User talk:CFIF/Archive 2

sockpuppet

please remove the sockpuppet tag you put on my user page. It is completely unfounded. No other user uses this IP address. JianLi 05:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the sockpuppet label for now - there is no rush to add the label for now. Is there a place where more information about this can be found? --HappyCamper 05:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Previous AfD's on television personality articles. These sockpuppets consistently delete them. [1]. JianLi boted delete, using the "crufty" excuse as these sockpuppets did. --CFIF (talk to me) 12:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used the word "crufty" because it seemed like part of the jargon of the AFD forums. How is that conclusive evidence that I am a sockpuppet? Just check my user contributions. There are hundreds before my participation in the AFDs and occur months before them too. JianLi 16:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I took careful a look at JianLi's contributions. JianLi has edited Wikipedia for almost a year - the concern I have is that the evidence provided to substantiate the sockpuppetry claim is rather interpretative and insufficient. It is also inconsistent with earlier editing patterns. This is also the same for José is Fluid. If the sockpuppetry remains a concern for you, it would be best for you to initiate something at WP:RFCU. The association with Spotteddogsdotorg would probably warrant permanent blocks for these accounts, and until this can be shown more conclusively, I will give these accounts the benefit of the doubt. --HappyCamper 16:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After a bit more time looking at this, I think the block that Splash later put on José is Fluid is warranted. I put an explanation here.

At first, what I took issue with was the fact that some accounts were labelled as sockpuppets, but not blocked in a timely manner. Without the block, from my perspective, it means that no administrator has taken responsibility for asserting that account X is a sockpuppet. I was a bit worried about your sockpuppet tagging for this reason, especially since it seemed that uninvolved users (like JianLi) were accidentally caught in the situation.

When it comes to dealing with sockpuppets on Wikipedia, there is always an element of controversy associated with them. I hope my questioning of your actions didn't cause too many problems on your end. There are not many users who would volunteer their time to investigate such things, so let me recognize this and thank you for doing what Wikipedia needs to be a healthy place for editing.

--HappyCamper 23:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologized to JianLi for my actions, anyway, thanks for investigating. --CFIF (talk to me) 23:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CoolKatt_number_99999

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CoolKatt_number_99999. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CoolKatt_number_99999/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CoolKatt_number_99999/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 00:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rollosmokes, when will you post your evidence?

I'm having computer problems right now...though it may not seem like it. My regular PC is in the shop, so I'm relegated to my wife's iBook, which for me is hard to work on (I hate Apples/Macs with a passion). I should get my PC back sometime tomorrow (Thursday), so I'll be posting my evidence then...be patient. Rollosmokes 16:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who is this CoolKatt number 99999? I don't want a "war" with people who support him and people who oppose him, but I see his name on a lot of histories on articles and involved in "edit wars".--grejlen - talk 00:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, it's odd you would ask CFIF that question when you could just look at CoolKatt's edit history. I hope you're truly not trying to stir things up. Lambertman 00:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review Pages

NEVER MIND. There was an issue with Deletion Review, and you just clicked on the bad button. I've fixed it, and moved your deletion review request for Kathy Fountain to the right place. Fan-1967 21:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TVNT

I regularly read TVNT, and now it's gone. Do you know where it is? Did it move? And please, archive this monstrous talk page. It's 125KB long! TrackerTV (CW|Castform|Green Valley) 03:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I second the motion for an archive. :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 04:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TVNT's still there. I'll see what I can do about archiving it, I'll probably get Werdnabot to do it, because I don't have the time to do it myself. :) --CFIF (talk to me) 11:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TVNT

I regularly read TVNT, and now it's gone. Do you know where it is? Did it move? And please, archive this monstrous talk page. It's 125KB long! TrackerTV (CW|Castform|Green Valley) 03:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I second the motion for an archive. :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 04:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TVNT's still there. I'll see what I can do about archiving it, I'll probably get Werdnabot to do it, because I don't have the time to do it myself. :) --CFIF (talk to me) 11:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About KALB-TV

Well alright -- you win!!! But I do want you to know I try my absolute best to provide any information the public might be interested in -- and you also can't leave an article near empty!!! Anyways... Done deal!!! --WIKISCRIPPS2K6 THU MAY 4 2006 8:54 PM EDT

The Other Networks

Here's a visual picture of my idea:

UPN Network Affiliates in the state of Wisconsin Note: Also in parenthesis along with the station's coverage area is the alternate affiliation following the UPN shutdown -- Effective September 2006
KBJR-DT 19.2 (Superior, MNTV) - WCGV 24 (Milwaukee, MNTV) - WACY 32 (Green Bay, MNTV) - WKBT-DT 41.2 (La Crosse, MNTV) - UPN14 (WISC-DT 50.2) (Madison, MNTV) - WFXS 55 (Wausau, ND)
See also: ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, PBS, WB and other stations in the state of Wisconsin

