Jump to content

User talk:Trotter/2009

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the previous archive, see User talk:John Sloan/2008


Hiya John

I'd be interested in your thoughts on the Wikipedia_talk:Rfa#I hope you all like red thread. (Watchlisting for a few days.) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 04:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Done - Thanks for bringing this thread to my attention! John Sloan (view / chat) 14:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Sure thing ... if I'm aware that people have said something relevant when we're discussing some RfA matter, I let them know. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 14:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Mackinac Bridge

This is in reference to my changes posted to the subject article from IP 68.249.81.38.

I am a regular user of Wiki, but am not interested in creating an account. The IP is a public/corporate one.

The changes I posted to the subject article are valid, NOT vandalism, and should NOT be reverted. I am a licensed structural engineer, and certified FHWA bridge inspector. The correction is important to ensure the proper understanding of the geometry of the bridge. I will continue to post the change until it stops being reverted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.249.81.38 (talk) 17:01, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

For reverting that user's edits on my user page! :) The Helpful One 22:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar moved to awards page
I thought I had a barnstar somewhere! :D The Helpful One 01:20, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: JLS

Although JLS does stand for Jack the Lad Swing, the band are more commonly known by the public as JLS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jemmabond (talk • contribs) 19:10, 3 January, 2009 (UTC)

RE:You have been accused of sockpuppetry

Yes I have Had One other Account but I had forgotten the Password so I created a New Account I am Sorry in it Looked Like Sockpuppetry. Thank you Nathan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadManNathann (talk • contribs) 18:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Heh. ARV. It and I are just not friends.

Normally if someone needs a block, I am handing in the recommendation with Huggle. I su...erm I struggle in actually getting the report manually typed in in a coherent fashion. This time, the report bot rescued it for me after I somehow lost it. *sigh*sinneed (talk) 22:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page! ~ Troy (talk) 23:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Dutch dirty - Dutch Dirty.

He/she created 2... and blanked the lower case one... apparently abandoning it. I changed the flag to db-author. The other one now has a HANGON tag on it, so the article creator may be trying to save it. (and no, this is of no importance, sorry) :) sinneed (talk) 01:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, you reverted his blank with Huggle (it looked like vandalism)... but he was abandoning the article. Sorry, my browser was crashing...it was painting the icons in the edit window the entire time I was typing the (incomprehensible) message. sinneed (talk) 01:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Wikiproject NICK

Sure, how do i join? Elbutler (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Dutch Dirty

Unless and until a sockpuppet case can be opened and settled against Makaylamac (talk · contribs), the deletion of the {{db}} on Dutch Dirty should be assumed to be in good faith. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

With overwhelming evidence already present to suggest sock puppetry. I feel that a SSP case would be pointless and add to an already large backlog. Also, the user has gone beyond the point where I can happily AGF. In any case, lets let a sysop decide whether to speedily delete the page or not. John Sloan (view / chat) 18:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey thanks!

Thanks much for the barnstar! I'm really glad you decided to give Huggle a try. If you need any help, please feel free to ask me and I'll do my best to answer. Thanks again and good luck! Thingg⊕⊗ 19:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: WP:NICK

Dear User:John Sloan,
To answer your question All Grown Up looks kind of messy, but is much neater than the iCarly article.
Um... To start of with, I don't think their should be a premise—that should be part of the introduction to the article.
Also I would change "About the Show" to "Plot."
That rating template underneath the infobox template makes the article look too cluttered—I would delete it.
Their should also be a production section, explaining about the production, inspiration, and behind-the-scenes information.
This article also should have a lot more references.
Their is more minor problems that I wont be able to get to tonight.
Thanx!
ATC (talk) 03:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay you too!
ATC (talk) 03:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The show should have a plot section with the show's plot. :)
ATC (talk) 22:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh no problem, that makes sense.
ATC (talk) 23:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree with CoreEpic... the FFS claim about the soccer player is unverified just now.

