Jump to content

User talk:Luk/Archives/2008/02

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

This Archive Page goes from 1/2/2008 to 29/2/2008 (dd/mm/yyyy)

Previous conversations prior to 1 February 2008 (UTC) are archived there.


check user

France a is stale but these id's aren't. That was the point. You can still do a checkuser against these IDs that were confirmed months back agianst France A... it's a chain.

  1. MrWez (talk · contribs)
  2. ShadowpuppetKing (talk · contribs)
  3. SaxonUnit (talk · contribs)
  4. Nosxalc (talk · contribs)
  5. Brinstar (talk · contribs)

--Dr who1975 (talk) 15:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you please ask another Admin to review this... While everything is under a main ID... sockpuppeteers are going to jump from account to account and that creates a chain that you can still check... these ID's have been checkusered against France A... can you ask a more experienced checkuser editor to review this please.--Dr who1975 (talk) 15:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 15:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

::Actually... my second edit was a reply to your reply. The checkuser protocol is this... you can use more recently active confirmed socks to confirm against newer accounts... that's how it works.--Dr who1975 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind... thanks for the response.--Dr who1975 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
ok ;) -- lucasbfr talk 15:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


CU

Well... yes. That's precisely what I want! I, ah, do understand how checkuser works. Sam Korn (smoddy) 13:40, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 14:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
I've got a feeling this guy isn't smarter than the average idiot. He has, in the last few days, sent me in the region of 40 emails. I believe I have sent him three in return. *sigh* Thanks for listing it, etc! Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Essjay

Hi, I'm pretty sure you forgot about that one, but I was bored and looking at some old RFCU cases and I saw that that one was never listed. I don't really know what to do with it to be honest (archive it, yes, but where ^^). Do you have any strong feelings about me simply deleting it? -- lucasbfr talk 17:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm a bit uneasy about you just deleting it... can't you just leave it floating in the aether? -- tariqabjotu 17:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Fank you very much

Thank you 168.216.71.129 (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

In reference to your comment [1] on my talk page, I always try and use the proper format and give documentation when I report on the WP:AIV page. However, I'm a bit confused as to why I received the message now, when I haven't made a report on WP:AIV in more than three days. If I can ask, what edit of mine brought on the comment, and what could I have done better? I'd appreciate any example you could give, I'm still not certain what caused this. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 18:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 18:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Heh. Missed it by that much, eh? I figured it was something like that, but I wanted to AGF and make sure. No problems. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Three hours?

Only three hours? Special:Blockip/63.97.18.35 I was about to do it for two weeks.... —EncMstr 19:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 19:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
You're likely correct. But in case vandals breed vandals, well, we'll see in about 2 hours.... —EncMstr 20:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Per IRC

The Special Barnstar
I dub thee "Deleter of white men's penises" for your work to provide equality to Wikipedia (and to the detriment of wikiexibitionists everywhere.) Trusilver 19:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
... LOL! :D -- lucasbfr talk 19:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

No Title

Thank you for giving me the idea of creating an account. Phoenixofshadows (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

29 years.

Middle age works wonders. ;) · AndonicO Hail! 02:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

my sub pages

My subpages have been nominated for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jooler sub-pages Jooler (talk) 02:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Blind Man's Bluff

It was deleted in a AfD sometime last week, though I don't remember what day. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I remember seeing it in AfD, thought it was deleted through that, did not see the previous CSD for it. Either way the article's gone and the author's been blocked for repeatedly removing the CSD tag. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for relisting 2008FromKawasaki case

I saw you're active now, so can you relist this case? It needs to be re-chekced and I added more information while Alison were taking a break. Alison said, I should first request clerks to relist the case before she looks at it again. Thanks--Appletrees (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

 Done -- lucasbfr talk 09:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Lucasbfr, I cleaned up it a bit, but this above sock rampage is really getting in my nerve. Lucasbfr, I'm sorry for this ugly thing. I hope everything can be cleaned soon.--Appletrees (talk) 14:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
rmed the part I don't care about -- lucasbfr talk 15:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for all the "crap", but you erased listed some people related to all possible sockpuppetry at the RFCU file. They maybe be socks of banned socks of whom I added to the file. --Appletrees (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 15:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind answer. I think you behave objectively, and do your best. The removal might be caused by my untidy file (I know it still looks clumsy, but they are too many). I will re-add it by myself. Thanks. --Appletrees (talk) 16:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

