User talk:Causa sui/Archive 3

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the very strange little bit of vandalism someone left on my user page. "If you so wish, feel free to email me: [my Wikipedia username]@gmail.com but i will not reply". What is that? That's really weird... Semiconscious (talk · home) 06:08, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my User page. Now that I've attracted the ire of immature wikipedia vandals, is there a t-shirt I can buy? Al 18:57, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user-page. Can you believe this is all about the Mariah Carey article. I kept reverting someones vandalsim and since then, that person has been out to get me. This was a long time ago, I just cant believe that they are still at it. To tell you the truth, I find it quite funny for some reasons. Journalist (talk · contribs)

Please stop

"Vandalism" is a very strong word. If you do not understand how I am expanding on the humor of the previous writer then please ask rather than accuse me of harsh crimes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.0.87.21 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 19 August 2005

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page, I appreciate your efforts. Ramallite ^(talk) 15:07, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome

Could you please block Redwolf24? thanks

Ta

Hi Ryan. Thanks for reverting the vandalism of my userpage. --Ngb 18:06, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hall Monitor's RFA

Thank you for the taking time to comment on my recent RFA nomination. Your confidence and support is greatly appreciated. Hall Monitor 19:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but...

I feel that the entry which was made was in all fairness, a valid statement about the person, she is well known in school and the surrounding tees valley area! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.213.241.132 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 19 August 2005

Financial mismanagement

Hello,

Please could you also look for Financial mismanagement (This article needs to be cleaned up to conform to a higher standard of quality.)

I will look for the correction.

Thank you

Best regards

Elementary courtesy?

It is surely elementary courtesy not to amend a user page, certainly without asking the permission of the user first. Why not put a suggestion on a person's talk page if you don't like something on their user page? RachelBrown 13:01, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that it would have been so much more civilised to put a note on my discussion page requesting me to remove it. It's what I'd have done, and no doubt you are also a civilised and courteous person. Aren't you? To avoid me making such a mistake again, can you please let me have a comprehensive list of categories which it is not appropriate to link to user pages. And as you're clearly a more experienced Wikipedian than I am, why don't you start a suitable category if you'd like one? RachelBrown 14:13, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

John Eastman

Dude: I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion that John Eastman is "not a well-known person". Anyone who has read a Beatles history book, or knows something about the band, knows who he was (and presumably still is)--namely, Paul McCartney's former brother-in-law, who had a minor but pivotal role in the band's breakup. Essentially, he was bootlick to Paul and to his father Lee Eastman (who became Paul's manager), and a general pain in the ass to the rest of the world. John Lennon and Yoko Ono particularly hated him for his attitude, and his tendency (like his dad's) to disrupt anything that didn't serve Paul at the other Beatles' expense. One of the reasons John and Paul lost their song copyrights was because John Eastman sent a panic letter to ATV in the middle of negotiations with them, so they backed out of the deal that was all but sealed, to sell their share of Northern Songs to Apple Corps. I noticed the deletion notice, but the entry was gone before I could add any more information (like this). Kindly put his entry back, so it can be added to, either by myself as I gather more information, or by others who know the subject better than you obviously do. Radsay 15:55, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Rizo's RfA

Ryan, thanks very much for supporting my RfA. Now I'll be an even more effective RC patrol sidekick. See you on IRC, my friend. Fernando Rizo T/C 18:45, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Who's rv

Hi, thanks for the rv on my userpage. I have so many things on my watchlist, that I didnt' even catch it till now. :o Thanks again. ∞Who ?¿? 17:31, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmic

Yeah, I realized after I pulled the trigger that it was talking about a group. I deleted it as link spam but I'll VfD it. In fact, I was going to do that anyway. Thanks for the good catch. - Lucky 6.9 16:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done and done. I just need to paste it to the VfD page. Thanks again. - Lucky 6.9 16:47, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

summaries

Please be specific or I don't know what tyou are talking about. When I am creating mass stubs it is extremely difficult to provide one, SqueakBox 18:23, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Categorical imperative

I've printed it off, and I'll take it with me when I go out tomorrow (I won't be able to read it properly on-line). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:16, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

One (Metallica song)

Couldn't you give a more serious reason to delete that?--Army1987 23:05, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deontology as consequentialism

I just remembered this little VfD we were discussing over several days, and find it's now closed — in favor of your preferred solution. Thank you for your fine thoughts; with every VfD I learn something about WP, and your comments here were useful to me. I like your work: keep it up—Encephalon | ^ζ 00:21:57, 2005-08-23 (UTC)

