Welcome to EnglishRose's talk page.

Talk Archives: Archive 1

20 December 2005 to 22 May 2007

Welcome

Hello, Englishrose/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! JoaoRicardo^talk 21:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

welcome

Hello there you newie! Thanks for your comments at aladin. Like you I haven't contributed to the page but have found the deletion move a trifle suspect. I have told a couple of Admins too. You should reply to me at my discussion pages btw! If you need. ;o) Autumnleaf 02:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC) I think we have some way to go yet on saving this article - so contribute away. Autumnleaf 23:54, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aladin

Hi Englishrose, thank you for your engaged discussion about Aladin. If you change your mind about this subject matter, and you may at any time of course, I'd be very glad to see it inside the discussion. All the best, Peter S. 00:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Home and Away

Hi, you have voted in the afd for various Home&Away character articles. I have had a go at combining all the articles in a single article (which I admit still needs a lot of work). You can find it at Current Home and Away characters. I suggest we keep this article are either delete or re-direct the others. What do you think? I made some comments on the page itself to say why I think one article is better suited than individual ones. Thanks, Evil Eye 13:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you again, but I'm just wanting to query the episode arrival number for Amanda Vale you put on Current Home and Away characters. I think you added it as 3394 but I think this could be a typo as as far as I'm aware she has only just arrived in the programme, so would have arrived in the high 3000's. Evil Eye 14:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dystopia: AfD discussion

Thank you for informing me of the discussion for the deletion of the Dystopia entry. I'm glad to know, as both a player of the mod and a contributor. I haven't commented myself as I feel enough has been said and I can't add any more (and they seem to be doing well anyway). I'm confident it'll remain up.

As a Canadian, I have often rebelled against American English. Just wanted to say. Also, feel free to edit that header if it seems a little awkward. --Tssha 10:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, turns out I had something to contribute to the discussion after all. Also, I have modified the header and personally feel it is better. Hope you agree. --Tssha 12:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aladin

There was no consensus on the debate, which is a default keep. I don't blame anyone who redirected it, though, especially as AfDs are not binding when it comes to redirects. Johnleemk | Talk 14:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Jaworski

Hi, we seem to be reverting the hangon tag. I think it should be left there as the page is still appeading on Wikipedia:Speedy deletions. If the tags removed from the article, then when an admin comes round to do the deletion after reading AFD where it is still listed he will not notice thats its being contested. I'm fairly new to this but just beacuase the tags not in the page does not mean it will not be deleted. Posible to also remove a tag while discussion in progress. --Salix alba (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope I take that back. --Salix alba (talk) 16:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibooks

Hey, have you tried wikibooks yet? I've started up on that last night and for some reason actually had something worthwhile to edit... The Runescape section there is rather sketched almost skeleton like and far from NPOV in some areas. Just thought I'd drop you a line and suggest you might like to try that site out, particulary if you want to do some editing on how to play the game! =p Or just to help me out =p Give us a bell and let me know, I'll be around on MSN anyway. --RBlowes 16:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Autobio?

Are you aladin? Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. You said there was a WP:AUTO problem. I'm trying to figure out why someone who appears to support the article in it's current state said there was a WP:AUTO problem. I'm thoroughly confused by the whole thing, except that it's reasonably clear to me that there's SOMETHING wrong here. Hipocrite - «Talk» 22:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. Ok, makes sense (You forgot "no"). I see no problem with there being an article on the guy as long as it's V, NPOV, NOR, AUTO compliant. Allow me to give you one piece of advice, however. Let me phrase it strongly, because it's really getting in the way of my ability to WP:AGF]

