Jump to content

User talk:Nishkid64/Archive 19

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

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Kristen McMenamy Article

Hi there, I created a new article for Kristen McMenamy but it keeps ending up in my sandbox. Can you tell me why and when it might be officially ok with the administrators of wikipedia? Many thanks, lx 10:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems a lot of us disagree of whether this meets CSD A7. I'm going to AfD to get a community consensus on the fate of the article. I think that's the best way to resolve this matter. Thanks, Nishkid64 20:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The spectre of Ass to Mouth

Hey there, sorry to be asking for your help again but there is a situation getting out of hand on Talk:Ass to mouth. There is an IP user who constantly reverts back comments that are totally unconstructive. The nominator of the article for deletion added a comment agreeing with him. Now that nominator User:CyberAnth is encouraging the IP user to continue with these actions. This is following a 24hour block and a request that he desist, including a template being added to the page saying that talk should be about improving the article. CyberAnth refers to "The Pervert Cabal" on his/her talk page. This is clearly not civil though it is difficult to demonstrate exactly who this is directed against. I referred it to the incidents noticeboard before CyberAnth's involvement though I am loathe to add to what I have said in case it is perceived I am victimising CyberAnth. Any recommendation on course of action? The temptation is to give in and let the comment stay on the page but I want to defend the principles of Wikipedia and it is vital, if I am to soon attempt to run for adminship, to have been involved in less than comfortable situations. Thanks. Mallanox 02:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stepping in with this. Like you said, I can't see what all the fuss is about. Mallanox 02:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RingtailedFox's signature

Sure, i'll shrink it. How should i do that, though? Template-it? and what do you mean....too much coding, or too much text, or both? The Legendary Raccoon Fox: RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 02:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the coding and the actual length are both problems here. Can you try removing "The Legendary Raccoon Fox:" and possibly use smaller font? Thanks. Nishkid64 20:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA! It succeeded, and I now have The Tools – which I'm planning to use as wisely as I possibly can. I hope I will be worth your confidence. Thanks again! :-) –mysid☎ 20:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming rights, barclays center

Hi, Please check this link as a reference to the naming of Barclays Center: http://www.1010wins.com/pages/186290.php?contentType=4&contentId=291683


Thanks. Naturevsnurture 21:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

for helping with the move protection. Normally these guys are relatively constructive in their disputes but today it escalated faster than I'd foreseen. Is there a lot of broken-redirects garbage to clean up? Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just one point; the original title of the article (which has changed to something else) was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ottoman Muslim casualties. Could you move the title to original, please. Thanks. --OttomanReference 23:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Errr, I think you rushed in protecting the wrong article (not version :-)). What you protected is in essence a copy-pasted-over-redirect. It is Ottoman casualties of the World War 1 that contains the article/history. What OR says above is against consensus stemming from talk and AfD. NikoSilver 23:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The original title is the title of the last poll, namely Ottoman casualties of World War I (even admins reverted to that version, as you can see by looking at the revision history). All Nishkid did was acidentally protect a redirect from moves! The original is still unprotected [1] and awaits restoration to its proper title (the one by FPaS in the history). Baristarim has already violated the 3RR. //Dirak 23:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What poll? The AfD for Ottoman Muslim casualties had closed as keep. Those people knew what they were voting for. Dirak, please do not make this personal. I only broke 3RR because I was trying to keep track of the creation of article with really bad titles that were created simply to override the redirects, it wasn't because I was trying to disrupt anything. I have been using the talk page constantly to discuss the issue. Baristarim 00:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think Dirak is missing the track of the changes. I believe It began with this one [2].
(3 edit conflicts) Ugghhh. The page you protection wasn't actually the right one, it was a cut-and-paste fork. The real page with the proper history is currently at Ottoman casualties of the World War 1 - a version of the title that's linguistically so ridiculously wrong that it must have been created in bad faith and I would hate to see it protected at that location. But probably that's exactly what policy would want us to do now. Otherwise, could you perhaps just toss a coin between the two original, slightly less Wrong Versions (Ottoman casualties of World War I and Ottoman Muslim casualties of World War I), move the page to whichever you picked and protect it there? :-( Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree somehow about the proper article's history getting lost. Nevertheless, the AfD had closed as keep, and it would be much more healthy if the talk page was used for discussion on such moves. Baristarim 00:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was, and the majority agreed to remove "Muslim" from the title. Do you suffer from selective memory? //Dirak 00:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No it wasn't. All that was agreed was that another article could also be created, but the current title was also valid. In any case I got no more time to discuss this with you, I am sorry - use the article's talk page for further discussion.Baristarim 00:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It could be a typo? I myself have done it occasionally... NikoSilver 00:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's my fault, I apologize. I got confused and English is not my mother tongue (in Greek you would say of the as in "Othomanika thimata tu Dhefteru Pangozmiu Polemu"). //Dirak 00:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was no typo. Move to "I" was not possible technically, therefore Dirak created that page just so that he could do the move anyways to a similar sounding article - I watched the whole thing from the beginning and I am pretty sure why the article was moved to "1", as FP also hinted above. Baristarim 00:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't follow you... //Dirak 00:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Similar thing with "First World War".. That's why I said "to override the redirects".. The moves were not possible technically to "Ottoman casualties of First World War" nor to "Ottoman casualties of World War I" at that point without admin involvement. I have been watching very closely everything that happened in that page since the AfD closed, and I was also watching its redirects. I strongly doubt that there was a typo. I was going to revert the original move last night, but couldn't do it. However I didn't create a clone article, but rather contacted an admin to see if he could sort it out - that's what you should have done instead of moving it to "1".Baristarim 00:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto, and also the "1" does get 1 million hits [3]. So it's not my "invention". //Dirak 00:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Stop squabbling, the two of you. Let me thrash this out with Nishkid. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid, sorry for putting you through all this. These guys can be terrible at times.