What kind of visual example did you have in mind??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SAT MAY 27 2006 1:01 PM EDT

How would you describe your view on the idea visually??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SUN MAY 28 2006 5:19 PM EDT

My Network TV Affiliates in the state of Wisconsin
KBJR-DT 19.2 (Superior) - WCGV 24 (Milwaukee) - WACY 32 (Green Bay) - WKBT-DT 41.2 (La Crosse) - WISC-DT 50.2 (Madison) -
See also: ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, PBS, WB and other stations in the state of Wisconsin

--CFIF (talk to me) 21:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The little bar on top -- wouldn't it be a kick to color-coordinate the bar with the network's logo??? What's your take on this??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SUN MAY 28 2006 6:13 PM EDT

That's not a bad idea....but what about NBC/CBS/FOX/ABC...not much to color coordinate. --CFIF (talk to me) 22:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, let's start with ABC -- black background with white letters...

Next, CBS -- like ABC only do reverse colors...

Then we come to Fox -- white background with the letters typed in whatever color as the letters "F-O-X" appears in the logo itself...

Then finally, NBC white or black background with letters typed using all six colors represented in the peacock logo...

Any questions??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SUN MAY 28 2006 6:23 PM EDT

Sounds good. --CFIF (talk to me) 23:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now this would also apply to MNTV and CW along with "Other"...

Now for the "Others" category -- this may sound corny but for each state you may want to color-coordinate using colors of the logo reflecting the network with the most affiliated stations in that state!!!

Do you follow me??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SUN MAY 28 2006 8:02 PM EDT

That might be tough because I am not good with HTML colors. --CFIF (talk to me) 00:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Say, what are these templates called anyways and where can I find them??? Because I'm getting curious!!! --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SUN MAY 28 2006 8:19 PM EDT

I haven't actually made the Florida ones yet...but they would be called "ABC Florida", etc. --CFIF (talk to me) 00:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, not that -- the formatting of the templates -- how are they classified and where can I find them??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SUN MAY 28 2006 8:27 PM EDT

Not sure...just go for what you have now and if others need to fix it, they will. --CFIF (talk to me) 00:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And then there's the subpages

And he also has these subpages, which show up on Google, Why does he get to keep those when they are entirely fictional and do nothing to contribute to an encyclopedia. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now, CK has threatened me with an RfC -- on Firsfron's talk page, no less. I'm crapping in my pants at the thought! But check my revision to my talk page and tell me what you think of this. Rollosmokes 08:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 152.789% with what you said, Rollo. --CFIF (talk to me) 15:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now he's gone off the deep end

CK has gone ahead and drew up an Request for Comment against me. (sarcastically) I've never been so scared in my life!! Rollosmokes 06:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He really needs to get real and realize what a problem he is. --CFIF (talk to me) 13:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The latest update

A direct quote from CK's latest subpage, written in the third-person:

"CoolKatt number 99999 is not someone whose edits you can revert on the spot. His edits are usually fully legit, and reverting such edits will draw the ire of him. Whereas, BenH usually makes edits that make no sense at all: like adding stub tags to non-stubs, poorly wrote sentences, etc. So, do not revert CoolKatt number 99999's edits without asking permission first." (retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CoolKatt_number_99999/What_CoolKatt_number_99999_is_not")

ASK PERMISSION?!?!?!? Who made him king of the hill? more importantly, who does he think he is? He is no BenH, but he ranks up there with him. Rollosmokes 08:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. --CFIF (talk to me) 11:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He has threatened me, too!

I seem to be having problems with CoolKatt number 99999, too. Is there anything that can be done? Among other things he has violated WP:OWN. Is there any sanction that can be taken against this problem user? Kramden4700 19:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/CoolKatt number 99999 voice your opinions there. --CFIF (talk to me) 19:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WSVN.png

The Image:WSVN.png logo is the official logo of WSVN-TV just like the logo WHDH.png is of WHDH-TV. The 150px is a homemade generic logo created by Spotteddogsdotorg that does not have the official FCC identification of either station. I would advise you stop vandalism either articles with your nonsense before I report you an administator and have both pages locked from editing. Leonard23 11:50 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Do yourself a favor and just get over yourself already. You are now sounding downright pathetic. You know there is a such thing as life outside of your computer. Please go live it. Leonard23 2:50 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Something New

I think we should blow up the current RfC against CoolKatt and start up a new one, because it seems the current one will not result in some kind of resolution (unlike the BenH RfC). CoolKatt is again labelling my edits as vandalism (specifically on WKBS and WGTW) and something really needs to be done. This time, I would like to be the one starting up the RfC. I may even attempt to use mediation as well.