STOP SAYING 19 PEOPLE VOTED KEEP. I am a charter member of the inclusionist cabal - and as soon as I figure out if this article is real, my vote will refect that. However, the vast majority of those 19 people voted keep on an article that should have been SPEEDY DELETED AS PATENT NONSENSE, or voted to REDIRECT the article as a mispelling of something else, or are sockpuppets of someone, I think. Hipocrite - «Talk» 22:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

aladin

Please join Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for unprotection. Mukadderat 02:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think we're on the same side here, so I wanted to introduce myself. Perhaps we can watch each other's back. :) For example, I'm trying to figure out the best way to deal with DreamGuy's personal attacks at Talk:Eenasul Fateh. Also, may I suggest that you reconsider using the term "bloody idiot" at the AfD? Regardless of whether or not it's accurate, it may weaken your other arguments. ;) Thanks, Elonka 07:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you tweaked the page. May I also suggest toning down "grow up"? Also, regarding DreamGuy's attacks, I think it will actually turn out to be to the advantage of the article's longeveity. By making personal attacks on anyone, he has weakened his own voice. Elonka 07:52, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. By the way, do you have a copy of the Times article that you could send to me? I'd like to read it for myself. I could also provide a mirror on my website so that others could read it. Elonka 08:02, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DreamGuy

Thanks for the moral support. :) Could you please give some references to the other comments that have been deleted without response from his talk page? They help to make a case of being uncivil. Elonka 11:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, just letting you know that I am trying to collate all the recent complaints onto one page, here: User:Elonka/DreamGuy dispute. If you would like, feel free to add a section to it, with attempts that you have made to resolve things with DreamGuy? You can see how I've formatted it, linking to places in his page history to show what I posted, and how he responded. If you have any doubt on whether or not a particular message is worth including, please let me know, or add it to the discussion page and we can take a look at it together. Elonka 18:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye out - looks like he's trying to sneak back under the radar. --Centauri 04:43, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Football and Turk vandalism

This is almost as silly as the Nicola Tesla-philes. Is there a way to prevent this vandalism on the football pages? John wesley 15:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Message against Khoikhoi's adminship

Hi, Englishrose. I've just seen your comment on Khoikhoi's RFA page about the Turkish advertisement by an anonymous account for voting against Khoikhoi's adminship. I am one of those who received this message and I just wanted to let you know that this message (its style and the fact that it is sent anonymously) is in fact very disturbing to me too. My vote on the page is solely based on my observations and is not connected to that message in any way. Atilim Gunes Baydin 00:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hey Englishrose, I'd really like thank you for taking the time to vote at my RfA. I withdrew due to certain controversies, but I appreciated your vote and hope to see you here in the future. Thanks again. --Khoikhoi 05:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I'm almost positive that the anon who sent all those messages (roughly 100) is a sock of User:Metb82. Check the contributions of the IPs before his/her spamming campaign - they're mostly related to the Turkish Riviera, a subject that Metb82 mostly writes about. Just thought you should know. --Khoikhoi 05:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks. This is one of his recent edits as well. Anyways, nice talking to ya. --Khoikhoi 02:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of shock sites

Someone has put this up for deletion yet again. Care to cast your vote? Skinmeister 10:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Liverpool_5_times vandalism

Hey, thanks for the message on my talk page. I'm not sure why I bore the brunt of that particular vandal's ire, but hey stuff happens, right? Some kind admins were quick off the mark and quickly restored the moves to my user page, so no real harm done. All the best, Gwernol 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

query

Northwich_Victoria_F.C. Could you check this page, I don't believe the picture is appropriate but unsure of the actual rules regarding pictures in articles.--Vindicta 10:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Kidd

Thanks for telling me that you've put Jack Kidd up for deletion. I was vaguely hopeful that it might be salvagable, but it was going nowhere. Thanks again for your politeness. :) RandyWang (^raves/_rants) 05:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. Tonywalton | Talk 07:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DreamGuy

