Jump to content

User talk:Jéské Couriano/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 10

another one

Thanks. I've let the ISP know that they should inform their local police of the street address of a suicide threat. Bstone (talk) 03:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Good. Maybe when they realize that cops are coming, they'll stop harassing us. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 06:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Admins willing to block?

Why are the block logs for User:TharkunColl and User:ShieldDane empty? I thought they were blocked, regards, Joshuarooney2008 (talk) 07:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I misread you the first time and thought you were referring to the socks; I just blocked Coll indef and will hit Dane now. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 07:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
That checkuser request has not yet confirmed whether or not TharkunColl is ShieldDane. It's just a request at the moment. Was this block premature? --Bazzargh (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

What happened here? You first jumped the gun with a - rather premature - block of TharkunColl, prompted by the - rather problematic - user Joshuarooney. Only eight minutes later, you decline the unblock request [1] (contrary to process; a unblock request should never be handled by the blocking admin himself, the whole point of it is to let others review it), claiming explicitly that "checkuser" had confirmed sockpuppetry. You evidently misread that page. Then [2] you say at ANI that it's a "behavioral" block based on what I said – but I said nothing about TharkunColl whatsoever, and you also failed to acknowledge that you must in the meantime have realised that your previous claim was wrong. Sorry, but this doesn't look very good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I can't say I was pleased about it =P ShieldDane (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

More on WP:AN

See this, someone else found one of the suicide notes and posted on the noticeboard. Don't think anyone has called anyone with that one yet, but people have talked about it... J Milburn (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

paws

Hi. I saw your comment and if you have any concerns, feel free to ask. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

More at AN

I've made a habit of telling you, so just to alert you that there is another thread. J Milburn (talk) 23:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

A Misunderstanding?

I received a message from you that I was "vandalizing" the Super Smash Bros. page. This, I feel, is completely untrue. I was just, as always try to, further the wikipedia community. I believe what you changed was how I added an alleged characters part because there is much controversy about Diddy Kong and Sonic (and Tails) being in the Melee version. I feel like there should be a tad of information. I truly am sorry if I hindered you in anyway, but I wanted to be sure you knew my intent was not vandalism. thank you for your time!! Hooty88888 (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

What you added was misinformation: third-parties weren't introduced until Brawl, and Diddy was never in Melee except as a trophy. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 04:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
that is for interpretation, there are screenshots of sonic and of diddy kong in action... I just feel that even if it is just alleged, which it is, it shouldn't be considered vandalism... thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hooty88888 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Sonic and Diddy are in Brawl, as are a few stages from Melee. Further, pics can easily be doctored to show "proof" where none exists. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 01:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Who's to say that "none exists" I have not played with Mr. Game and Watch, but he is listed... sorry if I am annoying Hooty88888 (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Game & Watch is available in Melee and Brawl, both times as a secret character. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 18:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

List of D&D monsters

Hello, we've been busily working on how to make tables for a D&D monster list page, and could use your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons#Negotiable concepts. BOZ (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's my input: Too long, even if you make a list similar to List of Pokémon. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 17:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Grawp is back

Or a copy cat... Care to review and block;

See also; User talk:Sandstein#anon harassing my edits

Cross-posted to Alison, too.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

More

Care to review and block;

see also [3]. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

another; cheers, Jack Merridew 07:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

DAH! Templete

Hi i put Crypto does Vages on the Templete can you please send the page that says that boes not belong. Not to be mean just for further refrence. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwilleditu (talk • contribs) 13:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Templates are used to link pages together (as per WP:NAVBOX). As Crypto Does Vegas is not a standalone article (just a subsection of an article already in the template) it does not need a link in the template. Were the section you linked to in an article not on the template (like, say, the reference was inexplicably on Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas) then a section link would be feasible. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 18:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) --Iwilleditu (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL DUH!

) Thanks for catching my mistake on my recent edit to the Chris Brown talk page!--InDeBiz1 (talk) 19:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Null persp. I tried to fix it myself, but since I couldn't get the text out of the archive box, I had to revert it to the last good one. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 01:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Your pet Magmar

Mount Rinjani
View from Mount Agung

Your pet might enjoy the view from the volcano I have a nice view of every day. Take him for a stroll early one morning to catch the dawn. Oh, that's Mount Rinjani on the horizon. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I live in a place with plenty o' volcanoes myself :P -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 17:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Brrr… Too cold except inside'em! Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

71.107

That's probably Jarlaxle, he likes Forgotten Realms and Star Wars a lot. Johnny Irenicus (talk) 10:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I doubt it; other editors from that same block have been harassing editors working there. I'm more inclined to believe it's a tard. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 23:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

SUL

Just noticed the SUL link on your user page, sounded interesting, but the link is broken - should it be m:Help:Unified login? Bazzargh (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thank'ee. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 18:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

59.149.32.77

I am happy to see you look into details of what i have done. 59.149.32.77 (talk) 19:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

And I have to tell you the editor has a "not-good" record

I did what I had to do. I see that your edits are good-faith, and not vandalism as she states, so I have no reason to lock down an article. However, my warning to the both of you still stands: The next revert on that article will be met with a short block to the party responsible. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 19:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Any action (i don't mean punishment) can be done towards Electrobe? As more than one wikipedian have been complaining about him. --59.149.32.77 (talk) 20:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I won't do anything, but I recommend filing a complaint thread at AN/I. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 20:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Rename requests & SUL

