User talk:Christine118500

HO HO HO!

This user believes in
Santa Claus.

This user puts up a real Christmas tree, not an artificial one.

This user is being held hostage in a fortune cookie factory! Help! Ooooh.. here's a good one! Confucius says you will be held hostage in a fortune cookie factory.

Welcome!

Hello, Christine118500, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

And now a personal message to do with the canned welcome: hello there! I'm not sure if it's policy, but I find that most people put the speedy headers at the top of pages. Just my two cents. :) Thanks and happy editing. --EarthPerson 17:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More flies with honey...

What did you do this for? Just wondering. --EarthPerson 17:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

OK, then! How can I resist such an unseasonal carol? Feel free to add {{adoptee|Bencherlite}} to your userpage (if there's room...) (Are all those userboxes really necessary? Some more experienced editors seem take the view that the weight to be attached to someone's comments is in inverse proportion to the number of userboxes they display!) When you get a chance, let me know on my talk page (a) what you're interested in contributing to Wikipedia and (b) what you'd like to get out of being adopted. We can then have a think about how to get you up to speed as quickly as possible as a valued contributor, and what areas I can help you with. Feel free to ask any other questions you have. Best wishes, Bencherlite 18:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Christine, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed you've just become a recent adoptee of Bencherlite. I hope you gain a lot out of it; I know I did. Please consider me also at your disposal, if you have any pressing queries that Bencherlite isn't available for. I must warn you, though—not everyone may appreciate your songwriting talents as much as we do: many editors prefer to keep their talk pages confined to discussion of Wikipedia. Also, when you do add comments to talk pages, consider placing them under subheadings, which you can do by putting "==" on each side of the title (==Title==). I hope this proves helpful! Best, CA387 15:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be patient!

I'll reply properly later. I want to review your contributions to date and offer my comments, and I can't really do that whilst I'm at work. In the meantime, I strongly suggest that you take CA387's wise advice. "Not leaving random messages on other people's talk pages" is your lesson 1. I'll be back to see you later. Regards, Bencherlite 15:46, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little context in Thaddius Vent

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Thaddius Vent, by CA387, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Thaddius Vent is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Thaddius Vent, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Thaddius Vent itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 15:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review

OK, I'm back home and can look at your edits in a bit more detail now. Thanks for the Wiki Gnome Week message - I had already seen it, but hadn't signed up: I'll probably find something useful to do with categories and call it my contribution. I saw you left the same message for CA387 too, which is good. The only down-side is that your Wiki Gnome Week message tripped the pornography filters of our work's computer system, thus disabling my access to WP! Not your fault at all, don't worry - our system is a little sensitive - but another example of why I can't always reply as soon as I might like.

I'll try and divide this into sections.

Important

Firstly, I'll just note that I've read what you said this in one of your edits: "To be totally honest, I haven't always been a good wikipedian, but I am ready to be a good wikipedian now". I hope you are ready. Looking through the edits you have made, I've been able to click fairly quickly through to users who have been blocked. I don't know if you are the same person as one or more of these blocked users, and I'm not about to ask someone to run a checkuser to find out. I just make the comment that if I can find similarities, others will too, so please don't give them any reason to look. I will take your adoption seriously - as I hope this review shows - and I am assuming that you are acting in good faith in asking me for adoption and that you do want to improve Wikipedia, putting whatever's happened in the past behind you. In return, I ask that you take Wikipedia seriously. This is not a social website like Myspace or a network of online friends: people are here to build an encyclopedia. If you don't want to build an encyclopedia, leave now, please: I have no wish to be associated with problem users. OK, "headmaster chat" over. Onto the critique...

Edit summaries

Big point: remember to use edit summaries as they explain to other editors what you are doing when you make changes to an article or page. Changes to articles without edit summaries risk being deemed "suspicious" by other editors when they see them in their watchlist, and you risk having good changes reverted because they look like vandalism, and risk having editors telling you this over and over again until you get the message. My strong advice is to change your preferences so that you are warned automatically by your computer if you try to make a change without adding an edit summary. To do this, go to "My preferences", then "editing" and tick the bottom box.

So, for example, your four mainspace edits could have had summaries like this:

[1] Kostol sv. Urbana - "tagging article that lacks content/context for speedy deletion"
[2] Oscar's Orchestra - "adding wikilink" (and mark it as a minor edit)
[3] Thaddius Vent - "new article about a TV show character"
[4] Thaddius Vent - "hang on, reasons to follow on talk page"

Also, leaving meaningless edit summaries or section titles, as you did on my talk page of all places here, won't win you any friends. Don't do it again, please.

