Jump to content

User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

78.101.50.151

78.101.50.151 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Mind taking a look at this guy? He's been going on a rant about Islamic views on anal sex's talk page which has been repeatedly undone by editors. I can't revert his rants anymore because they're techincally not violating vandalism and I don't wanna violate 3rr--SKATER Speak. 16:45, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I've given them a non-templated warning. If they continue, I'll block them. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, it's a dynamic IP and he's been warned before. That's why the article has been semi'd.SKATER Speak. 16:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Hello. I have replied your question on my talk page. --Saddhiyama (talk) 22:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Check...

..your email. Btw, nice cat. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. Please check your e-mail. I have replied. --Diego Grez let's talk 17:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey. I think it's time to get Pichilemu merged to the mainspace. By the way, the blog references are reliable sources because they were written by someone important in the city (ex. Washington Saldías, former councillor) or they are digitalizations of pre-published pieces (ex. El Mercurio). Cheers. --Diego Grez let's talk 18:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'm bit busy at the minute, but I'll have a look in a bit. Also, I've read your email, I'll reply later. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

mop?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.4.232.165 is socking now as User:JackWildFan I have tagged him as block evading sock of User:HarveyCarter if you could have a look, ta.Off2riorob (talk) 20:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol! That didn't take long, but somehow I'm not surprised. I'll keep an eye on him and if he quacks any louder, I'll block him ;). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:59, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, he has hundreds of previous socks. Hes a gaggle of guackers. 21:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)Off2riorob (talk)

Well he is just about warring his uncited content into the Jack Wild article, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_Wild&action=history supported by his (I know this is true) type comment on the talkpage. "I have seen most of this mentioned by Jack himself in interviews shortly before his death"...yea yea. Off2riorob (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries, Mitch, I sent him to SPI for a good looking at, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 23:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright then- hopefully a checkuser'll look into him- if you;re lucky, it'll pick up any sleepers he's got knocking around as well. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill protection

Thanks for looking into protection for that article. The issue we're having is a most-likely sockpuppeter is changing the cause of the accident from "blowout" as reported in major news organizations to "sabotage" and linking to a Venezuelan article that claims North Korea attacked the rig. I won't request protection again but please keep an eye on it. Thanks. --N419BH (talk) 21:09, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the conspiracy theorist has been blocked. What we now have is someone who is deleting the "blowout" section from the spill and adding "suspicious." I have not reverted their edits, but I have cautioned them on edit warring, the 3RR, and use of the talk page. --N419BH (talk) 21:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm keeping an eye on it, don't worry. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:25, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
To be clear, I have not reverted the latest IP's edits, but I did AGF undo them once. If they make the edit again I'll leave it. --N419BH (talk) 21:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Loose cannons in a witch hunt

Earlier today you responded to a "block me" request from Special:Contributions/125.64.94.68 as an open proxy. Just before burning that bridge behind her, she deleted comments from a discussion, accusing an innocent third party of posting them in her edit summary. (I know it wasn't him because it was me.) Deleting it was vandalism, and I'd appreciate it if you could revert it. Meanwhile far worse personal attacks on the opposint side are going without any real challenge. That page and Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/Internet Brands are a witch hunt that is going to require admin intervention pretty soon, so you might want to get a head start on it.--24.11.100.80 (talk) 21:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

IP Blocks

As a general rule, we generally don't indef block IP addresses, IPs generally aren't indef'd anyways. Depending on the mood and who is doing it, it's usually 6 months-2 years. Q T C 23:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

And an additional note, open proxy are hard-blocked, ie anon-only is disabled. Q T C 23:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm aware of the general rule on IPs, but, judging from the previous block log, it looks like a static open proxy to me, but as I indicated in the log summary, you're welcome to change it without further input from me. Oh, and thanks for the anon only tip- I didn't know that. I don't know much about proxies, I just knew someone at that IP was making a nuisance of themselves. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

ITN: Harrods

-- tariqabjotu 23:46, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Your page has been conquered by the Earth Cabal!