Fact is, the version with "... of the World War 1" was evidently created in bad faith, it is poor English, and it is really extraneous to the topic of the move war (which was originally just about the word "Muslim"). What's your preference? Direct all the broken redirects to this version as it is, or bend the protection policy in the interest of good English and move it to something linguistically slightly more sensible? I'll let you choose between "Muslim" or not. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad faith? As in copy-pasting the content in the preferred title[4] while aware it is a violation you mean?[5] NikoSilver 00:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for protecting Zendik Farm page...

Hi, I just wanted to express thanks for protecting the Zendik Farm page... it needs help, and I would like to contribute in a worthwhile manner so folks can understand Zendik Farm. I'm Jyre, and I just recently have entered the WikiWorld and I must say, I had no idea how much work is involved and what goes into all this!!! I thought there was a 'body' of WIKI administrators that were exclusively charged with site patrol and management and all that - I didn't know administrators were just people who put their own time in to deal with all the stuff going on in the whole encyclopedia - and the enormity of the content!!! All I can say is, I'm glad there are people like you who want to put their time in because it seems pretty overwhelming to me...

Also, I realize that my inexperience causes work for you (admins) and I am studying the WikiHelp and editing sections to grasp the proper approach to NPOV and appropriate editing style.

Any and all advice on how to approach editing the Zendik Farm page is much appreciated. I want to contribute to a fair and balanced article. Jyre 02:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC) jyre[reply]

Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 4 22 January 2007 About the Signpost
Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Talk page template, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? was updated. On 23 January, 2007, a fact from the article Brim Fell, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomanganitalk 10:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ottomans...

Hi, sorry again about last night's Ottoman chaos and the mess on your talk page above. I can understand if you weren't in the mood to join the discussion. Right now, things have subsided a bit, and I'm trying to clear away the rubble. If you have the stomach, your comment on Talk:Ottoman casualties of the World War 1#Move War would be appreciated. Thanks! Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Kristen McMenamy

Well, it seems a lot of us disagree of whether this meets CSD A7. I'm going to AfD to get a community consensus on the fate of the article. I think that's the best way to resolve this matter. Thanks, Nishkid64 20:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi there Nishkid64, yes I can perfectly understand the scepticism on whether Kristen McMenamy is a "notable personality" who meets CSD A7 criteria or not. I am new here on wikipedia and I understand that diligent administrators, like yourself, want to maintain the integrity of the database. I have done my best to describe Kristen's strong points, and you are welcome to cross check her references. You can check the "favourite model" citation from Steven Meisel. McMenamy was a major player in the fashion world of the 1990s, and she has featured many times in Vogue. I have no personal relationship to her, and I am just interested in her contribution to the fashion world. The problem is, she is not a "household" name like Claudia Schiffer or Cindy Crawford, but that doesn't necessarily make her a nobody either. To be honest, I wish to expand and improve many articles for fashion personalities, but seeing my amendments constantly being reverted for no particular reason (such as SPAM) is very discouraging. All supermodels feature in advertisement campaigns, which can be viewed by looking at their external links (see Claudia Schiffer who has featured in many advertisement campaigns). But these are usually historical adverts in a historical archive, and are not an attempt at spamming wikipedia or breaking copyright regulations. Thanks for your understanding, lx 03:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish coffee