Quick Question

Hi, I'm pretty new and was looking at the same article as you, Garmin International - just wondering, why did you cleanup-stub it, instead of a redirect to garmin, or would both be just as valid? Just trying to get an idea of how things work on RC patrol, thanks for the help! PubLife 12:07, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the clarification, will go do that now. PubLife 12:28, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/B1249

Ryan,
I stumbled upon this VfD, and I'm curious as to the closure reasoning. Is there background of which I am not aware? Thanks for filling me in,
brenneman ^(t)^(c) 13:35, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Um... thanks for the prompt response. If you want to give no answer that is your privilege. Did you discount some arguments as from very new users, did you count votes, etc - what was your decision making process? As I said, you can choose not to defend the closure.
brenneman ^(t)^(c) 14:07, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. - brenneman ^(t)^(c) 14:14, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, Ryan, I stand behind you 100% on the way you closed out that VfD. Fernando Rizo T/C 20:02, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Adventure

Hello, I awoke this morning to find my Miss Adventure page had been deleted. The reason you left was "Nonsense/fabrication". Yes, this is fabrication, I will admit. You have to remember that Miss Adventure comes from the pages of the Weekly World News which is also fabrication. Articles about P'lod and Bat Boy are also fabrication, but have claimed their place in wikipedia. My opinion is the Miss Adventure article can become cleaned up and improved, given time. --DaemonDivinus 15:12, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand what i am doing really. I keep getting these messages.. WHat am I doing wrong?

Criteria for speedy deletion

Hey, thanks for the tip. But wouldn't many prior votes supporting being on one television show as not notable eliminate the controversy that would hinder a speedy deletion vote? For example (I'm not sure what the precedent actually is on this one), suppose there were 100 articles on various people where they claimed that having written a Ph. D thesis on some topic. If 99 or 100 of those votes had resulted in deletion, wouldn't further claims of Ph. D theses be invalid as claims for notability? After all, at some point far in the past, simply saying that someone started a lawnmowing business would have been claim for notability - until enough lawnmowing business owners had been deleted to debunk the claim.

Just stirring up some interesting debate here - take it as you will, --Quintin3265 14:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary internet

Hey! I see you moved User names! and that was funny! thanks for the tribute! I'm only gonna be on for a bit but the conferences/seminars are pretty fun! Met lotza new people (and talked about Dream Theater/Megadeth with some progressive rock people) and lotza other shtuf =) also met some hot chicks =) always good (and got a lotta phone numbers) though my buddies aparently plan to "set me up" with some girl and i'm not too sure about that (i smell a prank coming) anyways, if you see a story about some kid dying in canada at a conference... start a memorial =) Sasquatch讲看 15:15, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism of Rangers F.C.

Can you do another revert on Rangers F.C.? I've used my 3 for the day. This and Celtic F.C. are a never ending battle to keep clean. TIA. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:20, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

cant see any Copyright problems

Helo Ryan , I was editing the page on my band – Analog Pussy – and got a notice about copyright infringement. I really can’t see what I’m doing wrong – the only information I enter is about our band.

Can you correct the situation or let me know what to do next?

Jiga Analog Pussy (preceding unsigned comment by Analogpussy 12:25, 24 August 2005)

Bob Dylan page / ongoing dispute

Thank you for looking into this unpleasant dispute. I was about to file a 3RR complaint regard two (discrete) incidents over the last two days, but if you would prefer that I hold off while you review the matter, I will. Monicasdude 17:30, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

copyrights

Ryan text belongs to our band and we posted it http://www.thedjlist.com/djs/ANALOG_PUSSY/

Can I still post this text? If not – does this mean that wiki requires us to put a text that doesn’t show anywhere else on the web?

If this is the case let me know and I will post something new or change that text.\ Thanks Jiga —Preceding unsigned comment added by Analogpussy (talk • contribs) 12:44, 24 August 2005

dj list

Ryan, i posted our band's Bio/History;And did the same thing on the DJ-list. Their copyrights warning don’t necessarily refer to the artists bio’s because normally bio’s are used all over the place and that’s the purpose of it. What do I do now? Do I have to start all over again? Is the page totally deleted? Jiga www.analog-pussy.com—Preceding unsigned comment added by Analogpussy (talk • contribs) 12:44, 24 August 2005

Understanding vandalism

Thank you for protecting the Bob Dylan page. I also read your comments on the Vandalism in Progress page. I would like to understand better what qualifies as vandalism, and how to approach users such as the currently troublesome User:Monicasdude.