Hello. I am here to inform you that your userpage or talk page has been conquered by the Earth Cabal. Please don’t panic; there is nothing you can do about it. You are hereby invited to join the Cabal, and help conquer other pages for our cause. See User:Hi878/Earth Cabal for more information. Thank you, have a nice, irregular weather day, and welcome to Earth. Hi878 (talk) 04:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Requests for unprotection

Ten bucks says that IP (12.74.248.27) complaining about unprotection is none other than Bambifan101. Keep an eye on them, will you? Thanks. --N419BH (talk) 20:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

You could bet more than that- I'm, almost certain it is, but I'll humour them until they start quacking, then I'll block them! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Here this is still a good edit. Thank you. Jmac2681 (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
That's a loud enough quack for me! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:27, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
That didn't take long. Add it to the list. Cheers! --N419BH (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Not at all. It was amusing while it lasted though! Already added via {{blockedsock}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Oops...

So when I tried to link to the list of Bambifan's sockpuppets, I accidentally added you to the list. I think I undid it. My apologies... --N419BH (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I saw ;)! you can link to a cat by puting a colon (:) after the [[ like Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Bambifan101. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
And to think, while you were busy blocking sockpuppets I was reading up on WP:TROUT and WP:OOPS... The irony... --N419BH (talk) 21:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

"Forces" vs. "Soldiers"

Hey, just so you know, I reverted your change of "forces" to "soldiers" on ITN. I agree that, with the new wording, "forces" is not ideal- but there were RAF personnel involved, for example, and they're most certainly not soldiers. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

So? There were also British soldiers involved, so it doesn't make the statement incorrect. In fact, that's pretty much exactly what the article says: The 2010 Parade marks the first time that foreign soldiers have joined Russian forces on Red Square for the parade. -- tariqabjotu 21:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
P.S. That cat is really annoying. -- tariqabjotu 21:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Cat made smaller ;)! While the two aren't mutually exclusive, "soldier" implies land forces, whereas "forces" is a little more accurate since there were non-land forces involved in the parade. Perhaps someone at WP:ERRORS or T:MP will have further input? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I know what soldiers are. I'm saying the fact that there were non-soldiers involved does not make the statement incorrect, as it is certainly true that British soldiers are participating in the parade for the first time, even if there are other British forces involved as well. -- tariqabjotu 10:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Think I'll need that Indef-SPP especially after much discussion with Theresa Knott, she was able to determined that per WP:DENY and WP:RBI, we should just ignore this matter as she reckons is the work of a banned editor listed on the list of banned editors, whom we should not even name. Hope you catch my drift. P.S.: The kat is really annoying! --Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 22:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Thank you. But remember rollback and the thing that say Twinkle Vandal only works on the last edit to the page (or should I say the last editor of the page). You should put that on the requests for rollback so it gets archived.--Curtis23's Usalions 01:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Wiki Historian N OH

Resolved HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The user has added a completely inappropriate line: "LOL! Some people need a woman. And that doesn't mean going and raping them like a Bolshevik because they wouldn't touch you otherwise." It was changed up to add the "raping" part. I was going to warn the user, but it is clear they are doing nothing but trying to encite a response. Could you lock the page down for the duration of the block, please? - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk page access revoked for the remainder of the block and talk page fully protected. I also blanked everything after the block notice since it's not doing anything constructive. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Excellent, thank you Sir. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Would you mind blanking the quote above now that the issue has been resolved? --N419BH (talk) 05:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Elena Kagan

I know you're watching this article. Could you review the "rumor" section? I rollbacked it as a violation of WP:BLPTALK but it does ask a legitimate question. Not sure how to proceed. --N419BH (talk) 06:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Curtis

...you must have missed the discussion on my talkpage regarding his rollback. He also reaaaaaalllly needed to learn that Forum Shopping would not be successful. I'm the one who comes out looking like a knob now, not that it matters. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't seen the discussion on your talk page, sorry. However, I stand by my comment- at the end of the day, it's one little button and if he misuses it, it only takes a few seconds to untick the box. As for the forum shopping, let's AGF and call it a one-time error and for looking like a knob, well, you've been an admin for a lot longer than I- I would have thought you were used to it by now, especially after declining the appeals from all those vandals I've blocked! Whatever we do, someone will think it's admin abuse and if we don;t do it, it's even more abusive! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

ITN: May 2010 Siberia mine explosion

-- tariqabjotu 09:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Previously blocked user up to similar tricks