Here's one more gem from CK, from WKBS and WGTW: "!-- Do not remove the merge tag. Doing so is considerd vandalism. --" So, I guess that means anyone who removes HIS mandatory merge tags (or his worthless "trivia") is committing vandalism? You make the call. Rollosmokes 14:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a real [misguided editor]. Start a new RfC, but label it "CoolKatt number 99999 [RfC #2]" --CFIF (talk to me) 14:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back from vacation

Now, back to business, as I need your help in backing me up against CK once again. He has managed to make a mockery of WWOR-TV, and David Levy is aparently taking his side. I will be seeking mediation in our dispute, so I'm sure you'll support me in that effort. But, for now, spot me on this one. Rollosmokes 07:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave me alone! CoolKatt number 99999 14:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm still on vacation, but I'm making some edits in my spare time. I'll see what I can do.... --CFIF (talk to me) 16:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You will do nothing because you will leave me alone or I will file an RfC. CoolKatt number 99999 18:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CK is self-destructing before our very eyes...how refreshing to see him get his just desserts! Rollosmokes 16:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your user name seems inappropriate

Hello. You seem to have an inappropriate username User:CFIF. You make all sorts of broadcast media related edits and may be confused with radio station CFIF-FM. Syolent Mauve 15:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User also crossposted this to WP:AN. I don't believe this is an inappropriate username, he/she (CFIF) may just be a fan of the station. Syrthiss 15:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Syolent (Soylent?), you've been a registered editor for 21 minutes and you're trying to oust people because of their username? Uhhh, welcome home, I guess... Lambertman 15:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF, Lambertman. We were all new once. ➨ ЯEDVERS

Regardless of how long I have been here, I feeel it may cause some confusion making the contributions of this user seem like they are sanctioned by the radio station. Syolent Mauve 16:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is a VERY narrow view; most people would know a user page if they inadvertantly came across it. - CobaltBlueTony 16:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Lambertman is right: you misspelled Soylent. - CobaltBlueTony 16:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The misspelling was intentional. Syolent Mauve 16:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How droll. - CobaltBlueTony 19:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I had no freaking clue of CFIF-FM until you told me about it. --CFIF (talk to me) 19:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, CFIF. Even if you had known about it, it would still have been alright. Thanks for your contributions and keep making them! We need you! ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CookKatt

Are the legal threats serious, please point me to some examples. Fred Bauder 15:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[2] --CFIF (talk to me) 15:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thanks so much for voting, CFIF!

Thanks so much for your support vote on my request for adminship! With a final vote count of (82/5/0), it succeeded, and I'm now an administrator! I am thrilled with the overwhelming positive support from the community, and sincerely thank you once again for taking your time to voice your opinion. Feel free to contact me with any comments/suggestions in the future!
—Mets501 (talk) 03:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MyWikiBiz discussion

Please join the new discussion at: "Paid to edit" dialogue -- MyWikiBiz 05:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BenH sock alert

You remember Ben, right? Get a load of this: 71.2.17.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log).

Stubs everything, makes up stuff. I am 99% sure this is Benny. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the heads-up on this user, CFIF. There's no reason to blanket stub tags like that. I'm assuming good faith, and have left a message for the user. Hopefully, we'll either hear back, or the user will stop adding stub tags to every article.--Firsfron of Ronchester 18:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/BenH I decided to be proactive on this. I am nearly 100% sure this is him, no one else blanket-stubs and changes dates like Ben. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to warn you, BenH's last edit was on July 10th, more than a month ago. His contribs may be too old to perform a checkuser.--Firsfron of Ronchester 18:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. :( If this user continues, I will be forced to revert every single one of the edits until the user is blocked. Because I don't know if it could be more obvious that it's a sock. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's wait for the checkuser results and see what comes back, if anything. Also, thanks for the barnstar. That was really nice of you (yes, I just now noticed it).--Firsfron of Ronchester 19:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was declined, but I'll go to the noticeboard as requested. --CFIF (talk to me) 19:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had a feeling his contribs would be too old. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 19:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BTW you're welcome on the barnstar, long overdue. --CFIF (talk to me) 20:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-CA/-LP suffixes in market boxes

A few months ago, you posted an opinion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations that you thought it was important to show the -LP and -CA suffixes in market boxes. I just placed a response opinion there, but wanted to ask why you attach such importance to that. I'm not looking for an argument; I just wish to understand your position better. Thanks. --dhett 16:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits on your userpage

Hey CFIF,

Some recent edits on your userpage and on this page indicate you want to run for adminship at some point, but that you feel you'll "sadly... never be an admin". You feel you wouldn't pass muster because you're not a "model Wikipedian". Clearly, your talk page indicates a history of incivility and other issues, but it's also clear you're working on that.

If you are interested in Adminship, I strongly encourage you, CFIF, to consider perhaps adding your name to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Programs#Admin_Coaching. Admin coaching can really get you whipped into editing shape and prepare you for an adminship, and by the time you are assigned a coach (it takes weeks, possibly months), you could be in a very different position than you currently are.