In characterizing Monicasdude's edits as vandalism, I realized the case was atypical of simple vandals. He certainly didn't insert, e.g. "John Smith is a fag" or the sort of irrelevant graffiti that you see on some pages. But it's also not a matter of any particular factual or POV issue in the article.

Judging by the changelog and the discussion page, since before I ever read or edited that particular Bob Dylan page, Monicasdude has shown a particular consistent pattern of "bad faith editing." His edit history is mostly on either the Dylan page, or on related pages (albums by Bob Dylan, similar artists), with a clear concentration on the Dylan page itself. It seems that Monicasdude has a particularly monomaniacal enthusiasm for Dylan; moreover, I think he honsestly believes that his edits are correct and of high quality. But at the same time, his immersion in trivia around the particular subject has bred an exaggerated sense of his own writing skills and knowledgeability. Enough that he believes that WP page to be "his page."

The concrete result is that Monicasdude finds it loathsome for the page to contain any wording written by anyone else. Most recently I've tried to make some (pretty minor) changes, and encountered that. But in the talk page you can see several past editors who banged their head against the same thing. When I make an edit (or before I tried to edit, when other editors did), Monicasdude inevitably rolls back my wording to whatever he had himself earlier written about the same topic (it must only be verbatim his own words). If I try variations that seem to satisfy his stated concerns (with some additional concern for clear expression and factuality), he equally inevitably makes rude comments the edit history, and again restores his "golden" version. Sometimes he writes long, rambling digressions on the talk page to justify his version, but while rich in trivial footnotes, they never actually relate to the edit in question (not seeing forest for the trees). His rollbacks are not always literally restoration of an exact prior version, which makes it harder to see if you haven't worked on the page—he might restore the paragraphs he himself wrote a while back, not necessarily in the same order as other people have modified those paragraphs.

The net effect is that no single edit by Monicasdude is unreasonable if taken in isolation. They're not necessarily particularly good in either factuality or writing quality, but no worse than a lot of edits by good faith editors (on whatever pages, not speaking just other Dylan editors). But taken together, Monicasdude editing stategy is "this is my page, and no one else is worthy to edit it."

So what to do? Is there an appropriate administrative mechanism to try to get the page to be a cooperative project rather than just Monicasdude's personal user page? Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:04, 2005 August 24 (UTC)

wikifying

thanx Ryan. i still dont get the remark there: "This article lacks information on the subject matter's importance"

there is another remark about wikifying. i;m not sure what that means but at least there is a help doc about it. so what do i need to do in order to have the article matter with importance? Jiga http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_Pussy --Analogpussy 18:07, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Vincent page

Why did you remove the speedy delete tag on Rob Vincent? I think this is a classic under WP:CSD A7. I expalind at greater length why on the VfD page for that article. most of the editors who have expressed an opnion on the VfD page also think this should be a speedy delete. DES ^(talk) 18:32, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Per Fernando Rizo's suggestion

I was pointed your direction by Fernando Rizo, as he suggested that you may be able to assist with the ongoing POV rumble regarding a whole range of articles having to do with the Republic of Macedonia. These articles need neutral admins with a little time to calm these folks down, inject some civility, and dampen the flames of ethnic anger. Let me quote liberally from the stuff I put on Fernando Rizo's talk page on the subject (mostly, so I don't have to type it all again):