Hi Jéské, thanks for all you help at WP:CHU. Just a small request - could you take a slightly softer approach with SUL-based requests for accounts that have edits than: "ANY edits in mainspace makes a target username ineligible for usurpation". It isn't strictly speaking true, if the account has few edits and they aren't GFDL significant (vandalism, mino typo fixes etc.) I will consider performing the requests. I know some wikis are giving the accounts regardless of edits, so they may find our approach surprising. If the account they want has very few edits and they don't look very significant, can you point them to WP:CHU/U and I'll take a look to see if we can accommodate them. Otherwise just explain that the local rules don't allow crats to rename the account they want (bear in mind some may have limited english and may have struggled to understand the instructions). Thanks, WjBscribe 22:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright, will do. However, I was merely stating what I saw as being generally so in the past; my apologies if I didn't notice a shift. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 22:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Bates method

Please resist responding to other editors improper behavior with what might be seen as incivility, especially in edit summaries where comments cannot be refactored later. I find it extremely difficult to WP:KEEPCOOL myself dealing with such editors, but the problems tend to get worse when misbehaving editors find reasons for retaliating against others. [4] --Ronz (talk) 21:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to, but I'm just stating that screaming at other editors in the edit summary is generally the worst way to go about trying to change consensus. I'm filing a user-conduct RfC on Seeyou. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 21:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The RFC/U is a good idea. I'll contribute as well. He's out of control. --Ronz (talk) 21:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm working on it as we speak; I'm gathering evidence from the AfD. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 21:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm incredibly busy and may be away from Wikipedia for days, or even a week or more at a time. I'll do what I can to help whenn I can. Have you gone over all the instructions in Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_conduct? --Ronz (talk) 23:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
This isn't the first time I've filed an RFC/U; see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/V-Dash. I did, however, list it (I was pressed for time initially). -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 23:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

First time for me starting an RFC/U. Not sure how much more I should add. --Ronz (talk) 16:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

If you can find any evidence of Seeyou being disruptive beyond what I already have there and/or evidence of him disregarding warning given him, by all means add them. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 17:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
And I just found out about Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-28 Bates method. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 17:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

Hey, can you protect my talk for me? It should be protected for at least another 2 weeks... Sceptre (talk) 04:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't see much disruption there - yet. If you get the equivalent of the Subspace Army ransacking it, though, I'll issue protection. Sorry. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 05:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

-WarthogDemon 00:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Threat?

Yes, that does answer it; but why was my comment a 'threat'? I did not intend to seem hostile - but I did want to challenge the new 'consensus' because it seems like a very odd conclusion. I hope you didn't take that as a 'threat'. If I am off the mark here (about what part of my comment seemed like a threat), what was it and why did you take it as such? —AySz88\^-^ 03:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I never called it a threat. (honestly puzzled, looks over his comment there) -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 05:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Fixed; I misplaced "D" with "T". -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 05:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Heh; okay then. :P —AySz88\^-^ 22:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

protection question

HI, do you know why did my request on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for protection for Lamb of God (band) disappear from the section? And I cant see it even in the history page!--Lykantrop (Talk) 06:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You made a request? -(Doofallslya v^_^v) Ékséj 06:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes. I made a request, and I even got an answer. The article was un-protected and should be atomatically re-protected after 3 days. I thougt the answer was from you, but I can not remeber properly, although it is not in your contributions. Now there is nothing. The request was between Accursed Lands and Rickroll. I have no clue what does it mean...--Lykantrop (Talk) 07:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I honestly didn't see the Lamb of God request. My response was to the Accursed Lands request; that was the one where I'd stated the unprotection. -(Doofallslya v^_^v) Ékséj 07:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok. This really makes me feel I am crazy. I will make it again but if it disappears again....--Lykantrop (Talk) 07:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

RE:Slow, eh?

I can't find any hidden note. ":)" desn't tell me anything --Lykantrop (Talk) 12:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hit the edit button on that request - hidden notes are not seen until you enter the edit screen. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 21:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Aha...Thanks..I just didnt know that that is called a "hidden note". So it is a temporary protection for 5 days... I am not sure if it works. What after this 5 days? Do we have to wait for some new IP vandalism and ask again for a 5 day protection? You must have more experience than me... what is better on the temporary protection than a permanent semi-protection? It saves our time The article is already a GA. If somebody really wants to edit it, he can sign up to Wikipedia...--Lykantrop (Talk) 20:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
After the five days, you will have to wait for vandalism to start up again (if an article is vandalized right after protection ends, the protection is generally reinstated for a longer period). As for your comment above see Wikipedia:Perennial proposals, specifically the bit about requiring registration. I'd rather block than protect, as protection also locks out good IPs. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 22:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes I know that there are lots of good edits by IPs. I am not against IPs. But I think that on Lamb of God (band) it just turned to vandalism. You think it is still not enough. Ok why not. We can wait, maybe they stop it.--Lykantrop (Talk) 08:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Accursed Lands

Thank you for your efforts to protect the Accursed Lands article and talk page. I know it's not a terribly important article, and needs cleanup in its own right, but your efforts on its behalf have gone above and beyond what I'd expected. Jclemens (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