No Title

im sorry about messing around it wont happen again

bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lingerie92 (talk • contribs)

thanks , i will look at them 2moz - im goin 2 bed cya —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lingerie92 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

clerking

I see you are a RFCU clerk. Someone has put a request on the RFCU board themselves instead of letting a clerk do it. It is malformed. The request is on Dr.Fix. I explained to person clerking the request (not a clerk) that the request is malformed (not a category F). See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAmatulic&diff=191531017&oldid=189786555 I also wrote to Dr.Fix giving him editing advice to prevent RFCU complaints. Archtransit (talk) 23:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

My job as a clerk is not to tell people whether or not their request is likely to be processed. Some recent events showed again that it is the CU's responsibility to perform a check, at their discretion. Please let them decide what is a good or a bad check. My own opinion, that I wouldn't express there or to this user, is that this smells like foul play (and that doesn't mean that the check will be processed). This is definitely not a malformed request, as a request that has 100% chances to fail. If you have concerns with the usage of the CU tools, I suggest you contact the arbcom or the ombudsman commission instead of "friendlily" pressuring users and checkusers to drop requests. -- lucasbfr talk 09:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I thought the clerk's job is to make sure the requests are compliant. If they are misleading, such as the wrong category, they are either to be placed in the noncompliant list or the author notified. A malformed request is not "a request that has 100% chances to fail" nor should you just refer cases to ArbCom. The correct thing to do would be for the user to correct the request. I think a category G is accurate but one could fib a little and claim it's an E. A category "F" is clearly untrue. I am not pressuring anyone to drop any request but merely requesting that requests be correctly formed and accurate.
I have no opinion on the case that I commented. I did give some "don't 3RR and how to use convincing edits and citations" advice to the person who is the subject of the complaint. It's not right for people to submit RFCU using false categories. Just describe it accurately. If it's a category G, then say so. If it's an E, say so. I saw a case where a RFCU was rejected so the person waited a while and then submitted it under a false RFCU to fool the checkuser, who was fooled (but the results still came out as unlikely or something like that). That is really unethical. Archtransit (talk) 16:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Well edit wars are better categorized under E than G (G used to be the "I didn't bother to categorize" category). In that case I usually add a comment, but CUs know as well as us what is a 3RR violation and what isn't, and can react accordingly. The clerks job is to help users filling the requests, we don't decline cases. We sometimes temporarily delist the non compliant requests, but not that often. About what you said, yes it's unfortunate and shouldn't happen, but that's the CU responsibility to evaluate and check the evidences. He's the one answering to the ombudsmen in the end. -- lucasbfr talk 20:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

MOD-Broken

No problem with me. :) Regards, Rudget. 12:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

help me

i was just wondering how to upload a image from another website or on my pc- im new to wiki (dont judge me) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lingerie92 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 21:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

moves to user space

I am puzzled a bit about the moves to User:AMK152 userspace you are doing with the Bionicle character articles. These are arguable covered by the episodes and characters injunction. there were still prod tags on then, which are now inappropriate, and I am removing them. But I do not really know how this should be handled. Did the user request this? her was not the only editor. DGG (talk) 01:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 10:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

checkuser

Shouldn't cases that do not belong here be moved to more relevant cases?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.132.236 (talk) 03:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Lynne Kresge

Regarding the copypaste tag that you removed, I checked and compared the section on the Minor Characters page, and the 24 Wikia page, and a large part of it was directly copied and pasted from the 24 Wikia page. I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, I was unsure of the correct tag to use, obviously copying word-for-word is not the right thing to do, and I thought attention should be drawn to that fact. Would a "Duplication" tag be more appropriate?

I also see you are an administrator. Could you kindly edit [Noah Daniels] to redirect to the proper section? My justification is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Noah_Daniels Steve Crossin (talk) 11:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 11:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


Okay, I will be completely honest, I'me very new to Wikipedia, I believe I have good ideas, but I'm not too sure how to back them up. I've heard someone who was recommended a mentor, I'm just having some trouble with understanding Wikipedia Policy. I think I could use a mentor, but am unsure of how to get one.

As for the length of the article, it's far too long, and unorganised. It's also not set out correctly. Let me explain. I'll search for Noah Daniels in the search bar, it will not direct to the correct section of the page, it's a little hard to explain, but searching for it would explain what I'm talking about.

I've also divided the sections into further sections, sorted them further by season where they first appeared, just to make the article more navigatable. I did this in good faith, but recently I've found my edits just reverted without notifying me, is there anyway to prevent this?