The link and his web page cite other schools. Since this would be wp:BLP information, it needs a strong source.sinneed (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It appears he logged out to create another account, very quickly. Impressive really.sinneed (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Sock or meat, puppets they are.
    These accounts seem to exist only for a specific set of edits in a specific set of articles.
    This does actually make sense and does not really indicate anything WRONG in my opinion, these/this individual(s) are associated through CAFETY. The practice of editing logged in/ logged out, coordinating work, etc. is consistent with the organizations activism.
    The abuses that have happened in the past at boarding schools are frightening... but this particular dispute indicates to me a lack of understanding... the kind of death they are campaining to make a part of the article *DRIVES* the abuses. The only way to PREVENT a suicide-by-2-floor-drop is ***TERRIBLE*** restriction, and I would do all I could to prevent that level of confinement for "any teen that mentioned possible suicide", since that would include a VERY large percentage.sinneed (talk) 20:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Confused- X Factor

I understand why you keep deleting it but Eoghan, Ruth and JLS all have pages yet they have not released any music, so how come their pages get to stay but Diana's doesn't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hithere2008 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Because they made the final? thats not a good enough reason for them to stay, Diana has been signed by syco,and theres a reference to prove it, therefore we know she will make music in the future, so i dont see why being in the final or not makes a difference, Diana made the semi final so that has to count for something too —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hithere2008 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry i don't exactly know how to do that, i'm not very good with discussion, i only know how to edit O.o --Hithere2008 (talk) 17:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Really?

Sock puppetry? Really?? Did you think to maybe ask me prior to filing a formal complaint? I may be new to this and I am learning how to maneuver wikipedia, but if there is one thing you'll find is that I am direct and honest. If you take issue with something ask me about it, dont file a Sock Puppetry complaint. Sock Puppetry... wow.CoreEpic (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)CoreEpic

Eoghan Quigg

Thank you for your message concerning my recent changes made to the Eoghan Quigg. I appreciate the importance of a neutral POV, however the revised version of this page certainly does not reflect a neutral point-of-view, rather a unionist one. Please amend recent changes in light of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.240.223 (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect. I am from NI. Think again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.240.223 (talk) 22:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: FFS

Thanks for your note, John. Per your diff here, it seems that neither of them indent their comments which is an identifiable pattern. The admission of "I know him" and the "I live in this area" gives away a meatpuppet and COI feel to the air. I would recommend that both of them be warded away from the article per COI concerns (both of them possibly knew the teenager et al). Please feel free to message me if anything else comes up. ScarianCall me Pat! 22:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Dropped a note on the FFS talk page. Hopefully that'll be the end of it. ScarianCall me Pat! 22:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you considered maybe the fact that both myself and my alleged "meat puppet" new to editing on wikipedia and are still getting used to the indentations and other concepts? There is no "meat puppetry" here. as the meat puppetry page make very clear should be used with care, as it is a harsh accusation. I made the other user aware of this wiki weeks ago, when he asked me a question about the FFS. His registration on here and comments have nothing to do with me, and you should stop accusing me unless you acquire some evidence which doesn't exist that contends with it.CoreEpic (talk) 23:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)CoreEpic

Flagged Revs

Hi,

I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 07:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Top hat

Hi John,

I was just going through some of the revisions made by Wikipedia and I noticed you happened to have reverted a top hat image caption edit. You apparently changed it from reading that the top hat was filled with poop, to excluding that fact altogether. I agree that the word poop is juvenile, and maybe has no place on Wikipedia, but I'm not altogether convinced that the hat was defecation-free.

Have you considered, perchance, that beneath the elegant brim was stowed a gallon of excrement? No, you probably have not. That's not to say that you're wrong, but apparently there are individuals out there that don't overlook such details. I would say that a less biased perspective, perchance, might establish that there is an outstanding, as yet unresolved dispute surrounded the poop-filled-ness of the hat. A subsection on the page would be a more fair treatment, but I understand that that's not necessarily the main purpose of the top hat page.

Please consider my points when making future revisions. 38.117.182.130 (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Replied - John Sloan (view / chat) 20:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA "conduct"

I understand that – with regards to your later comment (after the posting on my talk page), when I said "That really isn't helpful; please remove that silly, unnecessary, remark" - I was referring to a comment by Vodello with a unnecessarily sarcastic link. Caulde 18:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA

Sorry. I was checking through the history to see if the "odd accept comment" was indeed from the candidate, then accidentally editing an old version of the page instead of the current version. Just a dumb mistake on my part. WilyD 21:24, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Quick note

Hey, if you don't want to be blocked if you get an IP with vandalous history, What is my IP tells you your current IP, which you can add to your userpage. M1N (talk) 16:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Scott Hannan

I am personal friend of Scott Hannan. He likes Limes, I can give you his number to confirm. Please refrain from removing facts about him.