Mainspace edits

Edit No.1 was fine; the article has improved since you left the tag, but you did the right thing in tagging it. Don't be too quick, though: sometimes people are working on pages and press "save" instead of "preview", for example, so don't be afraid to leave it and check back in 15 minutes to see what's happening. If you leave a tag, though, you ought to warn the author of the article that you have left the tag.
Fine
The article is very short - is there nothing else to be said? If not, Thaddius probably doesn't deserve his own page. I've suggested merging the information into the main article on Oscar's Orchestra and leaving the page as a redirect, and two other editors have agreed with me. Don't be disheartened if this happens.
If you add a "hang-on" to a page, you must then explain on the talk page why you think the article shouldn't be deleted speedily. Do not just add "hang on" then leave it at that.

At the moment, your ratio of mainspace edits to (e.g.) userboxes on your user page is very poor. I'd suggest you make some positive contributions to the encyclopedia, rather than adding anymore userboxes. Userboxes are nice, but one can easily have too much of a good thing.

User / User talk edits

As I said earlier, avoid leaving random comments on people's talk pages, as you did earlier to CA387 - particularly if you're trying to live down your past.
Whilst being enthusiatic about Wiki Gnome Week is all very well, inviting Jimbo Wales to participate is, well, unrealistic and borders on being immature. Talk pages are for a purpose, not for general chit-chat.
Be polite: signing off "Bye, nerd" as you did here is not good.
I'm very puzzled as to some of your vandalism etc warnings: if you leave a warning message, always include the name of the article you are warning the user about editing/creating etc, otherwise it makes no sense later e.g. this warning should have had an article name in it. In general, do not issue a warning unless you are the person who reverted the vandalism, otherwise it gets confusing.
For a full list of warning messages templates, see WP:WARN. Always use the most appropriate one.
Remember to use {{subst:warning template|article name}}.

General

I'm very pleased that you're making some good steps: having a go at creating an article, warning vandals, and so on. With time, practice, and patience, I'm sure you'll be a useful Wikipedian, as long as you resist any temptations you may have to misbehave! I suggest that you have a think about these points and ask me any questions that you want. Then we can think about what your next steps should be, and how I can help you.

I'll keep in touch as best as I can, but weekends are not always great for family reasons, and sometimes work does have to take priority when I'm at work! I'm sure you understand. With best wishes, Bencherlite 20:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your page

Hello Mr. 118500, and thank you for signing my page. However I see you have copied the box onto your page, and while I usually don't mind anyone copying the general layout of my page copying a specific box that I have made for it can be seen as parroting other users. Is it OK if I remove it myself or would you rather? — $PЯINGrαgђ 04:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but if you keep it in the way it is now it will look identical with my page, which doesn't go over too well with most users. Could you at least chane the format so it looks like your own? ;) — $PЯINGrαgђ 16:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well one of my friends, User:Phaedriel is very good at changing and re-making format, and so if you just go and talk to her she will be more than happy to re do as much of your page as you like her to. — $PЯINGrαgђ 16:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Politics

OK, I'll keep an eye on what you're doing and I'll be back in touch after the weekend. As for your request to send you stuff on the Likud party, that's not what adoption is for. I don't know anything in particular about the party: if you want information, I'm afraid you'll have to get it yourself! Regards, Bencherlite 08:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the wikismile

And for keeping wikipedia a great place to be! --Android Mouse 22:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like a bot to do for you? --Android Mouse 16:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-vandal bots are normally not approved because of the false positives they cause. Plus it is difficult for the bot to distinguish such edits from legitimate spelling corrections. --Android Mouse 17:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watching your edits

This message you left on a talk page was immature and uncivil. It followed your unnecessary and show-off talk page edit here - yes, we know you added information, as we can see it in the history of the page - you don't need to tell the world through the talk page. It would have helped, of course, if you had used an edit summary for your addition of material here. You were then asked a perfectly sensible question, but you replied inappropriately and with no recognition of the principles of Wikipedia, one of the most important being the need for sources. Sigh... are you listening to anything I say? Or shall I waste my expensive time on someone else instead? Think hard. Do you really think that your behaviour at present is suitable for someone who wants to become an admin in due course? Bencherlite 14:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I will keep "nagging you" if I think that you aren't behaving appropriately, as you will only annoy other people if you're silly - people have long memories here and will be likely to remember "bad behaviour" if it comes to you standing at WP:RFA. The easiest way to get me off your back is not to do it in future! Anyway, well done for the apology you left on Chriswiki's talk page - that was a nice touch.