So, White Cat... I have a Shadow Gelert character available. Want him? -(Doofallslya v^_^v) Ékséj 06:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, I do not quite understand. What is this about? -- Cat chi? 20:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
My apologies, it was an All Fools' Day joke ([5]). In truth, I had no idea you wouldn't respond until now. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 20:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry I was offline for the most part of the past 48 hours. Could you explain what is this about? Granted the spirit of April 1 is gone but I would like to know. -- Cat chi? 21:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
As an April Fool's Day joke I changed my userpage at about 23:30 or so (PST) yesterday, replacing the "Edit Summary Shenanigans" section with a David Letterman-style Top 10 list ("How to Ruin a Perfectly Good D&D/D20 Campaign"). Number four on that list was "Ask White Cat to join in as a Shadow Gelert." (For the uninitiated, "Shadow" is an all-black coloration, and the Gelert is (literally) a dog; hence it was an irony). See the link I provided above. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 21:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Sarcasm? I think not

Dude, when I put down that thing about the mudkip edit, I wasn't trying to be sarcastic. I was serious when I wrote that summary. In any case, the Mudkip meme is popular enough to gain mention on wikipedia, and I felt that brief summary was appropriate. What's wrong with internet memes anyway; they're a big part of our current culture...—Preceding unsigned comment added by StealthsneakII (talk • contribs) 21:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No source, no addition. And even if you have a source, consensus is that it's best added at List of Internet phenomena. I was not being sarcastic - read the FAQ I linked to, please. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 21:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Uh...

What's this about? It was meant to be a jovial "watch out" warning. Second time today someone's misunderstood me. Sceptre (talk) 07:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

At this point in time, a bottle filled with rice and urine would be far more communicative than me. Here's a little tip: If my edit summary hints that I'm pissed, stay away for a few hours - it takes me a while to cool down. And, no, Wikipedia isn't the source of the stress. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 07:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Pokevandal

Ummm... this ip keeps tapping my talk page in weird ways. Thanks for reverting one of the edits.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 08:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This user is a SIHULM vandal; revert and report/block when necessary. I'm busy keeping an eye at Category:Requests for unblock. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 08:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for removing the vandalism on my talk page. --Eastlaw (talk) 18:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Null persp. He's blocked now, too. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 19:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Well then, thanks for blocking him. I try to make productive contributions to Wikipedia, and I really don't have time for crap like what this guy was doing. --Eastlaw (talk) 19:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Nor do I, but, then again, I've got plenty of other tings on my plate (like worrying about the next V-Dash sock)... -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 19:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

My page

Thanks for helping. I appreciate it. But, the flaming sadly continues on IGN...I'll take care that case myself though.SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do. It's starting to calm down on IGN but, as a just in case, could you lock it for a week? Thanks!SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 01:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so very much! I.O.U.!SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 01:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:CHU

Per this, I thought you should see this. - Milk's favorite Cookie 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of that discussion; however, I commonly use the clerknote template to signify whenever I fix a request. -Jéské (v^_^v Detarder) 23:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletable?

Looking through recent changes, I found an IP making edits to a user page: Fishfishfishfsh (talk · contribs) (edits on the page are hidden notes). The IP (141.209.238.58 (talk · contribs)) wasn't vandalizing the page, but it appears that the user page and account were created for social networking or blogging purposes only. The user page I found seems to be the second page used for this purpose by the same users, along with Vbushnell2007 (talk · contribs) (whose page actually explains at the top how to hide comments on the user page). The user(s) who own the pages have not edited anywhere else in WP, so I assume that these are single-purpose accounts. I'm mildly irritated at this misuse of WP, and would like to know it straight if the pages qualify for deletion at all. I don't want to go and begin the deletion process and find out I missed some sentence somewhere explaining how I can't nominate them; I've spent a while looking through the deletion policies, but I'm not sure which applies to this situation. I could just be acting overly-cautious again coming to you (hesitation and procrastination plague me yet), but I'd still like to be absolutely sure. By the way, thanks again for the help before. -- Comandante {Talk} 22:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Send them to MfD. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 22:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Got it, thanks. -- Comandante {Talk} 00:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Protection?

Through vandalism ..... best to protect your page for non-auto confirmed? Pedro :  Chat  22:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

No. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 22:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What's the protection for?

[6] Nothings happened to me so far. HalfShadow (talk) 02:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Wrong; you were being crapflooded. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 02:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Ah. And because you deleted it, it literally never happened as far as I'm aware. I assumed there was a reason for the protect. HalfShadow (talk) 02:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted that I wasn't the person who originally protected it; I merely reinstated the protection of another administrator (since I'd deleted the page, the protection was nullified). -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 02:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Need any assistance?

Want me to get rid of those ridiculous diffs or would you like to do the honors?¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait until the crapflood has ended first, then by all means feel free if I'm not already on it. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 03:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha ;).¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and ere I forget: Don't forget to keep past bad revisions deleted. I don't want to give these guys a new avenue of attack. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 03:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandal Reversion

Thanks for cleaning up my user page. I haven't had as much time to be on patrol lately, so the helping hand is much appreciated.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 05:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Null persp. -Jéské (v^_^v X of Swords) 06:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

A user creating nonsense pages

talk page. What would you suggest? Enigma message Review 08:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Pretty clear voa. Blocked indef as such. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 09:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of it, Enigma message Review 16:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your anti-vandalism work

Thanks again for your anti-vandalism patrol work.