And can the merges be stopped, at least until the page has been fixed up? It's giving me a bad enough headache as it is. Steve Crossin (talk) 11:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


Thank you for fixing that, but I agree, it will most likely be reverted. Is there a way you can prevent it from being reverted, possibly by semi-protecting the article? I believe that functionality is more important than aesthetics, but if so many articles were not merged into one in the first place, it wouldnt be in such a mess. Any suggestions on what to do with this article? Steve Crossin (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


I've just seen the comment on the Minor Characters for 24 talk page, but I'm unsure on the effect of what you said actually means. Is there a restriction on editing these articles? It's a little unclear to me, could you explain it, if possible?

Also, is my proposal to split up the page OK? There's a merge proposal at the moment as well. Steve Crossin (talk) 13:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 15:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your clarification, I know in the past consensus has been asked (if not always followed) regarding merging articles, I think it should be asked as well whether splitting the articles up is agreed to, it's just trying to address the readability of the article, and it would be split up into Seasons, of when characters """first""" appeared on the series.
As for the anchors, I know what they are, I just didn't realise at the time that they were called anchors.
And, as it has been decided that for the time being, no more of these articles should be merged/deleted, if any more articles are merged, would it be possible to request some sort of protection on them? As I've seen, the Arbitration case is still open. Steve Crossin (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 16:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible then, that the user be notified that ArbCom has made a decision for the time being, that the pages are not to be merged or deleted? The user is lucy-marie. And I do not mean to attack this user in any way, shape, or form, I just know that they are the user who has proposed most of the merges, so they are the one that should be notified. Apologies again if this seems to not be in accordance with WP:NPA Steve Crossin (talk) 16:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 16:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Very well, that seems reasonable. I'm also trying to find citations for the Minor CTU agents in 24 page, its been tagged with a (Unreferenced) tag, yet some sections I cannot find citations for. Also, if I can find at least one reliable citation for an article, can I change the tag from (Unreferenced) to (Refimprove) as it would have one citation, the part saying "This article does not cite any references or sources", is not correct. Steve Crossin (talk) 16:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 17:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ana Palacio

my information about Ana Palacio is not copied, it is mine so I dono undertad why you clear it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukvega (talk • contribs) 12:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 13:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


I´m sorry but this is something I can use because I have written and I don´t undertad why you clear it all the time and publish things are not true, I really angry about that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukvega (talk • contribs) 17:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

why you do not say the whole truth about Ana and Loyola de Palacio?, somebody always clear out everything even if it is not copied because it´s mine! Have you got problemas to tell the truth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukvega (talk • contribs) 17:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

but what you said it is the whole truth and I am authorised to use this information

about Loyola de Palacio, for example is relevant she was married?, do you say those things about men?, please, you are pulling my leg!

about changes in Loyola de Palacio and Ana Palacio. I promise you my information is right and free, I´m the owner and my intention is to write the truth because same things you have here are a prejudice for both people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukvega (talk • contribs) 17:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 17:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I know that links to blogs are often unreliable but in this case I think this particular link can and does ad value. This particular link is to a list of competitors to Second Life. Please consider allowing this link http://slgames.wordpress.com/2007/04/12/alternatives-to-second-life-uber-edition/

Thank you, 12.183.100.8 (talk) 13:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 13:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I go on telling to you

that some things you say are not true, for example, Ana Palacio did what the president ordered, she couln´t have personal views about nothing in a government as you propably know.

about Loyola it isn´t a feminist reality on the contrary, and she was treated in Houston and Madrid!,

I thank you your answer but I don not agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukvega (talk • contribs) 19:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Why you change?

Hi, im Alex and im a new user. Maybe I dont know something about the rules, but why did u delete my edit to the All your base page? I just posted a reference to the quote in the game Rome: Total War

Please reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander kostenko (talk • contribs) 22:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 23:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I understand

Title speaks for itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander kostenko (talk • contribs) 05:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Oklahoma Lakes

Hello,

Just curious why you removed a link to Oklahoma Lakes? I didn't see anything on the Oklahoma page for lakes and outdoors information.

Thanks, Ronnie Ronnie4 (talk) 23:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 13:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Sock block

Yep, that was it. The 3rr report had a link to the RFCU, so I figured that combined together, the odds were very high that it was the same person. Cheers :) --slakr\ talk / 18:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

simple request

I've figured it out myself, but in the future rather than just writing "sigh..." in an edit summary, maybe you could also point the user that's frustrating you in the right direction on how to do it correctly. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 14:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 14:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Brad Pitt

Were you just reverting the text back to it's original format? ApsbaMd2 (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 16:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Brad Pitt

It just looked kind of odd. I reviewed it again, and I'd say your in the clear.