Wanted to bring to your attention that a previously blocked anonymous user User_talk:86.43.64.132 is up to similar vandalism of adding unsourced defamatory content, I added a warning to his talk page. ialsoagree (talk) 10:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for 2 weeks for BLP violations. I doubt that's the last we'll see of him, but we can hope! Thanks for letting me know! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Welcome, thanks for all your hard work, keep it up! ialsoagree (talk) 11:00, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback ("cabals")

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at White Shadows's talk page.
Message added 10:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your input would be appreciated. As you are currently online according to my watchlist, and have been "tagged" by one of these projects, I would appreciate you providing an outside view before I form larger discussions. I may be the only one with concerns after all. Thanks alot. Taelus (Talk) 10:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I'll continue discussions there, as I am still pondering it all. --Taelus (Talk) 11:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. Like I say, I don't think it's doing any harm, but I don't feel any more strongly than "meh". I've deleted White Shadows' subapge though as requested. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I tidied the subpages up now too, although I feel slightly bad about it. Still, I informed him I will restore the pages upon request, pending discussion results, as I was only voicing my concerns for discussion, not demanding/requiring action be taken. Anyway, what's done is done I suppose. --Taelus (Talk) 11:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Well if he wants 'em back (assuming you don't object to my overturning your deletions) then I'll restore 'em and if it's really an issue it can be thrashed out in an MfD. In the interest of fairness though, I suggest you have a word with User:Hi878. Thanks for doing the subpages- I tried to do it with Twinkle but I never was much good at pressing the right button at the right time! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll give User:Hi878 a poke. I doubt the pages would ever survive an MfD personally, but I was unsure I understood them fully, thus didn't want to list them incase it was an over-reaction on my part. Your fully welcome to overturn my subpage deletions, they were G8 deletions anyway thus should be restored if the page they depend on was restored also. Thanks again. (Thanks for making your talkpage cat smaller too!) --Taelus (Talk) 11:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
No worries ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

He's back again

78.101.50.151 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), I don't think this is a static Ip so much as someone using different computers right now. Still I'm on my last options now because RBI isn't working.I'm thinking just reporting all the known IP's to ANI.--SKATER Speak. 14:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked again! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, while your at it, mind blocking 89.211.190.118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), his other Ip address?--SKATER Speak. 17:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
That one hasn't edited in 12 hours, but if he resumes, I'll block him. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm guessing this IP, 78.101.239.68 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is the same guy. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 17:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
This guy dosen't know when to give up, I'll start prepping the AN/I.--SKATER Speak. 17:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Blocked for evasion. You might want to try SPI and get a checkuser to look into it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I'll try there,there aren't any user accounts so I'm not sure how to name it... Thanks for all your help HJ :)--SKATER Speak. 17:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Name it after the first IP. You might like to try ANI as well actually to see if you can get a rangeblock (I am so not attempting that!) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd prefer not to see you block half of Wikipedia...Just out of curiosity should I not just go right to ANI to get someone to check the range and the block?--SKATER Speak. 17:48, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Go for it- try ANI for a rangeblock, then SPI for a CU or vice versa but inform each venue that you've filed at the other! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Alright, wish me luck. --SKATER Speak. 17:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Here goes.--SKATER Speak. 18:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Got another for ya 78.101.220.107 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)--SKATER Speak. 18:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
78.100.207.50 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), think you know what to do.ANI hasn't helped much so far.--SKATER Speak. 17:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Already blocked by Dougweller. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 18:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Can't Be Tamed G6: Non-controversial move?

Hi HJ, how come you approved the album article's move to Can't Be Tamed (album)? I had a discussion on the WikiProject Albums talk page that asked for clarification about such disambiguation, and the result was to leave Can't Be Tamed as the main target and Can't Be Tamed (song) as the disambig'd namespace for the song. A similar discussion took place in February that resulted in the same consensus: the album became the main target with a hatnote pointing to the song, which is exactly what had been done for the original Can't Be Tamed target. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 18:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't approve the move, but that redirect wasn't doing any good. If there's a consensus (I'll look at the link in a moment) that that the album should be at "Can't Be Tamed", I'll happily zap it again and move it back. Give me a minute... HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I think I confused myself. WhatGuy did the move, though I'm not sure why, but since I saw your name as well, I assumed an admin was involved with the move. I honestly don't recall if I put a link to the discussions on the talk page of the album article. Should the article be protected against page moves in the future, should you agree with the consensus? – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 20:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes. If there's a consensus one way or the other, I'll move protect it. I was surprised to see it myself- I didn't realise non-admins could move protection settings (and I still think it's odd that they can- it seems like a quick way to get semi protection without going through an RfA). I'll get back to you in a minute after I've read that discussion. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Barney and Friends