I hope you will not let past editing issues discourage you from wielding the mop some time in the future. There's no reason an editor with a somewhat checkered past can't become a very productive admin, since adminship is supposed to be "no big deal", and with the huge backlogs in many of the admin areas, we need more hands anyway.

Anyway, just some things to consider. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 23:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks, I'll be sure to check that out! --CFIF (talk to me) 23:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thanks so much for voting, CFIF!

Thanks so much for your support vote on my request for adminship! With a final vote count of (82/5/0), it succeeded, and I'm now an administrator! I am thrilled with the overwhelming positive support from the community, and sincerely thank you once again for taking your time to voice your opinion. Feel free to contact me with any comments/suggestions in the future!
—Mets501 (talk) 03:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MyWikiBiz discussion

Please join the new discussion at: "Paid to edit" dialogue -- MyWikiBiz 05:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A lack of common courtesy in your crying wolf

I found that you have made this accusation of a WP:Point violation with out even the common courtesy of leaving a note on my talk page. I took a look into your history of this user and you seem to jump to conclusions rather quickly and without any conclusive evidence; something which I did unlike him acting like the boy who cries wolf. I hope you can give some insight on your standard of proof. On the various deletion pages I stated clear and valid reasons why the articles should be deleted and I have now placed this on my user page as well just to be clear. I do not have a bloody vendetta against all lists, just those which do not meet the established guidelines. I have encountered some pages of lists that I felt did not violate Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory. The purpose of deletions is to establish a consensus. How can a consensus be established if a user with out any real evidence screams that the nomination is in bad faith? This adds a bit of doubt to a perfectly valid nomination for deletion that was based on the established guidelines of Wikipedia. I feel that your behaviour is bordering on vandalism. If I decide to take further action I will at least have the common courtesy to leave you a message. Displaced Brit 18:36, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but I do not appreciate being called a vandal, Sir/Madam. I do not vandalize pages, in fact, you need to do a little bit of policy reading to figure out what vandalism is/isn't. Good Day. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what would you call making an accusation in a legitimate deletion vote? Displaced Brit 21:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but it isn't vandalism. --CFIF (talk to me) 21:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like a retraction and apology and hope we can come to some sort of resolution. I trust in future, you shall not jump to conclusions and before you scream "J'accuse." Regardless, I shall keep a keen eye on your behaviour in future. Displaced Brit 22:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. --CFIF (talk to me) 22:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I expect more than two words, as it sounds as if you are just paying lip service instead of being sincere. I also expect you to say on the vairiuos deletion pages that you jumped to a conclusion on and attempted to skew the discussion via your attack. I really find your behsviour childish and I am starting to wonder if you are some fourteen year old with little life expericnce trying to act important, as it is suggested by your patterns of behaviour here. Displaced Brit 15:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep it up with your personal attacks and snotty attitude, I don't believe I'm going to expand on what I said further. --CFIF (talk to me) 15:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC) [reply]

I have decided to take the next step and have your behaviour, specifically your tendancy to scream "J'accuse" at the drop of a hat, looked into, something that will no doubt get me on your Nixonian Enemies List. Displaced Brit 15:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but you continue to stalk me, harrass me, and make personal attacks. I don't scream "J'accuse" at the drop of a hat, and you continue to go out of your way to harrass me. --CFIF (talk to me) 15:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFIF,

I agree that implying someone is acting like a 14 year old, etc, is incivil, and I guess it could be interpreted as a personal attack. I've left a note on D.B.'s page asking him to assume good faith, explaining that you've apologised already, there's no further need for an apology, etc. I told him you're a good editor and you've already said you're sorry. There's no need for incivility.

However, he is a new user and may not be aware of all the policies on Wikipedia (we've just added another policy, sadly, on Fair Use images, as an aside). So maybe we can cut him some slack here and just assume good faith for now; do let me know if the incivility continues (I'll be watching anyway), but I should also let you know my computer isn't working very well and so I might not be on as often as I usually am, but I will be monitoring the situation as closely as I can. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 21:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFIF,

D.B. has again posted to my talk page concerning your post on the Administrators' noticeboard incident page; I urge you not to respond to this latest round, and just continue editing as normal. To your credit, you've apologized, he says he's accepted the apology, and hopefully further ugliness can be averted. --Firsfron of Ronchester 05:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but if he says anything else it'll all end up at WP:PAIN and/or WP:RfC. --CFIF (talk to me) 15:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BenH sock alert

You remember Ben, right? Get a load of this: 71.2.17.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log).