How is life going for ya? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ApsbaMd2 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the sanity check! I must admit I can be hasty sometimes. :) -- lucasbfr talk 16:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Could You Have A Look Please

This editor USER:ApsbaMd2 seems to have an annoyed a few editors with his warnings and is removing the irate replies here. As an admin could you have a word about warning messages on pages thanks. BigDunc (talk) 17:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

You are racist!!!

I'm not a vandal and you are RACIST! Guti is homosexual http://qn.quotidiano.net/2008/02/16/65342-centrocampista_guti_bacia_uomo.shtml and this is a good information for his section 'peronal life'. You dont like the section personale life?!?!?! Delete it!!! The whole section!!!

Et alors? Réponds moi!!! Pourquoi as tu effacé l'information sur l'homosexualité de GUTI?!?! Et comment as tu osé definir mes changements du VANDALISME!?!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.103.208.153 (talk) 12:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Tu veux des sources? écris "Guti" sur Google!!! Sinon tiens: http://qn.quotidiano.net/2008/02/16/65342-centrocampista_guti_bacia_uomo.shtml regarde!!! C'est un journal italien d'importance nationale! Mais écoute...je m'en fiche...l'infrmation reste présente sur le wikipedia italien où je suis inscrit! P.S.: eh oui! T'es raciste! On appelle comme ça quelqu'un qui considère avoir une copine plus important que avoir un copain!!! C'est effectivement la différence entre ta version de sa vie privée et ma version!!! 84.103.208.153 (talk) 13:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I can't care less if he is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or anything else. You don't add any comment that might be libelous on the biography of someone if you don't correctly source it with a reliable source. This is policy: Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles. End of the discussion on that point. I personally can't speak Italian, therefore I am unable to assert whether or not the source you are now pasting on my talk page is reliable, and says what you assert it says. And don't even start telling me that the fact that his wife is breaking with him after seeing pictures of him kissing a man is not contentious. Applying a policy to protect someone's public image is not being racist, or homophobic. -- lucasbfr talk 17:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
José María Gutiérrez#Personal_life... *lucasbfr gloats. -- lucasbfr talk 14:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:

Thanks. Specification appears to allow users to use this when they are performing uncontroversial page moves. WP:RM states If the only obstacle to an uncontroversial move is not an article (e.g. a redirect or a disambiguation page with a single target article), the template {{db-move}} can be used instead to have that page deleted under criterion for speedy deletion G6., while WP:VOTE discourages use of votings when consensus has also been reached by other means (in this case it was brought up months ago and everyone agreed). There's an arbcom ruling more relevant in spirit than word Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/AndriyK#Reversal_of_irreversible_page_moves Moved pages which have become irreversible by adding to the page history of the redirect page may be moved back without the necessity of a vote at Wikipedia:Requested moves, though the page hadn't been moved. In general, I think G6 is good way to do it, leaving it to the admin responsible to veto or refrain from vetoing ... it's just as shame the tagging box doesn't make it easier to provide details. Anyways, all the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 16:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Maybe I did use that ... don't know now! Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Nah I double checked, I was wrong ^^ -- lucasbfr talk 16:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

RFC

  • Hello, I am asking for your point of view on a user. I was discussing it with one person, and they recommended I ask you. As you have been involved with the 24 Characters fiasco for some time now. Could you make a recommendation? My talk page is best, thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) 15:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
ACK. I'll have a look but I can't promise a fast or complete reply, I'm not aware of all specifics here. -- lucasbfr talk 16:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Lucasbfr, I recommended that steve come and talk to you, do to the fact that i have seen you have previous experience related to this rather large issue. I would be willing to help, but have been on the outside and just now started looking in. I think at this time, Steve is having a hard time deciding when other users are violating the injunction, and when they are how to deal with it and when to report it. Thanks for your help, your eyes on this issue are much appreciated. Tiptoety talk 19:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Erroneous block

I apologized. You are correct. Bearian (talk) 20:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you apropos Jason Fowler

Thank you for clearing my good (?) name with respect to Jason Fowler! Robert Greer (talk) 15:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Do not delete Barack Spoof

Cut & Paste Move

Thanks for you message. Sorry about that. I've never been very good at moving pages. I'll try to remember this in the future. will381796 (talk) 19:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


Citizens Union

I'm not sure what you mean by "prodding because of age" on your proposal to delete the entry on Citizens Union?