I was hoping you could help to calm and mediate an increasingly rancorous dispute in articles related to Macedonia, in particular, the foregoing, Republic of Macedonia, and Macedonian slavs. As an outsider and a neutral to this ongoing dispute, and as a motivated new admin, I think you may be able to inculcate some much-needed civility on both sides. I note that this problem has been mentioned on the AN/I page as well.
Primarily, it appears that ethnic Greeks and Macedonian (or Macedonian slavs depending on your perspective) have been engaging in revert battles, subtle rephrasing campaigns, and talk page flame wars. Both sides seek to push POV, which results in articles becoming a mess and unencyclopedic. I point you to both sides of the debate (which I have joined, hopefully prooductively) at Talk:Republic of Macedonia. Also, take a look at MATIA's old talk page for a Greek-English translation that shows some collusive bad faith, and I am certainly concerned by this pro-Macedonian [slav] user's cavalier remarks that appear on the AN/I page and at Macedonia's discussion page.
I fear this is poised to get completely out-of-hand soon, and I was hoping you could help. Many thanks, Friejose 17:41, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Friejose, I'll certainly look into it. Fernando Rizo T/C 18:11, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Many thanks, Friejose 18:35, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to continually be a bother about this, but I think reading the Talk:Macedonian_denar page will make crystal clear what the problem is. I'm afraid that some concerted admin effort and attention is needed here. Yours, Friejose 19:56, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Friejose, I'm actually not going to be around much today, and possibly tomorrow either. I've started reading up on the conflict, but I won't be ready to intercede for a day or two because I'll be busy in RL. If you need immediate help and the AN/I isn't getting you anywhere, let me suggest User:Ryan Delaney, User:Joy Stovall, User:FreplySpang or User:Grutness. No guarantees that they'll have time either, but they are level-headed admins whose opinions I respect greatly. Fernando Rizo T/C 20:05, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Also, if you really want a new and enthusiastic admin like me, try User:Func. Fernando Rizo T/C 20:09, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Whaddya think? Can you help? Should I talk to a couple of these other admins too? Many thanks – Friejose 20:26, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just figured an update was in order as there is a pending/ongoing revert battle at the Macedonia article. Yours, Friejose 15:07, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cash

Why did you delete 'Michael Cash', he is one of my heros...?

Dylan page dispute/mediation

While I am more than willing to participate in mediation on this dispute, I am uncomfortable, given your premature comments regarding my actions on user:Lulu's talk page, with your handling the mediation. I would like you to substantiate your comment regarding my "re-inserting [my] preferred edits with flagrant disregard to community consensus." I do not believe this has occurred. If you review the talk page with regard to the instant dispute, there are two editors -- myself and user:Tixity -- who to one degeree or another object to editor Lulu's characterization of Dylan's "Christian period." There are two editors -- user:Lulu and user: SECproto -- who to one degree or another support that characterization. I do not believe, by any standard, that this constitutes a "community consensus." I am also disturbed by your failure to comment on user: Lulu's repeated violations of the civility and personal abuse guidelines. I may not have been perfectly civil in this dispute, but I do not think there is more than one comment I made which does not center on the substance of the disputed matters. User:Lulu's comments regarding me are consistently dominated by personal abuse. The only point I have insisted on in the dispute with user:Lulu is simply that the article comply with the NPOV guideline, which is "non-negotiable." Monicasdude 20:37, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to accept mediation. However, I have asked that you explain one specific comment you made on user:Lulu's talk page before I accept this particular offer. Monicasdude 20:54, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ethan_Hawkinson

Looks like you got this before. Anon recreated the hoax. Wikibofh 21:07, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

...and again. Wikibofh 03:25, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

wereo

Are you considering deleting the "wereo" entry? I think it merits inclusion. Especially considering it's continued use on usenet.

3RR

I know about the 3RR; if I have violated it please show me so I can revert myself. --SPUI (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cool user page

Just a side comment from all those HELP!!! and WHY??? - you have a very nice user page ;) Renata3 02:47, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

about the sock puppet

I appologize for the actions Paul Klenk is doing. I had a user name that I didnt want so I redirected it to my current one. Now he wont stop adding me as a sock puppet. Imdaking

Citadel

The VFD started August 17, which is over five days ago. Hence, it wasn't closed early. R adiant _>|< 14:08, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Macedionia dispute

Alright I'll take it to his page. But for what it matters, after your intervention I wasn't reverting to the older version, I was writing it up on the fly, so telling me to "stop reverting" doesn't make much sense. I don't see the logic in having to convince that guy in particular that he was wrong, especially when the reason was so evident, however I'll do it for the sake of bureaucracy. Miskin 15:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After seeing that you have blocked User:Miskin, I am perplexed as to why you have taken no concomitant action against the anonymous user who was been particularly virulent in the past few days, reverting and vandalising the Macedonia article up to 20 times on one occasion, despite receiving several written warnings. A fellow editor has reported his extremely disruptive behaviour at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive41#problem_report:_Macedonia. I trust that you are not taking sides in this dispute, which is how the lack of action against him could well be interpreted.--Theathenae 16:36, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bmicomp's Monobook.js

Thanks for the pointer to User:Bmicomp/monobook.js. Very useful. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse aging