Stubs everything, makes up stuff. I am 99% sure this is Benny. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the heads-up on this user, CFIF. There's no reason to blanket stub tags like that. I'm assuming good faith, and have left a message for the user. Hopefully, we'll either hear back, or the user will stop adding stub tags to every article.--Firsfron of Ronchester 18:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/BenH I decided to be proactive on this. I am nearly 100% sure this is him, no one else blanket-stubs and changes dates like Ben. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to warn you, BenH's last edit was on July 10th, more than a month ago. His contribs may be too old to perform a checkuser.--Firsfron of Ronchester 18:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. :( If this user continues, I will be forced to revert every single one of the edits until the user is blocked. Because I don't know if it could be more obvious that it's a sock. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's wait for the checkuser results and see what comes back, if anything. Also, thanks for the barnstar. That was really nice of you (yes, I just now noticed it).--Firsfron of Ronchester 19:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was declined, but I'll go to the noticeboard as requested. --CFIF (talk to me) 19:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had a feeling his contribs would be too old. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 19:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BTW you're welcome on the barnstar, long overdue. --CFIF (talk to me) 20:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-CA/-LP suffixes in market boxes

A few months ago, you posted an opinion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations that you thought it was important to show the -LP and -CA suffixes in market boxes. I just placed a response opinion there, but wanted to ask why you attach such importance to that. I'm not looking for an argument; I just wish to understand your position better. Thanks. --dhett 16:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits on your userpage

Hey CFIF,

Some recent edits on your userpage and on this page indicate you want to run for adminship at some point, but that you feel you'll "sadly... never be an admin". You feel you wouldn't pass muster because you're not a "model Wikipedian". Clearly, your talk page indicates a history of incivility and other issues, but it's also clear you're working on that.

If you are interested in Adminship, I strongly encourage you, CFIF, to consider perhaps adding your name to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Programs#Admin_Coaching. Admin coaching can really get you whipped into editing shape and prepare you for an adminship, and by the time you are assigned a coach (it takes weeks, possibly months), you could be in a very different position than you currently are.

I hope you will not let past editing issues discourage you from wielding the mop some time in the future. There's no reason an editor with a somewhat checkered past can't become a very productive admin, since adminship is supposed to be "no big deal", and with the huge backlogs in many of the admin areas, we need more hands anyway.

Anyway, just some things to consider. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 23:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks, I'll be sure to check that out! --CFIF (talk to me) 23:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with User:Displaced Brit

Displaced Brit (talk · contribs) has made personal attacks and has continued to stalk me.

I am in fear of retaliation for this call for help, so I am editing this anonymously in hopes he won't find out and jump on me for this. --CFIF ☎ (as an anon IP) 19 August 2006

Do not be afraid of retaliation. I've blocked the user for another 6 hours for personal attacks. If he continues and makes personal attacks upon returning, just let me know :-) —Mets501 (talk) 18:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. --CFIF ☎ 18:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something for you to speedy, if it hasn't been done already

K07RE (if it's a redlink, someone's done their job) --CFIF ☎ 21:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I already deleted three other fake stations today. :( --Firsfron of Ronchester 21:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will you block the user for hoaxing Wikipedia? This is way past simple testing. --CFIF ☎ 21:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I would like to wait. The user has been warned; if s/he repeats the offence, then a block might be in order. But judging from these types of accounts, the user will probably never be back anyway: the account that made the other articles (WXEC, KRFV, etc) appears to have been a drive-by-hoaxing. I'll try to watch, and I appreciate the head's-up. If you see more TV station hoaxes, feel free to send them my way. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 21:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WBUW

Do you know if there's any way to make the gallery section look better than it is now? I did it with two separate galleries because the infobox squashes it all the way down to the page bottom and puts the title heading way too high from the gallery (at least it looks that way in FF, IE and Opera). This is in 1024x768 BTW, I saw that it was normal in higher resolutions. Nate 22:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not completely sure, it's fine for me, my resolution is 1280x960. --CFIF ☎ 22:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep it...I reduced page size in Opera only 10% in 1024x768 and it viewed fine so it's not that much of an issue, more of a page nag and an issue with the gallery tag as it is now (which doesn't allow image reduction). Nate 00:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kpjas' RFA

Hey CFIF!

On Kpjas' RFA, you have voted oppose based on his apparent lack of commitment to Wikipedia, ("being here for 5 years and having less that 5000 article edits doesn't give me the impression that this user is committed to spending time on Wikipedia."). In fact, Kpjas is already an admin on the Polish Wikipedia, and has 37,000 edits there, including 2,600 to WP space over there. You have opposed based on lack of commitment to the Project, but these facts clearly indicate a sheer ton of commitment. CFIF, you want an experienced, dedicated for admin. Kpjas is clearly experienced and dedicated. Without badgering you, I urge you to reconsider your vote in this particular RfA. Happy editing! :) --Firsfron of Ronchester 00:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid, based on the additions, I'm going to have to stay opposed to this candidate...as said by others, it doesn't appear he really needs the tools on the English Wikipedia. We need someone who commits a good amount of their Wiki-time to the English Wiki. Sorry. --CFIF ☎ 00:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On further review, I may change to neutral if the candidate promises to commit more to the English Wikipedia...if not, I will remain in opposition. --CFIF ☎ 00:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I appreciate your at least looking into the matter; not everyone will. Best, --Firsfron of Ronchester 01:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Welcome to the tropical cyclone Wikiproject! There are numerous ongoing projects that need work, including adding information for every storm in every seasonal article worldwide, as well as adding content to retired hurricane articles to bring them to Featured article status. However, any contributions you make, be it big or small, will be appreciated. Here's some pointers for the ideal tropical cyclone article.