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Awarded to Jéské Couriano for his valiant fight against Vandalism by Gavin Collins (talk) 08:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


Could I ask a favour? The following articles have had their cleanup tags removed by single purpose IP accounts in the last few hours:

Would you mind semi-protecting them for a few days from vandalism by anon IP accounts? --Gavin Collins (talk) 08:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Gimme a sec. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 09:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
My suggestion is to put in a request at WP:RPP - I expect a crapflood to happen (hence the reason I moved this thread here) and will more likely than not be stuck doing damage control. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 09:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

More threats from a new user

Hi,

It looks like this user has not learnt anything after you have warned him. I did not want to remove his comments from the talk page as I was not sure what the best course of action would be. I thought you would want to know of his continuing threats. --Ubardak (talk) 09:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch

Maybe it would be best to semi-protect the page for the time being, seeing as numerous anons are out to vandalize this Talk Page. Otherwise, these IPs just seem to be feeding off of other editors' reversions of their vandalism. ~ Homologeo (talk) 05:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

These editors moved from User talk:SeattleJoe after I deleted their target revision there; I brought it up at AN/I because some revisions look like they'll need to be deleted in order to nip this attack in the bud before the page is semi'd. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 05:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. I'm glad to hear someone's on top of this. ~ Homologeo (talk) 05:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Null persp. I'm busy with other things, or I'd do the deletion and selective revisions myself. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 05:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

SeattleJoe

Hi there Jéské. I happened upon SeattleJoe (talk · contribs)s talk page (after posting a block notice) and noticed you semi-protected it. Would you mind changing that to full protection? That guy is back, posting that he's reported people to the FBI and basically vandalizing his talk page. It's been removed but we outta stop him from causing more trouble. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 21:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I semi'd it for a different reason, but I'll look. If he is continuing such threats, I'll ramp it up to full. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 22:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Done -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 22:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Good deal, many thanks. Hopefully none of the folks he was arguing with see it. I'd hate to lose editors over paranoia and misinterpretation. Ty again.Nobody of Consequence (talk) 22:38, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Assuming good faith

Silly Jeske, you should it doesn't work concerning bots ;) Sceptre (talk) 23:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

So you'd think... How'd you like the cake? -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 23:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Not much; she never gave it to me. I heard the cake was a lie from somewhere, actually. Sceptre (talk) 00:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your prompt response and writing to the user who felt trolled. I refactored my commnets to VoA somewhat. Thanks, SqueakBox 23:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I both thank and welcome. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 23:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Request

I am requesting to have the Rollback permission replaced on my account. I was unaware of the indepthness of the issue that I was getting into yesterday. The admin who took action yesterday and removed from my account is unavaliable at this time, and has stated that I may reapply for use of the tool again. I am finding it aggravating to attempt to revert vandalism and having to go through the undo function. Thanks for your consideration. Dustispeak and be heard! 21:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't touch rollback. Sorry. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 23:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:WEB

I have moved the discussion regarding WP:WEB in Wikipedia_talk:Notability#WP:WEB. Please join the discussion. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 22:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Soccermeko

I noticed you giving a ray of hope that you may unblock. Please think carefully before you do. Soccermeko has proven to be a very tenacious puppetmaster that I have been wrestling with through nearly a dozen incarnations. The main problem is that he isn't an obvious vandal ... he just adds unsourced information and rumours, and edit wars to hold them in. He was ultimately blocked for creating a crew of puppets to agree with him on talk pages. This editor is clearly Soccermeko back again.Kww (talk) 01:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoa!

Good Zinglon! All I did was to look away from my watchlist for an hour and I got this:

  1. (Protection log); 12:18 . . Jéské Couriano (Talk | contribs) protected User talk:Urutapu ([move=sysop])
  2. (Protection log); 12:18 . . Jéské Couriano (Talk | contribs) protected User:Urutapu ([move=sysop])
  3. (Protection log); 12:17 . . Jéské Couriano (Talk | contribs) protected My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit. (Grawp target [create=sysop])
  4. (diff) (hist) . . User talk:Betacommand‎; 12:13 . . (+428) . . Mike.lifeguard (Talk | contribs) (→list of wikis: new section)
  5. (Deletion log); 12:03 . . Zzyzx11 (Talk | contribs) deleted "My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit." (content was: '#REDIRECT User:Urutapu' (and the only contributor was 'Zzyzx11'))
  6. (Deletion log); 12:03 . . Tiptoety (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit." (G3: Vandalism)
  7. (Move log); 12:02 . . Zzyzx11 (Talk | contribs) moved My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit. to User:Urutapu (revert)
  8. (Move log); 12:02 . . Zzyzx11 (Talk | contribs) moved Talk:My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit. to User talk:Urutapu over redirect (revert)
  9. (Deletion log); 12:02 . . Zzyzx11 (Talk | contribs) deleted "User:Urutapu" (deleted to make way for move (CSD G6))
  10. (Move log); 11:55 . . Werningly (Talk | contribs) moved User talk:Urutapu to Talk:My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit. (for great juѕtice and epic lulz; also, go to [spamlink])
  11. (Move log); 11:55 . . Werningly (Talk | contribs) moved User:Urutapu to My name is Urutapu because I like to go poopoo and shit and then eat my shit and smear my face with my own shit and shit my shit out again and repeat the process because I'm a freak who likes shit. (for great juѕtice and epic lulz; also, go to [spamlink])