My condolences on trying to clean up that crap. I've been at it for several years and finally quit after realising that some of those pages were on the list of the pages that I had edited more than any other. Couple of tips. There are two different IP hopping editors making edits. Neither will bother replying to any message left on their talk pages. One will only edit the whole page while the other will edit sections. They have both been warned several times so I was blocking as I saw them. One, who may be autistic, will sometimes add both valid material and nonsense in the same edit but rather than try and figure it out I would just roll it all back. There are some IPs listed at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Page 2#Disney/Barney vandal. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 18:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I ended up deleting a few (apologies if your deleted edits randomly sky rocketed!) and restoring them without the crap because it was easier than finding a good version to revert to. I've also blanket semi protected everything in the category for a year since there were pretty much 0 valid IP edits. I see from the history you've been clearing that crap up for years so I guess I should be offering the condolences. Hopefully the semi protection will solve the problem. At least for a year! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

2009-10 Premier League

IMO, this ITN item has consensus to go up, but I want your opinion. If you think the update is too weak and the article has consensus, I'll be happy to improve the update. Since I don't personally care about soccer/football, I just want to make sure the blurb will get posted before I spend time on an update.

Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 19:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree there's a consensus for posting so if you or someone else wants to improve it (as I just suggested on ITN/C it needs a bit more prose and maybe a "final" section) I'm willing to post it (and be pelted by the peanut gallery for it on T:MP!) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
There looks to have been more of an update now. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
There's still not really a lot of prose in the body of the article, though the lead has been updated. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm stumped where to put the prose in the body of the article. The article has been structured to be a bloody almanac entry. No wonder no-one has updated it... Very frustrating. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I've added a section called 'final results' which now has some content (some of which is copied). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Blimey, I had no idea this item would cause so much fuss when I nominated it. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Premiership of Gordon Brown

Hi. Thanks for passing the article for GA. I've been keeping an eye on it and am pleased to say it hasn't attracted too much disruption over the election. I'm planning to add details about the election results and events leading up to Brown announcing his intention to step down as prime minister. My plan is to wait for the outcome of the current Lib-Con/Lib-Lab talks then to update the section. Probably later in the week. Thanks again. TheRetroGuy (talk) 21:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

SPI

Hey, I have made a post at the SPI [1]

Could you comment on that edit that I point out? The fact that after exclusively using the NT account for 7-8 months to revert to ACs edits on several articles, the NT account then went to ACs sockpuppet before it was revealed that AC controlled it, and "asked" him if he could go to the Asmahan article where the main dispute was.[2] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle

HJ you have seen me using Twinkle right? Well now it is saying that my account is too new to use Twinkle, do you know why?--Curtis23's Usalions 23:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, but I've hear of it happening before. Try WT:TW- someone there should have the answer. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk:International response to the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash

Could you direct the debate on this article to the proper channel? It's been a month since the crash and editors still can't come to or respect any consensus. There have also been some block threats on user talk pages. Thanks. --N419BH (talk) 23:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think I'm in the best position to be dealing with that considering I opined in the DRV and the ITN nomination. Sorry, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Understood. I made comments too. I just want to see it resolved. Oh well. I guess we'll just have to let the primary combatants most vocal editors hash it out. --N419BH (talk) 23:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

In re: [3]. The reason for the discrepancy was because the new TFA/OTD just rolled on a couple minutes ago. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I know, I intentionally waited until 00:00 UTC before I re-added them. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Cool. I only commented b/c your edit summary made it sound like you didn't realize. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

"Overly drastic"

