Hi - I was about to take advantage of your recent de-crufting of this article to add some more (cited) content. I noticed, however, that you've placed this on the GA review. Would you prefer me to wait on any changes until the review works out, or is it okay to edit now? I'm fine either way; I'd just hate to interrupt the process. Kurutalk00:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I got your message and wished to thank you.No hard feelings.I understand the context in which you took that decision at that time. Take care.The Archer16:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I don't know how else to communicate with you. I'm the one who was "speculating" about the status of the potential planets. I'm sorry I did something wrong. I added a true statement to the entries. Using the new planet definition, I researched the available data concerning the status of the bodies and added a line to the entries reflecting the very good possibility that they will be included as planets in the future, as they all meet the given criteria. For example, one that I didn't modify, Quaoar, similarly meets the criteria. I didn't add anything to its page because it already has an entry explaining the same thing: "With the draft proposal for the definition of a planet, whose adoption will be considered in a vote on August 24, 2006, by the International Astronomical Union[1], Quaoar may be made a candidate for consideration as a "pluton", a proposed classification for a planet that takes more than 200 years to orbit the Sun. It is not, however, among the three objects (Ceres, Charon and 2003 UB313) that would immediately be considered a planet if the definition is adopted by the IAU."
Adam Habig - adamthelibertarian at yahoo dot com
As you have been taking suchj an interest in the Zapatero case perhaps you wopuld do something about this user Hagiographer altering my signature [1]. Thanks, SqueakBox03:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi KL, your instructions were fabulous! Very helpful indeed (I was clueless on how to proceed without reading them). Cheers -- Samirधर्म05:23, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I passed on your wikismile to someone I am heatedly debating with, what a great idea! Thanks! I usually get boot warnings, not smiles :) Your kinds actions make me feel real good, because it shows that I am making slow progress: I am starting to learn how to build consensus and be civil. I have learned that you never know how much little actions of kindness effect people, sometimes a small act of kindness can really make a BIG difference in a persons life. Thanks again, dear wikiuser. Travb (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't this page be "Allegations of state terrorism by the United States"? Any other page only has "United States" as its title, not "United States of America". Iolakana|T 17:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
These users are requesting unblock and User:Jmcrownpoint is still making personal attacks. As you were the blocking admin for sockpuppetry, I thought I'd let you know. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (TC) 03:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you indefinitely block this user? The "evidence" provided by Vivaldi is only allegations and not proven. Also, it doesn't seem a checkuser was ever performed, just a block based on allegations. --HResearcher02:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't you just tell me on another page that sockpuppetry isn't even against Wiki policy? Then you told me that a person couldn't be banned for it? I'm glad to see you are starting to learn the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. You might also like to know that the block of ESL344G was reviewed by another admin pschemp (talk·contribs) that concurred with the decision to block the user. You might also like to know that Wikipedia is not a court and evidentiary standards such as "proof" are not required for administrative action. Vivaldi (talk) 11:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was scanning through the user pages of wikipedians. On your user page, i was amazed to see that you have visited Scotland but not England? It seemed quiet strange to me.--nids21:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First off, thanks for saving my hide. Bose's Sock suspect thing passed without a checkuser and I grew afraid because of that. A checkuser would have absolved me. Is there any recourse for this? I was contributing fine before all these baseless RfC and sock charges were made against me. I dont want to use the word "revenge" but I am pretty pissed. I know they attacked me because of my religion. What does ArbCom do? I have heard of it, and I heard they give out loooooooooong blocks and bans for troublemakers.BakamanBakatalk21:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You weighed in that you thought I was a sock puppet with NO IP trace or anything? Please explain. There are several people trying to get me banned. I'm not trying to get anyone banned. I also have no need for creating any sock puppet. I am patient and not stupid. If I needed to edit something something and was concerned about 3RR, I could wait a few hours- and would never create a sock puppet to edit something that I KNOW 3 or 4 people are going to change anyway!!! You don't think it is more likely that someone trying to get me banned is the sock puppet? I would like a full explanation for your comment, and an IP trace to prove or disprove exactly WHICH editor created that sock puppet, and then the results published - after which time you will be issuing me a well deserved apology