What happened? I thought these logs aren't on watchlists. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 04:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

They were added in a recent MediaWiki update. Trust me, it's helpful. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 08:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Grawp

Thanks for that - apparently I've pissed him off enough he's after me now. I'll probably leave it move protected, there's really no reason for anyone to be messing with my user pages. Thanks again. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

No, he appears to be just attacking random users. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 23:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Pokémon anime image

Hi Jéské! I was wondering if you could restore Image:Pokemon-diamond-and-pearl-group.png. Maxim removed it a month ago because it had a bad FUR. If I had known that, I would have been happy to improve it. Could you please put it back? I wanted to ask Maxim him/herself, but it seems that he/she has commited suicide (see the user's talk page), so I ask you because you are a Pokémon fan. Cheers, Face 23:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I can, but you will have to have the FUR, no questions asked, when I restore it. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 23:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
No can do - restoration will not bring back the pic. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 23:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Ehm... why not? - Face 13:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I've tried. When I looked at the old revisions, the pic was not there; all that was there was the NFCC tag. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 17:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Weird. Perhaps it's standard procedure to permanently remove a non-free image with copyright problems? I've asked about this at the village pump. - Face 18:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Apparently User:EVula has magical fingers, because he revived the image without any problems. I've written a FUR for it, and have re-added it to Pokémon (anime). Cheers, Face 22:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Re Web forum planning vandalism discussion at WP:ANI

I have updated on what this group are currently up to. -- Roleplayer (talk) 21:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

And I have semi'd the targeted articles. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 21:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for taking time out of your schedule to respond to the users of AltNation directly - and also to apologise for my own failure to stop them before it got out of hand. Having previously reverted vandalism I made the mistake of informing users I was doing so on the thread on which they discussed it (there's been three or four, and my username here is what it used to be there). I was ridiculed for it and, seeking to avoid creating a scene, decided to just let it lie next time thinking it would be soon picked up anyway. This was a big mistake and not one I have any intention of repeating. I'm not the most active editor on this site, I'm a journeyman editor who, aside from a few prolonged article improvement drives, just edits now and again. Like I said though, I'm not prepared to let it happen again though, and believe me future edits from them will be reverted instantly, without my informing them that I'm doing so (which will only encourage it, my having stopped previous vandalism has certainly added a "let's see how long the edits will last before Addy reverts them" edge to their fun). So thanks again, it was much appreciated!Caissa's DeathAngel (talk) 19:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
You're very much welcome, Caissa. If nothing else, you presented your case and helped try and curb this "game", and for that it should be me thanking you, and not the other way 'round. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 19:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Five day semi-protection for Neil Gaiman?

I don't understand. There was one vandalism edit today that someone reverted, and the most recent other editing was on the thirteenth. Little vandalism and no edit warring: why the semi-protection? Aleta Sing 21:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:AN/I#Web forum planning vandalism. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 22:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Roleplayer posted the same thing on my talk page. That's obnoxious to say the least. Aleta Sing 22:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Semi'd stapler

Why did you semi-protect stapler? It just had one anon doing two edits; probably won't be back. Dicklyon (talk) 17:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

See the response to my query about the Neil Gaiman semi-protection in the section immediately above. It's part of the same meat-puppet vandalism ring. Aleta Sing 17:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Dicklyon (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome! Aleta Sing 17:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Mediation?

Jeske,

You and Percy are the two admins I associate most closely with Wikiproject D&D, so I figured I’d approach you about this (posting this on both talkpages). As you know, there has been a lot of drama over User:Gavin.collins and his editing style and how it applies to RPG articles and fiction articles in general. I know that both of you agree with some of the things he’s trying to accomplish but that you’ve both also had conflicts over his approach to editing. There is a long list of editors that have had conflicts with him, spanning over the talk pages of who knows how many articles and user pages. The RfC conducted six months ago softened his approach somewhat, but the conflicts continue, as seen most recently here today.

Now, we could all continue this way in perpetuity. Perhaps one or more people will get themselves in trouble over it, or it could continue to be a long drawn-out trench war. Maybe Gavin will eventually give up and leave, or maybe the most vocal/active of the RPG editors will do so. But that’s not how Wikipedia is supposed to work. It’s supposed to be discussion, collaboration, debate, and consensus. It’s supposed to be civility, assuming good faith, no personal attacks, and handling disputes like adults. And we just don’t have that on D&D articles when Gavin is involved.