Do consider that you corrected the Main Page balance after 00:00 UTC. I wish I could turn back the hands of time to show you what it looked like (okay, that's possible with a bit of effort), but, trust me, it was so bad I couldn't let it go for even twenty minutes. -- tariqabjotu 00:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I think you removed too many personally, but I believe I use a larger screen than most. I don't normally interfere with balancing for that reason. I did see it before midnight UTC, but after the TFA changed over, I felt the balance would be better with the items re-added. Apologies if you took offence to my edit summary, none was intended. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

10 May 2010 Iraq attacks

You haven't touched it in two hours. Still planning on getting around to it soon, or should I have a go? --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome to assist. I'll be onto it in a few minutes, but I need to eat first! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I've added a little to this article, sourced from the New York Times. (Borrowed the link from WikiNews.) ;-). Small pussy is better, took ages to load before!--220.101.28.25 (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Can't Be Tamed

Hey! Long time no talk buddy. I saw the message you left on Keraunoscopia's talk page. What is it about? Which consensus because I'm pretty much evolved with the articles. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 02:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of 10 May 2010 Iraq attacks

I have nominated 10 May 2010 Iraq attacks, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10 May 2010 Iraq attacks. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Mikemoral♪♫ 02:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Can you join the conversation?

Can you please join the conversation held at Talk:Hannah Montana 2/Meet Miley Cyrus#Soundtrack or studio album?. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 03:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll have a look when I get a moment. As for the above (Can't Be Tamed), the article was moved against consensus and an admin was needed to move it back, but no big deal really- everything's back where it should be :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:Deletion Request

Your last comment on that before it was posted is why I posted a comment rather than a delete. I don't think the article should have been created in the first place (not until details have been verified, which is the difference between this and your election results example), but deleting it and then recreating it in a few days is just silly. I'd still like to recommend that the people working so hard on these news stories on Wikipedia contribute on Wikinews instead, which is a more appropriate venue for all but the largest of events. Gopher65talk 03:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Random comment ... food for thought

(I was going to post this at the AFD, but it got closed before i hit save. Decided i'd just pop in over here with the matter and didn't want five minutes of typing to be wasted ;) ) Actually, I'm not opposed to Wikipedia's covering of recent events per se, I'm just thinking it's better not to elaborate on them until things become stable. If someone important dies, you'd of course want to put the date of death, etc., on the appropriate entry, to avoid looking silly/out of date, but IMHO it's better to wait at least a little bit before going into detail on the matter and new updates have stopped. For something else, that requires a new article, maybe hold off creating the entry until everything is verified and not being constantly updated. If things are in a state of flux, it's very easy to lose historical perspective, and there is a tendency towards recentism (I've seen this in several Wikipedia articles on breaking news events: use of present tense, active voice, overall "newsy" style of writing, et cetera).

But at the same time, I understand you're not strictly an encyclopedia in the usual sense, so perhaps these principles don't necessarily apply. Just thought I'd chime in, as this encyclopedic-versus-news issue is especially of interest to me, being active at Wikinews. (Also, regarding your WP:BUREAUCRACY comment on the AFD, I wasn't advocating specifically deleting that article, but rather expressing a broader view of recent events at WP. Of course it'd be silly to delete something only to recreate it hours later :) ) Cheers,Tempodivalse [talk] 03:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The weird thing is I don't disagree with a single thing you and Mikemoral stated in the AfD (apart from the bit abut deleting the article ;)) I just don't think it applies here. I think WP has a great ability to deal with current events, but the trap that so many people fall into is to write it in the format of "breaking news: X announces Y". If it's done correctly, I think it can compliment the great work you guys do over at WN rather than duplicating it and making it redundant. When the article's finished it will cover the events in their proper context rather than simply a list of events or a news article- it was, after all, only a few hours old when it was sent to AfD. I feel an encyclopaedia article that adequately deals with the background an the context will provide something for readers who want to know more than just what happened over the last few days, likewise, those who want the most recent information and the "newsy" details can be referred to WN. I think it's a shame that many people see the two projects as competing when, if both work as they're supposed to, they should support each other. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I generally agree - WP for historical background, WN for recent updates into the matter. That's what is frustrating to me, that Wikipedians see WN as a competing news source and want to do everything by themselves. Many Wikinews editors, rightly or not, see that as being pointless duplication of effort and think Wikipedia wants to take all the "glory" and "attention" for itself. For instance, the UK general elections results - users on both projects were doing the same thing, entering the latest seat results as they came in. Really, it would have been much more efficient (IMHO) to do this all on Wikinews, then, when the results stopped updating and became stable, copied the tables to Wikipedia.) I don't know how (or even if) to reconcile this, and try to reduce the rather negative view of Wikinews here. But I suppose a lot of this depends on where one believes Wikipedia should go, and whether it wants to be an encyclopedia in the traditional sense or take on new roles. Cheers. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