Dear Tropical cyclone editor,

As a member of the Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject, you are receiving this message to describe how you can better tropical cyclone articles. There are hundreds of tropical cyclone articles, though many of them are poorly organized and lacking in information. Using the existing featured articles as a guide line, here is the basic format for the ideal tropical cyclone article.

Infobox- Whenever possible, the infobox should have a picture for the tropical cyclone. The picture can be any uploaded picture about the storm, though ideally it should be a satellite shot of the system. If that is not available, damage pictures, either during the storm or after the storm, are suitable. In the area that says Formed, indicate the date on which the storm first developed into a tropical depression. In the area that says Dissipated, indicate the date on which the storm lost its tropical characteristics. This includes when the storm became extratropical, or if it dissipated. If the storm dissipated and reformed, include the original start date and the final end date. Highest winds should be the local unit of measurement for speed (mph in non-metric countries, km/h in metric countries), with the other unit in parenthesis. The lowest pressure should be in mbars. Damages should, when available, be in the year of impact, then the present year. The unit of currency can be at your discretion, though typically it should be in USD. Fatalities indicate direct deaths first, then indirect deaths. Areas affected should only be major areas of impact. Specific islands or cities should only be mentioned if majority of the cyclone's effects occurred there.
Intro- The intro for every article should be, at a minimum, 2 paragraphs. For more impacting hurricanes, it should be 3. The first should describe the storm in general, including a link to the seasonal article, its number in the season, and other statistics. The second should include a brief storm history, while the third should be impact.
Storm history- The storm history should be a decent length, relatively proportional to the longevity of the storm. Generally speaking, the first paragraph should be the origins of the storm, leading to the system reaching tropical storm status. The second should be the storm reaching its peak. The third should be post-peak until landfall and dissipation. This section is very flexible, depending on meteorological conditions, but it should generally be around 3. Storm histories can be longer than three paragraphs, though they should be less than five. Anything more becomes excessive. Remember, all storm impacts, preparations, and records can go elsewhere. Additional pictures are useful here. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its peak, use a landfall picture in the storm history. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its landfall, use the peak. If the landfall is its peak, use a secondary peak, or even a random point in the storm's history.
Preparations- The preparations section can be any length, depending on the amount of preparations taken by people for the storm. Hurricane watches and warnings need to be mentioned here, as well as the number of people evacuated from the coast. Include numbers of shelters, and other info you can find on how people prepared for the storm.
Impact- For landfalling storms, the impact section should be the majority of the article. First, if the storm caused deaths in multiple areas, a death table would work well in the top level impact section. A paragraph of the general effects of the storm is also needed. After the intro paragraph, impact should be broken up by each major area. It depends on the information, but sections should be at least one paragraph, if not more. In the major impact areas, the first paragraph should be devoted to meteorological statistics, including rainfall totals, peak wind gusts on land, storm surge, wave heights, beach erosion, and tornadoes. The second should be actual damage. Possible additional paragraphs could be detailed information on crop damage or specifics. Death and damage tolls should be at the end. Pictures are needed, as well. Ideally, there would be at least one picture for each sub-section in the impact, though this sometimes can't happen. For storms that impact the United States or United States territories, this site can be used for rainfall data, including an image of rainfall totals.
Aftermath- The aftermath section should describe foreign aid, national aid, reconstruction, short-term and long-term environmental effects, and disease. Also, the storm's retirement information, whether it happened or not, should be mentioned here.
Records- This is optional, but can't hurt to be included.
Other- The ideal article should have inline sourcing, with the {{cite web}} formatting being preferable. Always double check your writing and make sure it makes sense.

Good luck with future writing, and if you have a question about the above, don't hesitate to ask.

Here's a copy of our latest monthly newsletter.

Number 3, August 6, 2006

The Hurricane Herald

This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.

"Tropical Storm Lee was probably national news at the time, depending on where it went and what it did. Millions of people knew about it."