Gavin has very specific, firmly held, soundly-reasoned (in his own mind at least) reasons for wanting things the way they are. This is fine. Everybody he interacts with wants things their own way. This is fine, too. However, in a give-and-take atmosphere of compromise, “Do it my way or else” doesn’t work. Gavin may very well be right about some of the things he’s talking about, but bad interactions have colored people’s perspectives against him. People respond to his words and actions defensively, and soon incivility flies back and forth between both parties and nothing positive can be accomplished (or anything that is accomplished leaves a bad taste in someone's mouth). Sometimes other editors have attacked him preemptively, and sometimes he comes on as the aggressor. I don’t want to think that the numerous people who’ve had these interactions with him are always the ones in the wrong; with Gavin usually the only person on the other side of the coin, he seems to be the common denominator in the equation. If he really was always as right as he seems to think he is, wouldn’t more people be rushing to defend him and his viewpoints?

But Wikipedia, again, is not about being right or wrong; it’s about building an encyclopedia with consensus. Some of us have tried to deal with Gavin politely, and bring up the issue of his civility, or point out where he may be tagging an article inappropriately. This seems to have little or no effect, and this struggle has been going on for over six months now with no end in sight. So, rather than continue a seemingly eternal conflict, I would like to bring up a request for Mediation to try to get us to a point where Gavin can do his thing without butting heads relentlessly. I can only hope that will help. Maybe some mentoring would help with his WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and other issues. Perhaps some of the RPG editors could use this as well, but I can’t honestly see us being the crux of the problem.

Please let me know what you think of this. BOZ (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Good speech, but it seemed rambling at some points. 7/10. And, yes, I'll willingly do mediation in re Gavin. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 18:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I get wordy sometimes, sorry.  :) I'll try to keep it brief at the RfM. Now, to figure out the steps for that... BOZ (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I think when Boz uses the phrase "building an encyclopedia with consensus", this is actually a euphemism for the following point of view which he has been pushing my way that "Gavin should not be engaged in the cleanup of RPG articles, because he is not an expert". My understanding of this "mediation" is that is a veiled attempt to accuse me of misbehaviour (see above -"WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and other issues"), and to make other sweeping generalisations about my edits, editing style and interaction with members of the RPG projects. The crux of the problem as I see it is that there are many many RPG articles that need cleanup, but I have see very few of the editors perform this task themselves. When other editors get involved in the cleanup process, this generates a lot of hostility, a little of which has come from Boz himself[7]. As far as I can see, Boz is already canvassing support for this hate campaign, and I don't think I want to particiapate - it looks like a lynching party from my perspective.--Gavin Collins (talk) 06:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't expect you to be an expert (and nor does BOZ) - I merely expect you to know at least screamsheet knowledge of what you're tagging. You have demonstrated in the past that you think that tabletop RPGs and CYOA books are indistinguishable, and you have, insofar as I have seen, disregarded concerns about your work in this subject area. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 06:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I think you are mistaken, and I have actually gone on record to say that games are not books. However, many instructions, game guides, campaign settings, adventures and modules come in book format.--Gavin Collins (talk) 08:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
This sort of twisting of other people's words has been part of the problem all along, and - though a sweeping generalization it may be - it is a common part of Gavin's responses to other people, as is the phrase "POV pushing" directed at others which I have warned him is strictly against the civility policy, as is assuming bad faith "mediation is ... a veiled attempt to accuse me of misbehaviour", as is saying that the problem of fixing RPG articles is big and no one else is willing to fix it but him, as is blaming others for the hostility; in fact Gavin's response above encapsulates basically all the problems other editors have had in working with him. I have admitted to my wrong-doing in terms of my own incivility, but as far as I can recall he has not. Again, all of this serves to work against cooperation. I don't hate Gavin, I just think I've tolerate the above behaviors about as long as I'd like to, and apparently I'm not alone judging from the responses on the Wikiproject page. BOZ (talk) 11:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Our disagreement is not one way; removal of cleanup templates without making non-trivial improvement is the real problem. For me the issue is straight forward: removing the templates is self-defeating for the articles in question and will not make the problem of poor content go way. I have explained this over and over again, quoted the relevant guidelines, and gone to great lengths to set out my viewpoint so it is transparent and open to critism. I am prepared to defend by position by making my position known to editors on their talk pages who remove the templates without providing reasonable justification. Where disagreements arise, I ask for a fresh perspective from WP:Third Opinion or RFC because I admit I am not an expert and think it possible that I could be mistaken. However, I don't see RPG editors following anything like the regard for due process; the only 2 exceptions I can think relate to dsiputes about the value of citing the Origins Award or En World. I may not have a "screamsheet knowledge of...CYOA" (I admit I don't know what these terms mean), but I do know I am making efforts to engage RPG editors to improve articles. Your view that mediation is needed to address my behaviour does not encapsulate all our issues. The position you have put forward is very one-sided and does not address the underlying issue: the sabotaging of the cleanup process is a form of POV pushing if not vandalism; address this issue and the matter of civility will go away.--Gavin Collins (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
To have "screamsheet" knowledge is to have common knowledge of the subject matter. CYOA is short for the "Choose Your Own Adventure" genre. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 18:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. If you reread what I'm saying, you'll see that I have admitted that the disagreement is not one-way. BOZ (talk) 14:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Jeske, I could use some commentary from you here regarding the request - thanks. :) BOZ (talk) 14:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Protecting my talk page