Thanks for your comments concerning the above editor. You might be interested to note that he now appears to be using a sockpuppet to subvert the 3RR. I have posted evidence here. The result should prove illuminating. He also appears to be the subject of an open RfC dating back to 2004 which you might care to contribute to if you think it might be beneficial to reigning him in. --Centauri 08:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for providing that information. Very interesting indeed. If he thinks he's going to get away with any sort of bullying or intimidation crap with me he's picked the wrong guy. Abusers of his sort usually fold pretty quickly once someone calls their bluff. --Centauri 23:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I'm a bit busy over the next few days, but I'll try to follow your advice by the weekend. --Centauri 11:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that Victrix tried to remove your warning, so I restored it and updated the link to the checkuser case. I've now also posted a notice concerning this matter on the Admin Noticeboard. Thanks for your help. --Centauri 03:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contribution. I notice he's tried to remove the warning again, accompanied by a typically hysterical edit summary - just more hot air, of course. You might want to keep an eye on that - he obviously doesn't want people to see the evidence. --Centauri 12:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I thought it was a rather amusing comment :-) It's certainly interesting to see a high level abuser getting his knickers in a knot after being caught red-handed. --Centauri 10:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's just a short-term victory though. The long-term effort, as I see it, is to ensure that action is actively taken against those who persistently abuse new users, by either locking them out of Wikipedia, or at least posting clear warnings on their talk pages. But to those in power who are watching this situation, my guess is that they haven't really dug in to see who's in the right or who's in the wrong -- they're just looking at a couple of users who are calling each other names, and appear (to a casual glance) to be identically in the wrong. So in order to have complaints actually be treated seriously, it is essential that the victims be above reproach, treat the situation with civility, and lay out a very clear documented case about what the problem is, so that a harried admin can see the problem. But as soon as the victims resort to name-calling or taunting (even if it's justified), the powers-that-be lose sympathy. They've just got too many other easier and clear-cut cases calling their attention, to want to dig into the ambiguous ones. For example, try reading all the threads on a typical day of WP:ANI from top to bottom, with the mindset that you're an admin reading each complaint and having to make a quick decision on what to do. I think you'll rapidly see that the situations are murky, and it's often hard to tell which users are the truly wronged parties (especially when there are allies of the abuser who are popping in and muddying the waters). I'm also willing to bet that there are further political reasons that DreamGuy/Victrix gets protected, like that he plays a "guard-dog" role on some article(s) somewhere that certain admins believe need vicious protection, and so they're reluctant to muzzle their protector, even if the dog is obviously biting innocent bystanders. That's just a guess on my part though... I'm still trying to puzzle this whole thing out. --Elonka 17:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Due to his location, behavioural similarities and the suspicious level of inaction from admins I'm beginning to suspect that DreamGuy / Victrix may in fact be someone I've encountered before - although I want to get buy-in from some others about this before saying any more. If my suspicions prove to be well-founded I think we'll find that the problem disappears very quickly indeed. --Centauri 02:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Affirmative. You're thinking what I'm thinking. --Centauri 07:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it would just be easier to let Jimbo know? --Centauri 09:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to have decided that the temperature in the kitchen was getting a little too hot to handle. Then again, he could just have crawled back to his lair to cook up another sock or three to unleash on Wikipedia later. Either way I propose to remain vigilant but let sleeping socks lie - unless he starts getting up to his old (Vic)trix again. --Centauri 03:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't really had time to put anything together for Jimbo. However I did discuss it with another editor who agrees that they're the same, and who's said he'll likely raise it with him. You might also want to note this - seems to be some sort of attempt at a defense by someone claiming to be an alien abductee, of all things. This just gets stranger and stranger! --Centauri 02:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm amazed you're still going on about this snafu. =) Kudos to you for sticking with it, keep me posted I like this stuff. RBlowes 18:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just stumbled across this: Reichenbach. Seem familiar? --Centauri 09:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dreamguy is back, trying to delete the sockpuppet warning from hisuser page again. --Centauri 01:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dreamguy is trying it on again with the warning removal thing - and this time he has a friend helping him. --Centauri 23:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for Page Protection

Just a heads up, but new requests should be made at the top of the page, not at the bottom. It's no big deal, and I've moved it for you. -- Steel 19:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing style