Storm of the month

Severe Tropical Storm Bilis approaching Taiwan

Severe Tropical Storm Bilis was a damaging tropical storm that caused significant damage to areas of southeastern China, the Philippines and Taiwan. The fourth named storm of the 2006 Pacific typhoon season formed to the east of the Philippines on July 8 and moved towards Taiwan, strengthening as it did so. It reached its peak strength of 110 km/h (70 mph) on July 13, shortly before it made its first landfall on northern Taiwan. Bilis then made a second landfall in Fujian, China on July 14 after officials evaucated over 1 million residents from the areas in the storm's path. The remnant lasted for several days after landfall and brought heavy rain to inland China. The most significant damage occurred in Hunan, where heavy flooding and mudslides destroyed over 31,000 homes and killed 345. Despite never reaching typhoon strength, the storm was responsible for $2.5 billion in damage and at least 625 fatalities in total.

Other tropical cyclone activity

There were 10 other tropical cyclones worldwide in July, with activity in all 4 northern hemisphere basins.

In the Atlantic, Tropical Storm Beryl made landfall on Nantucket on July 21 before bringing rain to Atlantic Canada.
In the East Pacific, Hurricane Bud was a Category 3 hurricane that formed on July 10 and dissipated on July 15.
Hurricane Carlotta twice became a minimal hurricane before degenerating into a remnant low on July 16.
Hurricane Daniel reached Category 4 strength and was predicted to make landfall in Hawaii before it dissipated on July 26.
Tropical Storm Emilia brought tropical storm-force winds to southern Baja California on July 26 and was forecast to become a hurricane but this did not occur.
Tropical Storm Fabio formed late on July 31 but did not last long in the face of strong shear.
In the West Pacific,Typhoon Ewiniar (Ester) formed on June 29 to the east of the Philippines, it reached Category 4 strength before making landfall in South Korea on July 10 as a tropical storm. It killed at least 36 people.
Typhoon Kaemi (Glenda) formed on July 2 and passed over Taiwan before dissipating over mainland China on July 26. It brought heavy rain to Taiwan and the Philippines and killed at least 32 people in China.
Typhoon Prapiroon (Henry) formed on July 28 but did not reach tropical storm strength until August.
In the North Indian Ocean, Tropical Storm 03B formed on June 30 near the east Indian coast before making landfall on the Orissa coast on July 2.

Main Page content

Entries from 3 articles: Tropical Storm Bilis (2006), National Weather Service bulletin for New Orleans region and List of South America tropical cyclones appeared on the Main Page in the Did you know column during July.

New articles and improvements wanted

New articles are wanted for Fiji Meteorological Service and Papua New Guinea National Weather Service.
While the individual storm articles are generally quite good, the project's core articles are quite poor. Please help improve tropical cyclone and its subpages.
Cyclone Tracy has recently had featured status removed, please help improve this article back up to FA standards again.

Member of the month

Cyclone barnstar

The July member of the month is Hurricanehink. The WikiProject awards this to him for the superb quality of his work on articles. Hurricanehink joined the project in November and has significantly contributed to many of the project's Featured Articles including Tropical Storm Allison and Hurricane Mitch. In addition to his contributions Hurricanehink also works on the assessment and improvement of most articles within the project.

New and improved articles

New storm articles include: Typhoon Aere (2004), Cyclone Vance, Hurricane Karl (2004) and 1916 Texas Hurricane.
New non-storm articles include: List of Canadian hurricanes and National Weather Service bulletin for New Orleans region.
New Featured articles: Tropical Storm Allison, Hurricane Esther (1961), Hurricane Irene (1999). Also, List of South America tropical cyclones became a Featured list.
Articles which became A/GA class include: Tropical Storm Henri (2003) (A), Typhoon Vamei (GA), Cyclone Rosita (GA), Tropical Storm Harvey (2005) (GA) and Storm of October 1804 (GA).

Storm article statistics

Grade	May	June	July	August
FA	7	10	13	16
A	5	7	6	6
GA	3	5	18	24
B	66	82	79	77
Start	177	168	180	191
Stub	12	10	8	8
Total	263	282	303	322
percentage ≥Less than B	71.6	63.1	62.0	61.8

Useful sources of tropical cyclone information

The following organizations provide helpful information for writing about tropical cyclones, both past and present.

National Hurricane Center - Official forecasts for the Atlantic and East Pacific and a massive archive starting in 1958.
Central Pacific Hurricane Center - Official forecasts for the Central Pacific and summaries of past storms.
Joint Typhoon Warning Center - Unoffical forecasts for storms in the West Pacific and other regions. Has an archive of storm reports back to 1959.
Japan Meteorological Agency - Official forecasts for the West Pacific.
Naval Research Laboratory - A great source for satellite imagery of tropical cyclones.
Hydrometeorological Prediction Center - Forecasts of weakening tropical cyclones in the United States and information and maps of rainfall in the US.
National Climatic Data Center - Lots of information is available here, including satellite imagery. The Storm events archive is very useful for information on storms in the US and its territories.

