — ßott e siηi ^(talk) 19:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True, but I replaced it because there are a hundred or so of the templates lying around in user talk pages all over the english Wikipedia. Rather then walk around replacing each and every one of them with a new image, I just pasted the new one into the same name as the old (yes, I'm lazy, so sue me :P). Master of Puppets ^{That's hot.} 19:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 22nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 21	22 May 2006	About the Signpost

Project statistics updated, except for Wikipedia	Deletion of metadata icons debated
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia chapters report, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

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.

Mediation of Deus Ex article

Thank you for the quick response to my request. I would like some clarification on your suggestion, particularly in how to define a "notable" mod. My full request is in the mediation request. -- Y|yukichigai 23:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jacopo Peterman

Hello, I'm not quite sure why you would put my edit on Jacopo Peterman referring to the reference on Heart of Darkness as vandalism. One of the key plot points of Heart of Darkness is when Conrad utters "The horror!" as his last words before he dies. I think this is a valid point, and should not be taken as vandalism. However, it would seem that my account has been compromised, due to edits I have no recollection of writing, but I am sure that the bit on Peterman was done by me.

Edit: Just in case you wanted to know, it appears that all edits done on the 14th of May were not done by me, but rather by other people who were using my computer. But, my point on Peterman still stands.

--Larry! 01:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof Reversal of Cube Series

On May 12 you used VandalProof to reverse an edit I made on the Cube series page. The comments you left on my talk page said: "It might not have been your intent, but you recently removed content from Cube series. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you."

This comment is factually incorrect, which I believe warrants recalling the VandalProof warning. I added content to the page, which you then removed without comment in direct violation of the policy you were kind enough to inform me of. Now either this is an attempt to smear me while using VandalProof to squelch opposing viewpoints, or you were simply careless and excessively zealous in your anti-vandal efforts. I understand that my additions to the page could have been phrased better, but I do not believe simply deleting them as vandalism -- and then incorrectly accusing me of deleting content -- was the appropriate way to express your divergent viewpoint. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.121.19.61 (talk • contribs)

My edit removed the following text that you wrote from the article:

"The film also provides an excellent outlet for those who have the sadistic desire to watch other people suffer, without having to resort to illegal snuff films. The first film, which was the most popular, stayed away from complex scenes and instead focusing on showing the viewer human suffering and death with little plot/reason for any of it."

This certainly appeared to be vandalism when I reverted it. If you would like this content to be re-added to the article, I would suggest that you rewrite it in a more encyclopedic manner. — ßott e siηi ^(talk) 19:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newcomers

I removed my comments. I regret doing them but I felt that the user was an anti-Catholic due to removing the Roman Catholic sportspeople category from Kevin McBride and calling it a silly category. I reacted too soon. 75.3.4.54 20:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the newcomer did it again removing categories from the Kevin McBride page. I put a message on his talk page telling him not to do this. I think if he does it, he will need to be blocked. 75.3.4.54 21:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newcomers?

Why would you call me a newcomer? More particularly, why would you say it to an IP address? Ben-w 21:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

and I'm a bigot, too! Thanks

Could you exercise a little more thought and discretion before posting? Or, better yet, stick to the SUBJECT and don't discuss me at all. Ben-w 22:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? I have done nothing but try to promote civility. I take this as a personal attack whether you mean anything by it or not. — ßott e siηi ^(talk) 23:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bias

"Well I don't know if the removal of the Roman Catholic category is a result of bias". That legitimises the ad hominem attack against me, it gives weight to the vicious, baseless, hateful smear. An ad hominem attack like that should not be tolerated in the manner you did. I'm from DUBLIN, dammit. Ben-w 23:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]