you have yesterday blocked user 194.9.5.12 on users Rex Germanus` request. please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Various_terms_used_for_Germans#What_is_the_intention_to_create_an_article_like_this.3F. Please refer also to the concerned article`s content. The article has been created by Rex and aims at insulting Germans just because of their nationality. As you will see, user 194.9.5.12 tried to find out what Rex`s intention was to create an article like this and that he has the impression that Rex wants to demonstrate and foster anti-German feelings. If you have the time, please also have a look at Rex activities for eg on the discussion page of the article concerning the German language. Please note as well that it was rather rex who tends to be insulting and agressive. However, many thanks for your assistance in advance! (80.226.160.20016:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Hi thank you for the answer. As you have blocked the IP for a month I would like to know why you came to the conclusion to a) block the user at all and b) for such a long time. I would be be very thankfull in case you could give a more detailed answer, maybe you could also give some examples of his abuses. In case you have no time or you do not want to give a more detailed answer, it would be great if you could tell me how and where I could appelate against you decision. However, I am very disappointed that someone like user Rex who demonstrates and fosters his neagtive feelings against a certain, ethnic group of people gets support by an Wiki-administrator. (80.226.184.20314:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Hello again. I thought that you knew about the sock puppet case of Ulritz. Considering that it is possible that Ulritz is using this IP to get more addition consensus, one person—one expression. Ulritz has possibly been using this IP to get more expression. I do not know if that is 100% true if he is doing so, because only people with m:checkuser has access to see a contributors IP address. I would be happy to reduce the block if you feel that it is too long, and if so, I will reduce it to one week. Thanks, Iolakana•T14:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kilo-Lima, thanks again for your answer. Well, it may be that this Ulritz guy is causing a lot of trouble but I am not him and that is exactly what I have already told Rex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rex_Germanus#Your_abuse_report). Either you believe me or you do not believe me but blocking me for four or even one weeks is another thing. As far as I know it is a basic principle that I do not have to prove that I am not Ulritz (and I am not!) but you have to give evidence that I am Ulritz. However, thanks for your offer to reduce the block to one week but accepting that would mean confirming that I did something wrong, but - from my perspective - I did not. Hence, I would gently ask you again to please tell me what I have done that you think I deserved to get blocked except for the unproved assertion that I could be this Ulritz guy. Thx in advance! (80.226.223.2412:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Respectfully, I'd like to point outthat we engaged in a chat session with two wikipedia admins simultaneously from two separated locations (which can be shown in the record here: ,bose kept a record of the chat session on irc, you may verify with admins Blnguyen and Skriet of the truth of this session):
As you can see, it is clear that we are two separate users. I was editing as anon before and Skriet told me to get a login and I did. I am very unhappy that this sort of thing goes on in wikipedia, where any baseless accusation of sockpuppetry colores a user without evidence other than vague interpretations of similarities in editing etc. Please look at the evidence (different ips from different service providers and different domains etc etc) and understand that I have the utmost faith and respect for wikipedia rules and regulations and would not violate them or disrupt the process (at least, not knowingly). I believe that certain users with vested interests are trying to harass users they don;t like out of wikipedia by ganging up against them. This should not be allowed for the purpose of wikipedia's policy of 'anyone can edit' unless the user is overtly vandalistic or trying to evade wikipedia rules, which neither party has done (excpt maybe bose on a few occasions, but they don;t seem that major, though I understand you may disagree). if thereis any other way by which you would like me to cooperate in order to resolve this problem, please let me know. Thanks very much.Hkelkar12:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well... It never really supplied any evidence to state that you are not a sockpuppet (though, I am not taking sides here). Who exactly is <**suppressed**>? Is it an IP address or a username; if you don't wish to disclose it that is fine. It was just really a conversation about the cases. The RFCU is currently in progress; until then, there's not a lot that I can do. If it comes back "unrelated" or "inconclusive", then you have nothing to worry about. Please keep the tag on your page: I know that it is terribly ugly, but it helps us keep track of things whilst other things are in progress, after the RFCU comes back with a result then you can remove it. Thanks, Iolakana•T12:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Suppressed is Subhash Bose. There is no investigation pending on Hkelkar because it has not been filed. That is why I removed it. Its merely Holywarrior's attempt to get people like Hkelkar and myself out of the way.BakamanBakatalk15:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don;t know why bose put <**suppressed**>, maybe he doesn;t want to reveal his irc login. In any case, there is a line that shows the different ip addresses for the two of us. I was in my lab, and bose was at home. A traceruote of the i addresses should establish that clearly.Hkelkar20:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like User:Kmaguir1 is at the sockpuppet or meatpuppet stuff again. Not directly related to that, he first put a {prod}, and then followed with an {afd} on several articles that he had shown no previous interest in, but which me and other editors he's conflicted with have created. These nominations seem like bad-faith to me, especially since that's basically his whole editing activity since he's come back. But OK, fine, let AfD voters opine as they think best.