Thank you in advance.

Hannan1fan (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This is considered original research. Please provide a verifiable citation for your claim. --Odie5533 (talk) 15:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the way Hannan1fan edits the article, it looks more like petty vandalism to me. John Sloan (view / chat) 15:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Got 'im.

Thanks for leaving the message on the AIV paige. I just clobbered that user for the next 24 hours. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

  • I didn't look that far back. Believe me, if there's anyone who indef-blocks vandals at the drop of a hat, it's me. I'll change it immediately. I didn't take the IP edits into account. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
PS: I'm conservative.  :)
PPS: He's now indef blocked. Thanks for pointing out the mistake. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Glad to have been of help. I simply didn't realize how widespread the damage was. Those kinds of really subtle edits are, IMO, the worst kinds. They look plausible but obviously aren't. Why people do that, I'll never know. BTW, I clobbered the IP for a week. PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Man, can I ever feel your pain. Similar articles had been the targets of the mercifully quiet "Mascot Guy" vandal. He's earned his own info page at WP:LTA/MG. Four-plus years of bizarre, idiosyncratic edits to articles just like that one. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Done and done. That sort of behavior is just wrong. If the guy wants to edit soccer/football articles, all he had to do was to do it right. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.  :) I'll need to log off soon, but I'll keep an eye on that article and lock it down if necessary. PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank You

i would like to personally thank you for the labeling my article for speedy deletion, i know that as of right now it may seem that Michael Thomas Moore Shannon is not a noteworthy person, however i am working to establish his credentials in the article, unlike other admins you have not instantly deleted this article, however have shown me that i need to increase the level of effort i put into this if i want this man's impact to be searchable inside the annals of wikipedia.

-Brian McNeilly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpmcneilly (talk • contribs) 00:02, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

what about my article does not meet notability standards? i tried to read your fancy technical jargon but can't understand, and until i receive notification otherwise i will risk a bocked account because i believe that this information is important for the world to know -Brian McNeilly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpmcneilly (talk • contribs) 00:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Talk:Nancy Cartwright

I considered it, but what would be the point? He doesn't seem to want to pursue this dispute and would probably just ignore any report I made anyway. -- Scorpion0422 22:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Politeness

John - just want to say I'm impressed with your (auto I presume) response to my edit on the Philip page. It was a test and I realise it was the wrong place to do so. I've been doing some reading on Wikipedia, editing, vandalism etc and will create an account shortly. Phil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.177.31.249 (talk) 22:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Whats todays date again!?

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

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

Request reason:

I suffer from hay fever and my nose has been blocked all day! I've heard Wikipedia are quite good with blocks. Could someone here please unblock my nose? Thank you.

Decline reason:

Delete No references, no claim to notability and I've never heard of a nose before. Obvious trolling Jac16888Talk 09:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

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

No problem.

Nothing worse than an anon editor who has nothing better to do than to vandalize this place. I believe our little friend is due for a time-out. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

He's gone for a month. The entire edit history is dedicated to messing up these shows. Nothing better to do on a Saturday, I guess.  :) Anyway, thanks for alerting me. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

  • You bet I will. It's these kinds of chronic vandals which made me decide to get the mop and bucket back in hand. Too many folks like you are working too hard just to have some little snots come by and ruin the work just because they think they can. Thanks again for looking to me for the assist. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Phil Gartside's nationality dispute

Thanks for your message regarding Gartside's nationality. However, it is more a question of how Wikipedia as a whole attributes nationality to an individual: by country of birth, by parental heritage, or by other means. Gartside was born in Dublin and, for me at least, this makes him Irish. As for the use of national flags, you should perhaps consult the Manual of Style yourself and read it again. You will find that the use of flags in info boxes IS acceptable, and I am therefore - once again - restoring the flags for Davies, Megson and Duckworth. Their nationalities are not ambiguous and cause no controversy, and so have no reason not to be present. BBMSteve (talk) 15:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Look, I don't understand what the problem is. Are you goin to trawl through the pages of other football clubs to remove these flags too? I mean, there is no quoted source to prove that Birmingham City chairman David Gold is English, so are you going to go ahead and delete the flags from the Birmingham City page? Maybe you'd like to dispute the nationality of Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley as there is no source confirming that he is English? Your deletion of the flags is pointless. At the very least, Megson's and Davies' nationalities are not disputed and it is therefore okay, according to the MoS, to use flags in the info box. BBMSteve (talk) 15:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