In his April Tropical Cyclone Summary, Gary Padgett stated that he will extensively reference Wikipedia in his future summaries. I have communicated with him and he has stated that he is "very much interested in cooperating" with us. He has also provided me with a copy of Jack Beven's weekly summaries (covering 1991-1996). If you want a copy of them, email me.--Nilfanion (talk)

If you have any questions, feel to ask anywhere. Good luck with any future contributions, and see you around. Hurricanehink (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About your TV edits

Just wondering if you are in the industry or not, since you seem to make a lot of television related edits. I do, but I can't tell you who I work for and where, for obvious reasons. But, as someone who is involved in broadcast journalism, don't forget sources, sources, sources! TV Newser 23:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not in the industry....I do know someone who is though, kind of. I'm just interested in television. --CFIF ☎ 00:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you aren't in the biz, I am wondering where you are getting some of your information, as a lot of it seems unsourced and has lead to some edit wars with other users. I can assure you that here in our newsroom, and every one I have worked in (except for FNC), we make sure that all our facts are straight and properly sourced before we put a story on air. My first ND was a guy who had one rule - Get it first, get it right, and get it done the first time. If you need any help with fact checking, drop me a line. TV Newser 20:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of it is via the station's website. I never fill in dates or put in info unless it comes from a reliable source, such as the station's official website, FCC records, an on-air screencap, or a trade magazine. I don't know about what other users do but that's what I do. --CFIF ☎ 22:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well another couple of tips for you if you ever want to give journalism a go. Always try to get at least two sources, and don't forget that information you find of websites isn't always accurate or up to date. I was researching a story recently and the organization's website had information that hadn't been updated in two years! It proved useless for our story. So always, check, check, check and try to take a look at all sides of the story, since there are always more than two! TV Newser 05:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I usually check on official websites, and not little geocities pages and crap like that. The only real exception I made is for www.big13.net as the information is first-hand from current and former station employees and a good portion of it can be backed up at the station's website. --CFIF ☎ 12:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tywright back to removing information

As previously reported at AN/I, Tywright (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back to removing information on the Charlie Crist and Tom Gallagher pages after being warned multiple times, I think a block may be necessary. Maybe an indefblock for being a vandalism-only account would work. --CFIF ☎ 12:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, indefinite block applied. —Mets501 (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WVTM-TV

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate list of information; is there a reason you continue to include a list of non-notable data to this article? RadioKirk (u|t|c) 14:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newscasts are notable. I think notability also depends on who you are, for example, I might not find the infinite articles and lists and crap about Pokemon notable (which I don't), but find a small list of what newscasts a station airs notable. It's not like we're adding schedules to each station, it's just interesting to see what newscasts or local programming a station has. It's also very inappropriate to make sweeping changes to similar articles without seeing if the community agrees on it. And also remember, Wikipedia is not paper. --CFIF ☎ 14:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A list of newscasts with titles and anchors is the definition of non-notable; no one outside of Birmingham would care about the anchors unless they were demonstrably notable, and nothing more than a brief paragraph outlining the station's newscasts (not a list) would be appropriate; it's a foregone conclusion that a news station has newscasts. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 15:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but when do they have newscasts? People probably want to know that. Who's to say anyone outside of small circles of the Czech Republic actually give a rat's behind about Karolina Svěltá, same for non-notable people like Reem Kalani, and George Golla. (Thanks Random Article feature) Some people in tiny circles find that notable, but probably a good amount of people don't. I don't see anyone else jumping on the bandwagon to delete because "no one outside of x would care". I bet over 99% of the people who read this enyclopedia don't care about the articles I mentioned, and don't care about a lot of the obscure things here, notablity (double) standards are set too high. It's okay to have someone with little importance in the English-language world have a bio here, but not a short thing about newscasts. It's all about the double standard that world articles are more important than articles about the USA, or any other English-language country. For example, people are ready to delete well written parts of articles, but won't delete one sentence about some Palestinian folk artist 2 people have heard of. --CFIF ☎ 15:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Wikipedia is not ... TV/Radio schedules' - Amgine 15:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ignore the diatribe on double standards that has nothing whatsoever to do with this article and instead stay on point: a bullet list of newscasts, newscast titles (!) and anchors is a perfect example of why Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Unless there's something specifically notable about a cast or an anchor—note that nearly every broadcast television station in the US does newscasts—the proper way to present this information would be in one brief sentence such as, "WVTM-TV presents newscasts at (times)." Nothing more. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 15:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything in that section that pertains to newscast names and times. Plus, not all stations call their news "News ## at ". I don't get why people can't just find better things to do on Wikipedia than nitpick at one little thing. --CFIF ☎ 15:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of information (and listing a newscast's title could not be any less relevant and any more PR). When reverts are explained and you ignore those explanations in making reverts with no comment, you border on creating a disruption to make a point. Please understand that what you consider nitpicking is actually a matter of following policy. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 15:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]