However, it appears he's not so happy with the probable outcomes of these AfD's. Especially the one on Danny Yee (an article I created, and someone I've emailed with infrequently over several years... though I don't think I've ever been in the same hemisphere as Yee, so Kmaguir1's apparent fantasy that we're best buds seems odd). Anyway, in the course of that vote, some oddness has occurred:
A "delete" vote from User:72.147.230.148: [4]. This AfD vote is the first edit ever from that IP address, and...
After checking where the IP address was located, I wanted to see if Kmaguir1 would admit the IP address was his, or controlled by him. This was the chat on his talk page:
Oxford, Mississippi
Sounds like a nice town. LotLE×talk 01:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
It's to die for. So much better than Memphis--you know, where I am.-Kmaguir1 01:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Admittedly, it's a bit ambiguous, but it seems to indicate that he knows his "proxy vote" came from Oxford MS; either because he had a shell account or because he asked someone there to vote (or because he is, in fact, currently in Oxford MS).
A "delete" vote from User:Shazbot85: [5]. It appears that Shazbot is a distinct person from Kmaguir1. One who says he attends the University of Memphis (same as Kmaguir1), edits mostly on Calvinism and C.S.Lewis (topics Kmaguir1 often discusses), and whose first two AfD votes ever were those on Danny Yee and Raymundo Baltazar (two of the {prod}/{afd}'d articles Kmaguir1 nominated).
Bracket my comment on Shazbot85. Although I still suspect that Shazbot85 was asked by Kmaguir1 to look at the AfD's, s/he has since voted in several, sometimes disagreeing with Kmaguir1. Moreover, after the Danny Yee article was expanded in a manner requested by Shazbot85, s/he changed his/her vote, showing open-mindedness and not any conformance with the particular wishes of Kmaguir1. There is, of course, absolutely nothing wrong with simply looking at an issue another editor invites attention to, if independent judgement is used. LotLE×talk06:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merely vindictive is the insult of Yee that Kmaguir1 added to Talk:Danny Yee at: [6].
You have no proof or reasonable ability to be suspicious of ANYTHING. It's a bit ambiguous? How about ludicrous. Every time someone supports a decision I make, Lulu is consistently claiming sockpuppetry in a vain attempt to try to make one of the charges stick--and so when an edit history is low or is nil, I get blamed. If I went through her stuff and found some people supporting her with no edit history, should I then attempt to label them as sockpuppets? That having been said, the fate of the AFD is going to be no consensus, because there is no consensus among Wikipedians on it--although there should be. It's non-notable. If you want to block me because Oxford, Mississippi is close to Memphis, Tennessee, that's the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard.-Kmaguir106:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly. I apologise if it was any distress toward you, but it is protocol. Apologies again, and thanks for being patient. Iolakana•T20:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I have just placed [[image:bye bye.jpg]] on the page Alien (film). I believe this is okay under the fair use rationale. I noticed that you judged its use on another page (Xenomorph (Alien), so I was wondering if you wanted to do the same for this one. - Zepheus <ツィフィアス>20:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The seems a good reason for me to not put too much store by checkuser. An account turns up joins in a dipute, 1 minute later makes effectively empty edits to user and talk pages looks like classic sockpuppet actions to me. But makes little difference to me personally one way or other... --pgk16:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm curious about why you removed the {{DisneyLogo}} tag from the image, since the logo is marked at the bottom as copyrighted by Disney. Thanks! -- ArglebargleIV15:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you disagreed with the PROD for Pedro Sá, for the reasons that he has a "generous amount of Google hits" and a listing on IMDB.