As I asked right at the start of this, "When you get a chance, let me know on my talk page (a) what you're interested in contributing to Wikipedia and (b) what you'd like to get out of being adopted. We can then have a think about how to get you up to speed as quickly as possible as a valued contributor, and what areas I can help you with." Saying "teach me" isn't terribly helpful - teach you what? You know the very basics: creating an article, changing an article, leaving messages for people, etc. Have you got specific questions that you want answering? If not, I suggest you go and read through all the pages mentioned in the "Welcome" message at the top of the page.

Alternatively, if you've done that, I have three "learning by doing suggestions":

Why not look up material on the internet for that article on Òscar Ribas Reig that you started. It was a good idea to start this article and well done for it. However, it's very short and you must be able to find something else to add, surely. Also, what categories should he be in? How should the page be set out? Should there be an infobox? Should there be a succession box? I'm not going to write the article for you, but these are some questions you need to think about. Have a go, using the Manual of Style and other similar articles such as Marc Forné Molné for comparison and inspiration. Also, follow the missing steps at set out here for you. I'll have a look at the article when you're happier with it.
If that doesn't appeal, why not go and help out assessing articles Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment/Assessment Drive? It'll be a good education in what articles should include, plus for 200 articles assessed you'll be awarded a Wiki-Cookie, 1000 articles will get you a barnstar.
Or, something that might appeal to your political stance, go to Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links, read the instructions and sort out #417 on the list (President Bush) - there are 110 articles that say "President Bush" without being clear which President Bush they mean! Go fix!! Let me know if you need a helping hand in getting started.

Best wishes, and I do mean that, Bencherlite 17:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

concern versus warning

You may or may not be aware that there is an indefinitely blocked user with a similar name as yours. [[5]]. Both his user name (he is male) and yours is similar as well as both editors being male whilst using a female name. This could cause confusion and cause people to accuse you of being a sockpuppet.

If you are a sockpuppet, you should become familiar with the sockpuppet policy, which prohibits many forms of socks. See WP:SOCK.

Since you have an adopter, I would recommend discussing this situation with your adopter. VK35 17:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Morning, Christine. I have posted a message asking for advice/information at WT:SSP. My own view is that you should be allowed to contribute positively under a new name, rather than being forever banished from WP for your past misdeeds. My strong suggestion is that you very quickly show how good you can be, just to help others see you want to contribute positively: fix as many of those disambiguation links for President Bush as you can, for example. I'll do what I can to help if things turn nasty. Bencherlite 07:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But if you're going to make dab corrections you have to be careful that you do them correctly. Clear Channel was wrong. Tvoz |talk 13:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about Oscar's Orchestra, so can't say, and you haven't made any edits to Marc Forne Molne. As for the page you created for Oscar Ribas Reig, I made a few changes, but it is really very much of a stub and unless you plan to expand it in a major way I'd say it will be appropriate to merge it with Andorra rather than keeping it as a separate article. When you set up a page it's best to do more research and writing before actually posting it, when it is as thin as this one is. Tvoz |talk 16:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't. And just being a former PM does not necessarily make him notable enough to warrant a page. Seems like just a few sentences in the Andorra article would do - we don't have articles on all PMs of England even. Tvoz |talk 16:16, 16 June 2007 (UTC) Ok, I see we do - still question the notability of this one. Tvoz |talk 17:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You made your point - try focusing your energies a bit. Tvoz |talk 17:24, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elections

Hello,

Thanks a lot for your support. Yann 19:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, You might want to support me: m:Board_elections/2007/Endorsements/en#Yann. Thanks, Yann 11:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to User talk:Chriswiki, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — $PЯINGrαgђ 21:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A word to the wise

After discussions with a previously-involved admin, it would seem that you're not going to be blocked as long as you behave yourself this time round. So carry on editing to your heart's content, but remember to be extra-careful about what you do, particularly in your comments on other people's talk pages, which seems to have been a particular problem for you in the past. Good luck! Let me know what I can help you with. Yours, Bencherlite 13:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

You told me to leave you a message. Hello Christine, how is the wiki break going?