Yes, I was thinking the exact same thing. The long edit summaries, the accusations of harassment, and even the name-calling (like referring to me as a longtime problem user). However, if he did come back, it's interesting that he'd be focusing his attention on me and the BinRev people/articles, and not on his other pet projects like Jack the Ripper. So I'm not sure what to think about that part. --Elonka 09:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a troll who has come back from the dead, please email me or post the details regarding this on WP:ANI. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E-Fed Wiki

There's two e-fed wikis now, what does one do? Thanks. Englishrose 17:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which would you trust, one at Wikia or one at www.scaredofpoo.com? --EazieCheeze 19:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War Avoidance

Generally, I'm more of a diplomat and/or a politician than anything else, I tried to criticise using the least possible cliches I can, I try not to offend anyone, and I attempt to talk more with a professional tone, whilst trying to defend my reputation. I don't like to instigate flames, edit wars (one time I've got into an edit war with Madchester), and sometimes there are people that people don't like, so I have to keep my eye on it. Now sometimes I could lose my mind and type down a couple of cliches like "tralala", but I always try to criticize people in a civil and professional manner, though like I said, I might lose my mind at times that I tend to use colloquial and/or cliche words. I usually try not to start a discussion and I always try to keep a low profile, but there are some people who are going to go way over the line and I try to resolve things through a professional manner. Now I could chit-chat and debate, over and over again until someone gets my point, but it's kind of useless to me in your case. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 03:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of persecuted Turkish writers

The article wasn't deleted, as you may or may not have heard elsewhere, so I'm canvassing opinions for what to rename it to/merge it to on its relevant talk page. All reasonable suggestions will be entertained. BigHaz 10:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance

Hi there. I'm wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look at Bell Witch. I'm having some difficulties with an editor who is trying to remove and/or aggressively devalue the only known skeptical analysis of this supposed "paranormal" phenomenon; basically it's a not-very-subtle attempt at insidious vandalism. A reasoned external opinion would be valued at this point. --Centauri 12:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hiya, could you please remind me of your email? I have some information about Fateh that I'd like to forward to you. --Elonka 23:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Boyd

Hi, English Rose I put Adam Boyd up for GAC yesterday (17th Sep) because I thought your work on it made it reach GA standard to match to the Marc Pugh article. Kingjamie 16:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't pass mate see talk page Kingjamie 15:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I trying to fix these problems so can you help me please as you probably know more about him than I do. Kingjamie 15:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have Re-Nominated it because I think we have addressed all the problems on the talk page Kingjamie 12:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you added the photo to the Adam Boyd article (albeit that it was some time ago), and following that example I have recently used a similar Fair Use Rationale to upload a photo for the Bob Taylor (footballer) article. I'd like to add a lot more images of other players from football DVDs, using the same rationale, but I'm nervous about doing so in case they all get deleted. As Adam Boyd reached Good Article status, I guess the use of the image in that way should be fine, but I still have some nagging doubts, given that all other football photos seem to be free images, where fans have taken the picture of the player themselves. The copyright on images seems such a legal minefield, and it's probably the one aspect of Wikipedia that I still can't really get my head around. Basically I'd just like to get an idea from you on how confident you are that such fair use images won't be removed, and also whether you have had any positive or negative feedback on the use of the Adam Boyd image. Also if you know of any other examples of articles where reduced quality DVD screenshots have been used. Thanks for taking the time to read this, it is much appreciated. --Jameboy 21:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandals

Thanks, I appreciate it. :) And yes, I'm pretty sure that it's all related, and that it actually originated with something really trivial, during a routine AWB sweep. While working through Special:Uncategorizedpages, I ran across the Angus Macdonald disambiguation page, which needed some cleanup, so I reorganized it a bit.[1] As part of that, I deleted some red links, one of which was for an Angus Lett Macdonald (a link which was rapidly re-added a few hours later)[2]. My guess is that "Harangus" is this individual, and he took the deletion personally, and has been nominating my article and other family articles (Stanley Dunin and Elsie Ivancich Dunin) in retaliation. I've tried reaching out to him at User_talk:Harangus and assuring him that it was nothing personal, but he's been coming in with a series of anon accounts and continuing the wiki-rage campaign. I've been debating on whether to submit a formal sockpuppet check, but I'm actually trying to stay out of it as much as possible, per WP:AUTO. If you'd like to do anything further with it though, here's what it's looking like so far. --Elonka 22:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elonka

I emailed Elonka and discussed my impressions on the articles captioned. My IP is 68.14.0.254. My efforts did not constitute vandalism, rather they were articulated in the comments section. I have nothing to do with any other activity on her articles.