Thanks for catching the change to my User page, cheers! — Matt Crypto 17:40, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mini dispute resolution request at Talk:Holocaust denial

Could you look in on the bottom of Talk:Holocaust denial? Bdell555 is looking for some admin other than Jpgordon and Jayjg to confirm that simple admins can't mess with article histories. Thanks. :-) Tomer ^TALK 19:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

3RR on Din

Hey Ryan, I did not violate the 3RR on Din. However, Nickbee's sockpuppet Exmuslim has (he has also logged out and used his anon ip). If you could block him for the 3RR that would be appreciated.Heraclius 20:48, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, I am not a sockpuppet. And that is not my anon IP either. You are being unfair. Please look at the page and Discussion on Din. Nickbee wrote that page, asked for inputs, and has tried to resolve the issue. Heraclius, waltzed in threw out a lot of valid information and you froze the page in that condition. Now you have reverted the page. You really should look at the information and put the page where Nickbee left it and let Heraclius and Nickbee then sort it out. Please take a look at the page itself. I have not violated the 3RR policy.Exmuslim 21:16, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want proof that this guy is a sock of nickbee? Take a look at his first edit:[1]. Now scroll back an edit or two. You'll see that he just reverted to Nickbee's version.Heraclius 21:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is baloney, Heraclius. Look how many people were putting in FFI link at that time. Exmuslim was not the only one. Neither was I. Nickbee 02:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not spill this dispute onto my talk page. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 02:31, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From Paul Klenk

Ryan, now that I am unblocked, I am taking the liberty of communicating with you directly. I sent you three e-mails last night, as I was invited to on the page informing me I was blocked, but I have not heard from you. Rather than rehash everything here, please visit Ed Poor's page, will you, and read what I wrote to him today. Hope to hear from you. Paul Klenk 21:43, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, I'm still waiting for you to respond. You and I have some things to discuss, and I hope you can do it with an open mind. I understand you'll be out for a few days; perhaps you can contact me when you get back to school. Regards. Paul Klenk 07:09, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on Elvis, Nick Adams, Gavin Lambert, etc.

The problem is that there a two users repeatedly deleting additional content I have written. I have frequently cited my sources according to the Wikipedia guidelines. Onefortyone 23:13, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, with all due respect, this has been discussed endlessly and repeatedly... through enough talk pages to make a very long book. 141, against consensus, on a single agenda which involves adding the words homosexual and gay as many times as syntactically possible into Elvis Presley and other articles, is trying to distort Google keyword searches to direct readers to books by David Bret. Most of his citations are of books which have been thoroughly discredited on the talk pages as made-up gossip.

This is a single agenda, disruptive PoV editor who has zero concern about consensus or encyclopedic content.

He seeks out admins who aren't familiar with the articles and who don't have time to read the unbelievably long talk pages to figure out he's been totally discredited. Maybe it's time for an RfA. Wyss 23:21, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wyss, this is your personal biased opinion. My contributions are all based on independent sources. You are frequently disparaging these sources. I have even cited a peer-reviewed source by Professor Wall. I don't understand why you are constantly deleting my contributions. Onefortyone 23:26, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do not spill this debate onto my talk page. Thanks. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 23:26, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the trouble. There is one important point I wish to make: Users Wyss and Ted Wilkes are working together in deleting my contributions. See, for instance, [2] and [3]. Onefortyone 23:36, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, pls see my talk page... thanks :) Wyss 23:27, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Placing users in danger

Ryan, FYI Wikipedia_talk:Blocking_policy#Placing_users_in_danger SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:27, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Paul Klenk

I hate to bother you so late but User:Paul_Klenk has been stalking my articles posting malformed VfD tags on them (he finally did it right after about 3 attempts each) and making snide and mean spirited comments about me in VfD nominations I saw his talk page and saw he's had all kinds of problems being civil before I am a slightly autistic user from Brasil what should I do about this thank youWiki brah

Double votes.

Hi. This is just a quick note to say that you've vote twice on JesseW's admin nomination!

2. Support Mindspillage nominated him, so I support per IRC cabal. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 04:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

19. Support Seems like a level headed fellow --Ryan Delaney ^talk 06:41, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I silly mistake I guess! Stewart Adcock 10:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan article

Hi Ryan. So, will you help us out on the Dylan article, or will start-of-school-year stuff claim you for a while? JDG 19:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]