Mas11112 09:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism November 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Alias (TV series), are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Tvoz |talk 23:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense pages

Please refrain from creating inappropriate pages such as Shanapase. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unadoption

I am no longer prepared to be your adopter given your behaviour. Please read WP:CIVIL before you think about approaching another potential adopter. There is no point in asking me to change my mind. Regards, Bencherlite ^Talk 17:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi... i dont mean to step in, but being in a similar situation myself, I sympathise. I, like I can see that you have, have tried very hard to contribute to wikipedia. Sometimes, I have noticed that some of the more experienced editors may be slightly hypocritical towards the newcomers... I have recently encountered a lot of this. Try not to take it too personally, just better yourself as a wikipedian so that when you take their place, you wont make the same mistakes as they have. Thanks Iamandrewrice 10:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck (Y)
and here is where you can find lots of other adoptors... Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters... hope you find one that is more benefitial to you this time. Every newcomer counts
... ;)
Iamandrewrice 11:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to point out to you that users are not allowed to edit other users' talk pages without their permissions. It seems lyk your adopter deleted the userbox from your userpage regarding his position of adoption. Although he may have been withdrawing his services, he is not allowed to have edited your user page, unless you did actually give him permission to go edit your page and delete the userbox. Just thought id let you know... we dont want those more experienced on wikipedia abusing their positions.
Iamandrewrice 14:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Careful, now, Iamandrewrice. An accusation that I have "abused [my] position" is not accurate or helpful. WP:USER does not contain a blanket ban on others editing user pages and I did not need permission from Christine118500 in order to remove the userbox. Regards to you both, coupled with a strong suggestion that you get back to editing the encyclopedia! Bencherlite ^Talk 16:02, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"la de da monsieur carrotte?!!!! hahaha that made me lol"... but yeah.. be civil ;p
lol Iamandrewrice 20:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Thanks for the message but I don't have the time to help at present. Cordless Larry 14:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about my still be listed as willing to adopt people. I'd removed the category from my user page but had forgotten that there was also a list that I needed to remove myself from. Cordless Larry 16:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for being an obvious sockpuppet of Iamandrewrice (talk · contribs). If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

— Coren ^(talk) 15:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Christine118500 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I swear, I am NOT a sock of Iamandrewrice. There is no evidence I am, and I swear to God, I'm not. Iamandrewrice has just been a very good friend to me. I didn't know him until about two wekks ago.Christine118500 17:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Please read WP:SOCK. A meatpuppet is treated exactly the same as a sockpuppet. With that in mind, please read WP:SOCK and if you believe you have still not violated this policy, please redo your unblock request. Other admins, please note that this decline does not count toward the maximum two reviews. — Yamla 17:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Christine118500 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm not a meat puppet. I have nothing else to say on the matter. Wiki can block me if they want, but if they do, that is unfair and unprofessional.

Decline reason:

Fairly clear abuse of WP:SOCK. — Yamla 19:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Just a follow-up. Do you currently possess other accounts or have you used other accounts in the past? Not all would necessarily be in violation of WP:SOCK, of course. --Yamla 17:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have edited wiki on other accounts. You can ask Bencherlite this if you want to.Christine118500 17:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Here you admit to using sockpuppets in the past. Here you boldly proclaim that you will get elected to Admin eventually, and I will never EVER stop working hard and will create as many accounts to get into a good WikiJob. Announcing that you will continue to create new account every time you get caught doesn't bode well. IrishGuy ^talk 18:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

friendship

I am Chrstine's friend, we go to school together, and i no she is NOT a sock, meat or anything else puppet. Please release her.Blackhouse123 18:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cant believe you are blocking me when i am not a wikicriminal. Still, now I no you get punished for being a close friend to another wiki user, and i can't work in that environment. Please unblock me. Please.Christine118500 18:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blackhouse; nice try with the lie—Christine on his own user page said he was a guy. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 20:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

unblock me, please.Christine118500 13:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christine118500 18:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Christine118500 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I swear to god, im NOT a sock or meat of Iamandrewrice. Don't block me, it's not fair. I am NOT a puppet. PLEASE unblock me, this is a terrible thing. unblock me, please. please. PLEASE> Give me one more chance, i beg you all. i like wiki, don't ban me, please. i promise ill be good.

Decline reason:

Sorry, but the evidence points toward the likelihood of sockpuppetry — Avec nat...Wikipédia Prends Des Forces. 18:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

We know you are a sockpuppet. --Yamla 18:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:UBX/World

User:UBX/World, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:UBX/World and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:UBX/World during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. benzband (talk) 12:56, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]