Harangus

Aside from 68.14.0.254 (talk · contribs), Harangus is also obviously 68.230.134.55 (talk · contribs), as can easily be told by the contribution history (for example, editing the Angus Macdonald article). As for the others, yes, it's possible that they're someone else with a grudge, since I also (successfully) nominated another article for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Alan Johnson) which seems to have had a vengeful fanbase. I will email Harangus and discuss the matter, and try to bring him back from the dark side. ;) --Elonka 01:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the check. My guess is that Harangus is 68.14.0.254 and 68.230.134.55, and that the others are related to Johnyajohn. When they did the CheckUser, my guess is that they rejected it because of the multiples. In any case, Johnyajohn seems to have stopped, so it's probably not an issue anymore. As for Harangus, though he's still sending me emails vehemently protesting the unfairness that I have a bio and he doesn't, he doesn't seem to be attacking articles anymore, so that's good too. Judging from his editing history, he has two purposes on Wikipedia: (1) to promote himself and his company; and (2) to attack articles related to me. I recommend setting a watch on Angus Macdonald and Venture Technology Merchants, LLC (which is probably worth nominating for deletion under WP:CORP, but I'll let someone else make that call at this point). Thanks for the help, Elonka 19:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one for the list: 81.1.78.14 (talk · contribs). I'm guessing that this one is connected to Johnyajohn (talk · contribs), because there seems to be some timing correlation between when I edit the Antonia Bennett article, and when my own bio gets vandalized. ;) The Bennett article was recently deleted by Wikipedia staff (Danny, interestingly enough), but it appears to be back now. I've tried to actually help with it, but my guess is it's just going to get deleted again, so I guess I should brace for more vandalism. ;) Thanks again for the help, Elonka 09:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neale Cooper

Hey. Is there a particular reason why you don't want to list his Place of Birth? I assumed it was pretty much standard for a biography - just about every other footy-bio I've seen has it either attached to the DoB or in the 1st line of the 2nd paragraph. I'll assume there is, but surely you could assume good faith in my edit rather than label it vandalism - after all, the soccerbase link contains exactly the same details. Caledonian Place 08:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Englishrose. I guess its part of the colonial legacy. It seems Cooper himself was quite reluctant to accept his Indian birth, and liked to imply that "Darjeeling was a little fishing village just outside Peterhead" [3] Caledonian Place 01:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Football hooliganism

The current version of the section on Turkey is basically what I put on the galatasaray page, I however do not have a view on Galatasaray, but on the turkish people that were there to cause trouble with the leeds fans, i.e. the guy that killed Chris and Kevin. I simply added the information as i felt there should be some information in several places on Wikipedia as people should not die for football. --Chappy84 17:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

trouble is, even though it's associated with Galatasaray, because the guy that actually stabbed Chris and Kevin was a besiktas fan, galatasaray fans refuse to accept that it has any kind of connection to their club, even though the leeds fans were there purely to see leeds play galatasaray, and they're adamant on that. They also think i'm adding it out of Islamaphobia, which i'm definately not. Waya5 seems particuarly adamant on this, as well as that the whole of england is full of skinhead football hooligans, and he is going to visit the Galatasaray page far more often than me so i left the choice up to other people as to whether the information was added to the page or not, i really feel that the information should be on the galatasaray page but I can't keep the information there. --Chappy84 18:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Football Hooliganism