ITN Credit

--ThaddeusB (talk) 12:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Ka-ching! I must have slept through it, but it explains the Vandals! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 19:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Omai

Please delete User:Diego Grez Bot/Sandbox and block it. I run it in Wikinews but it came to Wikipedia :S Please excuse me! --Diego Grez let's talk 18:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Ironically (considering how much I whine about allowing others to do HJ's work for him), I've done both for you. No worries, innocent mistake. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. :) --Diego Grez let's talk 22:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Floquenbeam, you Hypocrite! (Just kidding, nothing serious)--White Shadows you're breaking up 22:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

EMudhra SecMsg

Hi. You deleted and salted this; see this section at WP:REFUND, where the author Divya1006 (talk · contribs) asks for undeletion and I have told them they will have to ask you but should first read the COI guidelines Orange Mike has put on their talk page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Adminship

As a recent new admin yourself (and the one who gave me rollback) could you possibly help me work toward adminship? I really want to help with the constant backlog in RPP, UAA, and AIV. Obviously my weaknesses at this time are lack of long term steady contributions (I've only been an active Wikipedian for about 6 weeks) and lack of content additions to articles. I'm wondering how you worked your way toward the bit and if you could give me advice on ways to improve my qualities. Thanks. --N419BH (talk) 01:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

If I'm perfectly honest, I never really aimed for adminship. It just turned out that, with the areas I worked in, my editing would be a lot easier with a few extra buttons to press! But yes, I'll be happy to informally point you in the right direction- I'm a regular at RfA so I know what people look for. The best way to get started, I suppose would be for you to answer the first three questions in every RfA. You can email me the answers or put them here if you want, it's entirely up to you :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Look at you HJ, teaching newbies how to become admins. Good job and good luck N419BH. Question: Why such an od name? when I think of your name I think of a robot!--White Shadows you're breaking up 01:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
You called? ;) --an odd name 01:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Lol! Just, lol! :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Did I miss something?--White Shadows you're breaking up 01:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Haha. I'm working on the questions. My username is based on the U.S. aircraft registry system. I've got it explained in detail on my userpage. --N419BH (talk) 01:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
WS, you asked "why such and odd name", hence the comment by AnOddName! Well it looks like I've got the most boring username here! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I got it a long time ago. Wow, silly me and that was very funny.--White Shadows you're breaking up 01:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Numbers are more boring IMHO. & I think "N419BH" may be an aeronautical reference. Silly me not reading!--220.101.28.25 (talk) 02:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Scratch that. Your name is the most boreing. You need to join!!!--White Shadows you're breaking up 02:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
boreingboring sorry I had to :) --N419BH (talk) 03:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

First draft:

  • 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

I intend to use the tools to help keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. I see myself doing most of my admin work in RPP, UAA, and AIV. I may get into AfD at a later date but that’s a long way off.

  • 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

My best contributions are in dispute resolution. When I see one, I try to find a win-win solution and interject it. I find this gets editors to stop focusing on each other and focus again on solving the issue. This improves the overall quality of the enclycopedia.

  • 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

Of course, this is a natural part of any team effort. I am used to stressful situations due to my real-life occupation as a flight instructor. I focus on the problem and not the editor. I will also seek third-party advice. There are 1,000 admins here, it makes sense to ask another for their opinion rather than try to solve a difficult problem alone.