If we went by your methods, there would be very little information on Wikipedia indeed! As I have stated before, just because one person's nationality is in dispute does not mean that everyone else's is! Additionally, there is NOTHING in the MoS to convince me that the use of flags in info boxes is frowned upon. In fact, having re-read the relevant section of the MoS, it seems to be authorising the use of flags in this context. Going against convention for the sake of "tidiness", on the other hand, is not something which the MoS encourages. BBMSteve (talk) 15:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

List of VeggieTales characters

Note: This wasn't vandalism, and it just another name for Jellyfish Labs. TheAE talk/sign 19:10, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I say this way is fine too, I won't revert. Thanks for explaining, John. :) TheAE talk/sign 19:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again!

Given the chronic history from these IPs, I think a block is certainly warranted. I'll knock them out for a month each and we'll see what happens. There doesn't seem to be anything positive from either address. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 21:29, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Help needed

{{adminhelp}}

I'm looking for a sysop who is willing to take immediate and firm action against a serial vandal/misinformation spreading troll. Thank you John Sloan (view / chat) 15:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The issue:

Albbbbeeeennnnoooo was indef blocked for knowingly adding incorrect information to football player articles and football club articles. He is now evading his block and making the same unconstructive edits via his IP. I'd like some immediate and firm action to be taken against this IP so we can nip this in the bud. No final warnings (or any warnings) are requied in this case as the person behind the IP knows exactly what he is doing and has shown no desire to stop. Thank you John Sloan (view / chat) 15:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, John - I'm not an administrator but I'm pretty sure you will not find an admin willing to do what you ask unless at least one warning has been issued, if only for name's sake then no other. Issuing a warning is pretty easy stuff and makes it easier for an admin to take rapid vandal action, so there's no reason not to do it. :-) I see the IP you're talking about and will start warning immediately. Tim Pierce (talk) 15:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Images

Who says? 84.215.17.68 (talk) 01:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It says nothing of the kind, but whatever. Just leave me alone... 84.215.17.68 (talk) 02:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Got 'im.

Holy mackerel, one month and one day on the dot and this weirdo starts in again. What is it with users like this and their fantasy worlds, anyway? You won't have to worry about this monkey for the next six months. If he comes back in November with the same idiocy, I'll motion for a formal complaint against the IP and knock him out until November 2010. Give me a yell if he tries to do any sockpuppeteering. Thanks for the heads-up! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Request

{{adminhelp}}

Hi, could a sysop please delete my userpage and restore just the latest version? I'm asking this because I want to protect my real life identity. Thanks John Sloan (view / chat) 13:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi John, is that OK? ϢereSpielChequers 13:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
That's great! I've been really worried lately about vandals/trolls finding out my true identity, so i've decided to go for total anonymity on Wikipedia! Thanks for the help :-) John Sloan (view / chat) 13:49, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: RFPP

No worries! –Juliancolton | Talk 19:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

< barnstar moved to user page >

Since you're reverting all of the user's edits, this script might be worth a go for you - I think it lets you rollback all of a user's edits in one go. – Toon(talk) 20:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback|Treelo}} Nope, it doesn't end, sorry. treelo radda 20:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, you're set.

I've blocked access to all non-admin users for the next 24 hours. If you have any more hassles, please let me know. Sorry I didn't get to this sooner, but I just logged back on. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Archiving that ANI thread

Jimbo can weigh in like any other editor; he cannot trump consensus. If there is consensus to block, it will be done, but no one appears to be doing it since it's going to be before RFAR. It doesn't need to be unarchived for him to look at it, or comment. rootology (C)(T) 02:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD

I'm nominating an article you have worked on for deletion. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian cult (2nd nomination). Borock (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Archiving old deletion discussions

When you remove completed discussions from the WP:FOOTY page, links to the discussions (but not PRODs) should be moved to the deletion archive, the reason this is done is to make tracking down old discussions easier. Regards King of the North East 20:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey up. Cheers for the barnstar, thats my first one in over a year, I'd prefer it if it was for my contributions to Argentine football but nevermind. If I get a barnstar every time I spot a little mistake, I'll watch you like a hawk in case you make any more (only joking). Take care mate. King of the North East 22:06, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Trotter/2009&oldid=1139340917"