Thanks for the heads-up. I can see why they wanted to remove the section as there was alot of emotive language in there, so it didn't read as an encyclopaedia should. I've reinstated the section, but made some edits at the same time to give it a more neutral point of view. Issues like this need to be handled tactfully and in good faith; it looks to me like this approach was equally missing from both parties. Finally discussion should take place on the talk page, not in the edit summaries! Cheers, Waggers 14:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe you banned me but you didn't ban that English user for doing exactly that. Being from there yourself, your impartiality is questionable. Please find a single document written by UEFA suggesting that Galatasaray club members or supporters were involved. Also, that section is ridiculous; it is full of errors and purposely leaves out information such as Hakan Sukur being hit with a projectile in the leg at Elland Road and the racist chanting during the match. It ignores the Galatasaray team bus being stoned while going through an underpass. It ignores the attacks on British citizens of Turkish and Muslim origin during the time of the semifinal. It ignores that Emre Belozoglu was also sent off in the second leg of the semifinal near the same exact time as Harry Kewell. They are trying to make it appear as though the referee was the reason their club lost (amazing how some people can be sore about a result after 5 years) when in fact a Galatasaray player was sent off also; in any case, I have both matches on tape and Leed United (despite finishing third in England that year) were barely in the match and were surprisingly light on the ball; if they want to blame somebody for them losing the match it should be themselves as Galatasaray dominated both legs. Basically, they're trying to suggest that Turks are evil, that their clubs shouldn't play in UEFA, that the Leeds United organization is a shining example of decency (LOL); amazing, this club Leeds is the same that threatened the Busby Babes with death during their time playing. This is the same club whose players were involved in the beating of a Muslim Asian student (Lee Bowyer and Jonathan Woodgate; Lee Bowyer settled out of court: big surprise) in Leeds. Please read what I have written in the Galatasaray talk page. There is much much more.Waya 523:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite of Turkey section

I've made some minor changes, but overall in terms of the tone, content and referencing I think you've done a marvellous job. You've clearly worked hard on this and I think the result is a well-balanced and fair account of football hooliganism in Turkey.

User:Waya 5 has made no such efforts to ensure the article is balanced, has several times refused to engage in discussion to improve the article, continues to engage in revert/edit wars and continues to throw groundless accusations at anyone else who edits the article. I think we should proceed with your suggested changes, and refer any more of this behaviour from User:Waya 5 to the arbitration committee. They have the power to ban him from editing particular articles, and sadly it's looking like that's the only way to achieve a neutral point of view in this article. Waggers 09:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. By the way, I've had another look at WP:DR as although I'll try to mediate when I can, I'm a bit short of time for editing Wikipedia at the moment and I think User:Waya 5 perceives me (and you) as biassed. So I've made a [[4]] for a completely fresh mediator to step in and examine the situation. Waggers 09:22, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still going?

Thought I'd drop you a line, I notice you seem to be interested in the whole football/hooliganism scenario, you may want to reference; Galatasary Vs Manchester United (1990's) and pick up that copy of yesterday's newspaper over the Portugal/England hooligan scene, if no one has beaten you to it. But really I'm just here to say hello again =p RBlowes 23:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-I'm sure they do, over there the police join in if you didn't know... =) RBlowes 17:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Good to see you used all the information I researched for you in the pages we've been discussing, let me know if I can help again in the future. Also, would you drop by sometime and give me a line on the method of editing (again) the VH2 page that I linked you to the other night, as that really should have been written up by now but I'm kind of unsure how to go about it having been out of the loop since the whole DG fiasco. Regards! RBlowes 00:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, I saw your vote to keep the article, Lee Crompton. I have investigated his authorship and found a few facts that I think may convince you to reconsider your vote. Would you please check at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Crompton and consider adding a further comment? Rosejpalmer 18:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DreamGuy