--N419BH (talk) 02:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Given how ridiculously busy this page is, we might be better off moving this into your userspace somewhere. Have you opted into the edit counter, btw- I can give you better feedback if I know where you spend your editing time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:16, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah I noticed that. I'll move it to my usertalk for now. If need be I'll move it to a subpage. Yes, I've opted into the edit counter. I'll continue over there. --N419BH (talk) 03:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Cabal

Could you delete User:Hirohisat/Earth Cabal so that I can move the page back? Hi878 (talk) 02:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Hi878 (talk) 02:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I only deleted the redirect pages, I just moved the cabal back to where it was. :) But whatever. Hi878 (talk) 02:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, as far as I can tell, everything's back to how it was before the "Earth Cabal" was "resurrected". Personally, I don't think it was doing any harm but as I said yesterday, the strongest emotion I can find about the whole thing is "meh". HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Others weren't so neutral. Plus, I don't think that you read the talk page of the cabal that much. I was getting a bit MySpacey, which is my I decided to just get rid of it. I just wish the edit history didn't have to be kept... But oh well. :) Hi878 (talk) 03:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
It's the kind of thing that, while mildly amusing, tends to attract the less mature variety of editors, but hey, better than attracting the trolls! I've move protected the original page in case anybody decides to start it again, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I suppose you are right. And another thing, could you tell me what you think of how I was acting on the talk page? Since you can still go and look at it. I want another outsider's opinion. Hi878 (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Block Length

Per the block policy, IP blocks should generally be kept to under ~6 months, excepting proxy blocks (see WP:IPBLENGTH for more). Your block of 202.4.84.228 [4] was set for 5 years, significantly longer than that period. Accordingly, I have reduced the block to 6 months in length. In the future please refrain from excessive blocks on IP addresses. Thank you, Prodego talk 02:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The only thing I'll say is have you seen the length of that block log? There's obviously no constructive edits coming from the IP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:23, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I have, but that doesn't actually change the odds of the IP being reassigned, which is why IP blocks are limited in the first place. Additionally, you left the comment "See you in 5 years!" in your block notice. This is wholly inappropriate. This comment could be interpreted either as a personal attack, as feeding the trolls, or just plain disruptive. Blocks are not punitive, and gloating comments about dishing out punishment entirely miss the point. Prodego talk 02:25, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
They'll be back in 6 months doing exactly the same thing, but hey, 6 months is better than nothing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I {{schoolblock}} long term problem IP's for a year fairly frequently. In my experience watching other admins at AIV, one year is kind of a de facto maximum block length for an IP; I don't know what the policy says, but if it says 6 months is a maximum, it is not reflecting current practice. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Me too. The policy has In cases of long-term vandalism from an IP address, consider blocks over a period of months or years instead which I think covers it. The snarky comment was uncalled for though, I agree with Prodego there. --John (talk) 02:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The policy has had a few different explicit limits, which have varied over the years, before becoming the more vague wording it is now. 6 months, 1 year, or (rarely) 2 year blocks would be normal for very repeated vandalism (say, 1 year after returning from a 6 month, 2 year after returning from a 1 year). Anything over 2 would be exceptional circumstances indeed, 5 years was standard for proxy blocks, but that has started to shift downward and I believe it is now 2 years. Prodego talk 02:52, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Really? I thought this was fine. Should it be standardised then? {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 03:16, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
creepy (talk page stalker) - I'm going to weigh in that 5 is too long, but anything less than 2 should be presumed legitimate for some of these extreme accounts... a more relevant consideration is whether pre-registered accounts can log in. School accounts might actually be assessed based on the length of time one individual might possess a single IP. Shadowjams (talk) 05:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I'm not the only one :) Yeah, I would agree that 5 is too long. It does vary on the type of block- hard blocks should be shorter, and blocks where account creation is not disabled aren't really much of an issue. {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 05:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:DUCK

67.80.21.55 edits to Disney articles, changing content without edit summaries. You know what I'm getting at. --N419BH (talk) 03:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Another one? He doesn't waste any time! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Uh, remember the length of his sockpuppet list... (I'll give you a hint, he probably has more socks than Canada has individual legitimate users) --N419BH (talk) 04:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Another IP Vandal at Big Money Hustlas

Hi, Just letting you know that more IPs (from the same range) have shown up to continue vandalizing the page. [5], [6]. --GD 6041 (talk) 04:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Semi'd for 2 weeks- that should give yo a break! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Liquidluck's talk page.
Message added 05:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

liquidluck✽talk 05:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Pank claw/Pank x