Hi. I noticed that you just protected my talkpage, but there are no recent edits in the history. Was something posted there that was deleted from the history? I also noticed that you or someone else did delete some Grawp vandalism from the history. Thank you for the protection and for getting rid of the vandalism anyway.--Urban Rose 21:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I deleted your user page and talk page because you were being targeted by revision-edit vandals; the deletion was to remove the revisions so that they couldn't be used to vandalize the page. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 22:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm guessing that it's more of Grawp's work. I hope that the abuse report I working on against him turns up something.--Urban Rose 01:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not him - the same vandals were attacking your userpage with an unrelated one-sentence... proposition... but I wouldn't be surprised if he posted the link at that rat's nest. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 01:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes that's what I meant. He's notorious for posting links to vandalized revisions on message boards and asking others to save them. Therefore it's hard to tell if Grawp style vandalism is actually from Grawp or from imitators. But anyway, thanks for looking out for me.--Urban Rose 18:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Changing my username

Hi, Jéské, and thanks for responding to my WP:CHU request. I have left a question there for you. xpanmanx (talk) 01:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied there. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 01:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Cleanup tags

I note that a few editors may taken the current discussions as an opportunity to remove cleanup tags from articles with obvious or abundant content issues [8] [9]. If this trickle becomes a torrent, I intend to request clarification for these edits, and would hope for your assistance if this turns out to be vandalism. --Gavin Collins (talk) 19:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never seen those two editors before - is there any way to tell if those edits are coincidental to the mediation discussion, or if they really are sometime trying to take advantage of "a Gavin under scrutiny" and baiting him? (Impossible to tell, for me.) BOZ (talk) 20:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Oo's edits don't look that way, Gavin, but CSHunt's do look suspicious, given as this is his first edit in a couple of weeks. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 20:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_Pokémon_(441-460)#Lucario

A comment or few from you in this section would be useful. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 20:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandals

I have noticed a great number of IPs vandalizing or at least replacing your talkpage with unnecessary comments. Do you know why? And to my calculations, this message will be deleted soon.--RyRy5 (talk) 02:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes; they're mad at me because I'm deleting their vandalism revision as soon as the article the hit comes off of the Main Page. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 02:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Figures. Anyway, I think your talkpage is the most vandalized page of the day if there was one. I reverted some of their edits to your talkpage BTW. Well, good luck. Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk) 02:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Null persp. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 02:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm taking your previous advice and waiting for the attack to subside. Feel free to delete revisions like these when you wish.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 02:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Trust me, I will. In fact, I'm planning on doing so once they realize that all they're doing is vandalizing a brick of honey-flavored Jell-O. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I Love Money: Challenge Show Protection

Hi. I've been keeping an eye on this article, I Love Money: Challenge Show, and noticed it was recently protected. Looking at the history, it seems someone placed the template on the page so, I'm not sure if this page is actually protected or if this is just an attempt to deter other users from editing the page . I also don't see a request for it on the request page, but would just like to double check before removing the template if it's not in fact protected. Thanks! Pinkadelica 02:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not protected; I've removed the template. For future reference, there's a link at the top of the history page saying "View logs for this page"; if you click on that link it will tell you all the times the article has been protected, marked patrolled, deleted, etc. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 02:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Didn't think so. Thanks! Pinkadelica 02:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

??

You seem to be getting a lot of vandalism here... any idea why?  Moo  Chat  02:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

They want my head because I semi'd today's FA and am going to go deleting their "contributions" after it gets off the main page. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I see... Does this usually happen with FA's? or do you think this is just one user that is somehow using lots of different IP's...  Moo  Chat  03:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not just one user - the IPs are from all over. And, actually, this is the first time I remember it happening. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation filed

I have no idea if a bot will tell you, so I might as well post here.  :) Just remember that you must sign the request within 7 days or the case will be rejected. You may add any additional content-related issues that you also feel need mediation in the following section: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kender#Additional issues to be mediated. BOZ (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding said vandal

So how in the future should I respond to having come across lists of socks that need to be blocked without creating an AN thread? I won't mention the vandal by name if possible, but usually a name is requested. Would it be better in the future if I contact an admin via e-mail for this?--Urban Rose 13:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Contact a CU - my preferred one is Alison (talk · contribs) - and let them handle it. The reason why I say contact a CU is because if there's one account, there's generally ten backup on the same IP. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 18:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation

Hi. In regard to the RfM involving the Kender article, I'm unsure as to whether or not I should add myself to the list as an involved party, and could do with a bit of advice, as I haven't previously been involved in these sorts of proceedings. I guess I probably am involved, in the sense I've been heavily involved in the discussions in regard to that and some of the other articles, but I don't know whether that means I should be there, and my feelings regarding Gavin aren't as strong as some other editors, it seems. In terms of a successful mediation, is it better if all the main parties involved in the debate are listed? My main interest is to help the mediation to be successful for both sides, and I would be willing to join if that would help the process. - Bilby (talk) 10:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

If you don't have any problems with how Gavin has been doing things on those articles, you shouldn't join. Mediation is only used to resolve disputes. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
It isn't that I don't have problems - Kender shows just how problematic his methods can be. And other articles I've been involved in also suffered problems (Paladine, Red Hand of Doom, etc). But I wasn't around when he was deleting articles, so I guess my feelings aren't as strong as some others. What I don't know is whether or not all involved parties should take part in order for mediation to work - I'm willing to, because Kender in particular has been frustrating, but I'm weighing up whether or not I should be as someone involved in the disputes against the effect of having too many people involved in the mediation. - Bilby (talk) 03:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kender.
For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 23:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Hey Jeske, I think the mediator is seeking comment from you: [10] :) BOZ (talk) 13:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Compromised account you tagged