The article is stubbish, but there are links to the blank article from a few stories about Tammany Hall, which suggested to me that it was worth adding an entry on Citizens Union and starting to fill it out. I work with a Citizens Union partner, so I am particularly alert to not trying to get hagiographic in the entry. If you are saying only that it is too thin, I'll keep adding to it. Amanda bee (talk) 21:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 21:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Rail transport in Abkhazia

It's getting ridiculous. Surely you can't find that article because it doesn't exist. What do you want me to do? Alæxis¿question? 22:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 22:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Everything is ok. Alæxis¿question? 22:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The Marmite Sisters

Hi, you deleted that one as A7, but when double checking, the talk page shows that it was (weakly) kept in an AfD in 2006. What do you think? Should we restore and bring it to AfD again? -- lucasbfr talk 16:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

My bad. Yes indeed. It should be done. Article now restored. While doing a bundle of CSD that day, I missed the history on this page as being AfD in 2006. Thanks for the heads up. Alexf42 17:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks :) To be honest I don't always look, either. -- lucasbfr talk 17:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh BTW, I am jealous of your best vandalism EVER. I had plenty vandalism on my pages, but never this good. Alexf42 18:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Adznet

Whether his real purpose was promotional or not, it's still against username policy for a username to match a real-world website or organization. He can certainly request a new one or open another account ... I'll soften the block if he wants to do that. Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
How about I unblock him and open up a username RFC then? With the stipulation he participate only in that until it gets decided. Daniel Case (talk) 14:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[Cluebat] crits [You] for 2008 damage. [You] die.

Your quit message on IRC reminded me of something I saw the other day...

  • Captain Balinda Stonehearth's Arcane Explosion hits you for 1337 damage.

That actually happens a lot to me. :-p --Deskana (talk) 17:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

haha, yeah, I sometimes wonder if they do that on purpose! -- lucasbfr talk 10:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Ping

As requested. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Autoblock solution

Hello, my name is Daniel Tzvi and I'm a Sysop on the Hebrew Wikipedia. Today I b locked a vandal, and the autoblock affected one of our prolific writers as well as an entire University. Apparently, this has happened several times this week alone. the user in question mentioned that he had a similar problem here, and that you came up with a solution. If you would be so kind as to let me know how you did it, I would be most grateful. Regards, Daniel Tzvi (talk) 14:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I anon blocked the IP for 3 months. When you block an IP directly, blocks on users from this IP no longer trigger autoblocks :). I hope that helps! -- lucasbfr talk 14:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, I'm not sure that restricting anonymous donations from a University's i.P. address is necessarily the way I want to go, but I'll remember this' in case the troll that's editing from there becomes persistent. Cheers! Daniel Tzvi (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 15:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the drawback :( (that's why I only blocked for 3 months) -- lucasbfr talk 15:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

A more permenent ban for User talk:82.47.141.134

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Artificial_intelligence&diff=194284465&oldid=194279025 - Isn't there a more permanent ban that you could make to that IP address? He/she has quite a ban record. I realize it could be more than one user, but with the continual one month bans it's not like anyone else from that IP has much of a chance of becoming a constructive wikipedian.--Sparkygravity (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Done, but not by me. I tweaked the block reason though. -- lucasbfr talk 12:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

BIG HUGE FREAKING PURPLE USERBOX

Many thanks! DuncanHill (talk) 01:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Block of User talk:68.156.47.66

Looks like you blocked User talk:68.156.47.66, but looks like maybe you forgot to post a notice to the IP's talk page. I'm guessing this is an oversight? --Smiller933 (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

No it is not. I used to warn every vandal that was blocked, but, when it adds up, it is very time consuming, and it is source of misunderstanding when blocks expire and IPs are shared. I always warn the users I indef block, and I blank the talk pages of IPs I block for a long time (> 6 months). I usually warn users when I block them, to be sure they get the message. But most IPs do hit and run, and I believe the error message is enough to send the word home. I hope that helps! -- lucasbfr talk 18:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I've never accessed Wikipedia anonymously on an IP that was blocked before so I didn't know about the Blockedtext message. Makes sense to me. --Smiller933 (talk) 05:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for lifting an IP ban (205.157.244.33) upon me

Thank you for your quick work! I am actually browsing from the South Florida area; a north-western Broward County locale. I always register before making any (although few) edits/contributions. Formulanone.one.two 22:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I'm gonna add this one to my "sucky Shared ISP" list! -- lucasbfr talk 22:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Luk/Archives/2008/02&oldid=1221604734"