Thanks for taking care of this! -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow

I did not knew your RFA passed. Congrats!! Well I have refrained from editing the article as I clearly made three reverts in 24 hrs time. I apologize for the last reversion but I thought I was removing unsourced content, deliberately being added to the article, as it is exempted from 3RR. I won't edit the article now, I will let your admin hat (lol) decide the outcome. The hisory should say it all. Regards --Legolas (talk2me) 06:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :). I'll discuss it with the other party and jopefully we cna all move on and find something more interesting to do! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I know right? I have so many epnding articles to be developing for GA, FL coupled with that Madonna FAC. "Crazy" seems an understatement eh? --Legolas (talk2me) 06:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of rollback

Any chance I can get it back? This wasn't a revert, it was only restoring one part of the section within the article and wasn't even a complete revert. We discussed it all on my talk page and I touched nothing else but that section after the discussion. And now that even that edit was reverted I won't even bother with the article anymore and will avoid genre warring at all costs, I promise. So, please? Can I have it back? • GunMetal Angel 06:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is a big no-no. That's why I revoked rollback. As for the other diff, although it was a continuation of an edit war, I haven't taken action about it. I suggest you either discuss your changes on the talk page or disengage from the article because further reverts will result in blocks and I really don't want to do that if I can help it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I just would really want my rollback back, it was practically a birthday present for me a couple months ago. We discussed our changes on my talk and I refraimed from edit warring. Things happen and I appologize for it coming about but yes, I've decided to lay low and let him be in charge as a major editor for everything Lady Gaga related and me aparently being the annoying one. It won't happen again, every time someone reverts me I'll consult them first, okay? Give me one more chance? • GunMetal Angel 06:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
If you ask me again in a week, I'll consider it, but you used rollback to revert an editor with whom you were involved in a content dispute. Big no-no and most certainly grounds for its removal. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I just think I deserve a second chance is all, as to how everyone else does. Never again will I use it for a content dispute in any way. And I will not genre war ever again. • GunMetal Angel 06:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Like I say, ask me in a week- half an hour after you used rollback to edit war is not the best time to be asking for it back. In a week, I promise I will review it without prejudice, but not now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree with HJ Mitchell. You tend to use rollback for a lot more than clear vandalism, like this or this. Undoing without rollback will help you assess edits before reverting. Shubinator (talk) 07:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've seen numerous people use rollback for edits that were not vandalism as well, so that's the reason why I have made edits like that. But sure thing, if it's meant for reverting vandalism then that's what I shall only use it for. • GunMetal Angel 07:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

My first article

...will probably get deleted because I looked for it on the Dornier 328 page and not the Dornier 328JET page. Plus I can't get the template to work for the specs. Oh well. Maybe it is detailed enough that it has standalone qualities. Have a look; it's Dornier 428JET. (oh, and if you could figure out what's wrong with the template, I'd appreciate it) --N419BH (talk) 07:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Well it's not my area, so I couldn't possibly tell you what its chances of survival are, but I suppose if worst comes to worst, you can always merge and redirect. As for the template, I'm afraid I haven't the foggiest. There are no glaring syntax errors (at least not glaring to an idiot like me!) but my knowledge of templates is next to nil. Sorry! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Haha, the thought from Shadowjams was spend some time writing, so I tried it, and I really had fun researching the airplane. I've left talk page posts at WikiProject Aircraft regarding the article so let's see what they say. The article was listed in their "articles for creation" box (along with literally a thousand other aircraft. Looks like I may have found my niche...once I get the template to work. --N419BH (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Would seem a logical place to find people who know how that specific template works. Good on you finding your niche- I don;t really have one- I write about everything from pretty actresses to army officers to current events! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
And it's fixed. Now let's see if it survives... --N419BH (talk) 07:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Aircraft accident article titles

WP:Aviation convention is that the airline identifier is not used in front of the flight number. Mjroots (talk) 08:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Plus Afriqiyah code is 8U, not BU. Slasher-fun (talk) 08:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Oh dear, my mistake. I just discovered that two articles had been written on the same crash (unsurprising) and was trying to clean up. By all means stick it where it needs to go and delete anything that needs to be. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HJ_Mitchell/Archive_5&oldid=1178682910"