Thanks for your well stated reply. I understand your position; DreamGuy has butted heads with a lot of other editors, and it is "likely" he used a sockpuppet, according to the CheckUser. But my opinion that the template should come off still stands, for the above reasons. I'm not the only one who thinks so, as it has been removed by an admin now. As for the Wik thing, I think Gene's posting that accusation out of nowhere on someone's RFA reflects more poorly on him than on DreamGuy.--Cúchullain ^t/c 02:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Butted heads? That's like saying the Second World War was a minor skirmish. Regularly calling other editors "fucked up", "psychotic" and a range of other profanities, accusing everyone who dares to disagree with him of "harrassing" him (while simulataneously abusing them himself) - and then suddenly re-appearing months after being caught out for using sockpuppets while promoting some half-baked tale of being "impersonated" by the people he was harrassing (!) is precisely the reason we have warnings. He's obviously not changed in the period of his absence, so I see no reason not to warn people of what they should expect. --Centauri 05:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing the situation I removed the sockpuppet template. The information does not pertain to an ongoing sockpuppet issue with this user. A sockpuppet template is meant to inform the reader that edits made by more than one account were made by one user. When the need to alert others to the specific facts of the situation passes, then the template can be removed. There is no reason to permanently label an user. FYI, DreamGuy taking a wikibreak was a reasonable response to the problem and should be applauded. Upon his return from his break, the old issues need to be treated like old issues and not reintroduced to harass him. Take care, FloNight 10:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[5] Glad we are on the same page. :-) FloNight 11:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muchas gracias

Hey Englishrose, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoi khoi 04:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Send me an email

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka

Thank you very much for your support in my RfA. Unfortunately consensus was not reached, and the nomination was not successful. I do however appreciate your comments, am still in support of the Wikipedia project, and will continue to contribute without interruption. Thanks again! --Elonka 09:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks!

My brand-spankin' new mop!

My RfA done
I hope to wield my mop well
(Her name is Vera)

I appreciate
The support you have shown me
(I hope I don't suck)

Anyway, I just
wanted to drop you a line
(damn, haikus are hard)

EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Football turk and england

I believe team pages should deal with all relevant notable topics. If team A in england had a sad incident, say 40+ deaths from trampling, it should be in the article. If the article is only on team scoring, then finances should not be in. But a general article on a turkey team should include hooliganism if it was by their fans or done by others againt their fans. However, if the hooliganism did not actually involve the turk team as either vitims or perpertrators, then it should be removed. John wesley 22:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

replaced PROD

Hi, I noticed that you had put a PROD tag on David Jones (E-fed Wrestler), which I had meant to do previously (I got sidetracked and forgot to come back to it). Reading through the article again, I noticed that it contained personal info about a minor. I immediately deleted the material and replaced the PROD with a Speedy A7. I wanted to explain why I had deleted your tag in order to avoid any misunderstanding. If the Speedy fails, I will replace the PROD tag; one way or another, this page needs to go...Doc Tropics 00:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy note about ArbCom proceeding

Hiya, just wanted to drop you a courtesy note to let you know about a current ArbCom proceeding where your name is briefly mentioned: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions. No action is needed on your part, though if you would like to participate in the case by offering a statement, evidence, or comments on the workshop page, you are more than welcome. FYI, El on ka 05:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H'Angus

Hi, I just wondered whether there was some reason you deleted references I added to this article, thus: [6]? DWaterson 23:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spooks?

What's new in Wikipedia? Haven't been on for a while, wanted to know what's been going on, any info? >_> The game I was telling you about before can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestseller_%28game%29 if you have any interest in it to wikify the entire page etc. Cheers. -R

H'Angus

Could you please not revert removal of unsourced biographical information relating to living people from this article. It's against policy to leave such information in articles. --Tony Sidaway 09:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's sourced. Englishrose 09:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fateh

Yeah, I just replied. I have no idea if it's true or not, but I'd say it's probably safest to just remove the image for now. I tagged it for speedy deletion, and have written to Aladin's website to try and request another one. Maybe I'll actually get a reply this time. :) --El on ka 17:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, in the absence of an actual approved image, that's probably the next best option. Do you have access to the DVD? --El on ka 20:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. :) Go ahead, and we can always replace it if a free image becomes available later. --El on ka 20:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]