On the website ED on the user talk page of "Grawp" there, a person called Lateral (known here as banned user User:Arkalochori) said he emailed Grawp a bunch of his accounts (it's against the rules to link to the site ED so I won't) and those last bunch of accounts were ones that appeared to be Arkalochori socks. "User:WHEN I WAS A YOUNG BOY" acted like an Arkalochori sock since I first saw it when it used to be active and the one you tagged as compromised User:任 made this odd edit [11] long ago to a talk page archive of an Arkalochori sock. William Ortiz (talk) 10:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


Doh! I just realized Arkalochori just admitted that's his account in this edit [12]. William Ortiz (talk) 10:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yuan Ti

Resolved
 – This is, sadly, a trainwreck. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Paizo and Wotc are separate. Mongoose Publishing has nothing to do with either. Please refrain from personal attacks in the edit summary (have you even read the article?). Since the article has been flagged for notability for SIX MONTHS, either remove the tag, or nominate it for deletion. Anything else? CSHunt68 (talk) 14:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68

Sources there still do not establish notability, though there may be 3rd-parties in there. I'll remove the 3rd party tag, but the notability tag stands. If *YOU* want it gone, nominate it yourself. Asking someone who wants to keep an article to nominate it for deletion is like asking an elephant to give up its trunk. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 18:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
How don't they establish notability? How 'bout 89000 Google hits? I'll be removing the notability tag, as well. Refer to arbitration, if YOU want.CSHunt68 (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
WP:GHITS. GHits are by no means a definitive notability measure. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 22:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Combined with the third-party sources listed in the article, it seems sufficient to me. As indicated, I'll be removing the notability tag. CSHunt68 (talk) 03:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
The Third-party sources, at first glance, do not provide notability (and w/o inline cites, there's absolutely no way to tell). I'll ask for an extension of the full-prot until we can hammer this out. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Sure they do. Good luck, but there's nothing left to hammer out, except the fact that, as you accused me, you seem not to have "read the article". CSHunt68 (talk) 03:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
They don't - or if they do there's no way to tell how, and then there's still a notability issue. On a side note, I opened a thread on you at WP:AN/I. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Since you seemed not to have read the Wikipedia guideline: "using a search engine like Google can be useful in determining how common or well-known a particular topic is". It's not the only thing that should be taken into account, and in this case, it's not.CSHunt68 (talk) 03:57, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
(RI) But at the moment, it's the *only* thing it has. The sources do not indicate notability. If they do, then it's impossible to tell so. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The third-party sources, combined with the GHits, indicate notability. Is there any point in continuing? CSHunt68 (talk) 04:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
Just because a source is third-party does not mean it establishes notability. As there's no way to tell with the ones currently there, the Notability tag is appropriate. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
He said, she said. CSHunt68 (talk) 04:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
And what do you mean by that statement, CS? -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Do you not know what that means, JC?CSHunt68 (talk) 04:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
I don't, honestly. Enlighten me, please. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
"He said, she said" is a term to describe two people with differing viewpoints on the same situation. That is, two people can describe the exact same thing in different, even opposite ways, and it becomes merely a matter of opinion whose story one should "believe". CSHunt68 (talk) 04:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
Ah, thank'ee. As it seems that we're doing nothing more than constantly arguing in circles here, I think it might be best to restrict discussion to the Yuan-Ti page (for the content issues) and the AN/I thread (for the conduct issues). -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Glad to have enlightened you. CSHunt68 (talk) 04:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68


Way to be elitist

Considering the image was considered on the discussion page of the article in question as irrelevant to the topic, it deserved to be deleted. By overriding this majority decision, you have proven yourself to believe that you are more important than a majority. You are censuring us, the population of wikipedia, from expressing the will of the majority, and therefore YOU are the one who should get a "warning." Don't believe yourself to be superior to others.

Consider this your own warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.177.210 (talk) 01:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Bullshit. Wikipedia is not censored; any other editor would have reverted you. If I'm elitist, so is policy. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 04:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Numpty454

So you think that 2 warnings is enough do you? That "vandalism" was good faith editing- by the way havent you seen my recent contributions- i have actually been on RC patrol reverting other peoples vandalism. Agressive editing of talk pages? How is telling people to discuss a matter and vote on it being agressive. May i point you towards wp:newbies?I think you should read it sometime. Regards --Numpty454 (talk) 05:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

A redirect of that nature is not a good way to get people to trust you, and I advocated a 24 hour block because I was aware of your contributions. Please assume good faith; people with disruptive userpages (redirs incl.) have been blocked for less. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 06:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You are my hero

Why, you may ask? For this. That made me chuckle. Keep up the good work! :> Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank'ee. Although, I should note I replied to the semi-prot of the spellcheck template with an atrociously-spelled response. :) -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 06:01, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Second'd. Well played, sir. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 14:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jéské_Couriano/Archive_4&oldid=1175826791"