May I suggest that in future, you take care to check these things properly. The Google link you gave only searches for Pedro Sa (21,200,000 hits) - without quotes, and without the acute accent on the a. These things make a difference. You should have searched for "Pedro Sá" (with quotes, and with the accent). This returns 89,200 hits. Big difference! Still quite a lot of hits, yes, but if you actually look at them, you will see that not only is this a fairly common name — meaning that all these hits do not reference this one particular individual — but many of them include the place name "San Pedro SA" in Argentina. Therefore in this case, the Google test is an extremely poor measure of notability.
Also, the IMDB entry is that of an art director. It should be clear that this is not the same person of the WP article.. if you actually read it.
I have listed the article at regular AfD now, but just wanted to give you a tip for the future to be careful when it comes to using Google & IMDB to evaluate notability.
I first gave this to H2P but I think because you're the one who blocked me, you may be able to do more.-
You know its me right? I'm the real "Father's Wish". I just read everything over and I can't believe what has happened. I leave for awhile and bunch of people jump all over my name (which meaning is something that is very important to me by the way). Now I can't even do anything. Your probably wondering why I didn't say anything earlier. This is exactly why. I didn't want to get "into" all this, you know? I just wanted to come here and post info on a show that I enjoy if I found them to be accurate. Now I got a bunch of "vandals" I'm paying for, even when some have stated that they're not me. And the others.... "[You] get adreneline out of this?" All your doing is sitting on your ass typing a bunch of stupid crap onto a computer! What's the next big thing for you, jaywalking? Telling people to look over there when there' nothing there?
Look to be honest, I still don't really know how this place works, like I said before I'm only here for Avatar. I don't even know how to upload a picture. So I don't know how to deal with all this either. Please, just do whatever you can. I don't mind not having an account, but getting blamed for what someone else did is something that I can't tolerate.
By the way, your welcome for the magazine info that I put up. I also put up info on the Burger King advertising and a link to an article discussing the success of the Avatar cine-manga. See how helpful I can be?
You know what’s really funny? All that (spoiler) information that I posted weeks ago for the upcoming episodes (which were 100% accurate by the way) that always got deleted an hour later, are now on the pages, a good two weeks before the episodes. From the look of it, they’re here to stay. How messed up is that? Some of what is written are exactly what I originally put down. Speaking of originality, do you that the summary for The Drill is taken from the TV.com summary for that episode. How do I know? Beause I’m the one who originally submitted the summary (which they’ve simply copied and pasted here) to the TV.com guides. Funny isn’t it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.239.75.47 (talk • contribs) 20:08, September 4, 2006.
Following a successful period of consultation WikiProject Scotland has now been launched. As a participant in the Scottish Wikipedians' notice board I wonder if you may be interested in this new endeavour too? If so, please sign-up here. The WikiProject will be replacing some of the functions of the notice board, especially those in the lower half.
While I am here, please also have a look at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Scotland and give it a "Watch". It was started up by User:Visviva a few days ago, after long being mooted at the notice board, and effectively replaces all the AfD listings at the notice board. Being a transclusion of all the on-going discussions it is a much more useful tool.
Even if you do not want to spend too much time on the WikiProject, please give it a "Watch" and feel free to contribute to Talk page discussions: the more contributors the merrier.
Thank you for unblocking my account. I seriously do not know who user Cretanpride is but I can definately say that I am not him/her nor am I a sockpuppet of him/her. I appreciate all your help in resovling this matter. Question: Can I remove/edit the sockpuppet templates from my user page or do those still need to be left up? Again thank you for all your help. Apro 5 September 2006
Particularly vandalistic are his edits of Eurabia and Bajrang Dal. He has also vandalized my user page, rehashing the old sockpuppetry accusation which has been closed. I have reported him for vandalism, but he continues to vandalize the articles and my fixing it might get me above 3RR. I feel that these edits are vandalistic and so, in my opinion, 3RR does not apply.However, since users have been banned for violating even the precept of 3RR before I'd like your opinion on the situation, since I'm still quite new to wikipedia. Please advise. Thank you.Hkelkar21:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support on my RfA. Give me shout if I can be of help. Thanks/wangi 00:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