Can you block Khoikhoi from Turkish coffee? He has not contributed any original content. Seems like all he does his revert other's people's cited sources. Correct me if I am wrong but that is all I see in the history.

Also, there is a reference to a commercial website that is Greek. That is not an acceptable source, please remove that part and ban the users who keep puting it in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.216.11.5 (talk) 13:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Uhh...why would I block someone just because he's not adding information to the article? He's reverting edits that he feels go against consensus established at the article's talk page, or material he feels is too POV. Nishkid64 20:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe safest after all

Maybe it would be safest after all to go to AfD with it. However, there's always the chance it will go down the same route, but at least this way we're giving it a chance. This seems like the best plan. Bobo. 18:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand Lxhughes here, but I still want to take it to AfD. He can provide sources and such, and show how this subject meets Wikipedia notability guidelines. Nishkid64 20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If taking the article to AfD is a good way to bring to the attention of others what the article may or may not need, this may indeed be the most sensible solution. That way we know which route to take in the near (or very near) future. Bobo. 20:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tigranes the Great

Can you please semi-protect? Ararat arev is still messing around please thanks man. Nareklm 22:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

This Working Man's Barnstar is awarded to Nishkid64 for continuously taking care of the backlog at WP:RFPP before anyone else even gets there! -- Natalya 01:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! Yes, good news about the bot - the page was getting rather massive with it having to be done manually. -- Natalya 01:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman casualties of the World War 1

I think about lifting the protection from Ottoman casualties of the World War 1 and make official as title: Ottoman casualties of World War 1. Its scope has been expanded by its own editors and I donot see any ground for conflicts on the title right now. Maybe you would also like to check the discussion here. Thanks!--Yannismarou 08:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Death's call

Hello. I have noticed that User:Death's call has been a throwaway account. He has not been active since December 23, and his most recent edit (just now) was vandalism. I think that this account should be indefinitley blocked. Thanks, PikminloverMeep!|| 19:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the fact that this user has not contributed the encyclopedia and has made vandalism edits, I won't block him/her until the user has been sufficiently warned if he/she continues in the future. Nishkid64 20:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, he is on his last warning. Also, Betacommand unprotected my userpage. Should he have done this? PikminloverMeep!|| 20:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I talked with Betacommand just now. I re-protected your user page, and he was fine with that. I will only unprotect if you want your page unprotected. I usually won't unprotect unless the user requests it. Nishkid64 20:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Party 8 issues

The Mario Party 8 article is having a problem with Henchman once again: he insists the mini-game list should stay because it's not too big and doesn't take up much space. I counted and it was 26 lines: that's certainly big. He agreed on removing the cruft lists on the other MP articles: just not this one. The game not being out, shouldn't be the exception. Also, there is this: [[6]] (which seems to be made in bad faith, just because of the recent edits to Mario Party articles). RobJ1981 20:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After some checking, I found this: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Henchman 2000. As of now: Henchman just wont listen and still reverts the mini-game list back. He seems to be the only one, that want the list. Talk page discussions still go no where with him. RobJ1981 17:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sprot

I agree with your comment about Barack Obama sprot, and as an active editor there I thank you for it. Could you have a look at Bill Clinton's edit history - sprot was in place for several months, then lifted on 12 Jan and the IP vandalism has increased significantly - almost every other edit in the last few days has been a vandalism revert. I requested reinstated sprot late last night, preferably longterm, and it was denied but I think it needs another pair of eyes. Let me know if I should make a formal request again, and if so how. Thanks. Tvoz | talk 22:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Is there a timeframe? Tvoz | talk 23:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since I'm not particularly sure how long we'll need this, I did not specify an expiry date for the protection. Nishkid64 20:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I think that was wise. Tvoz | talk 00:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taj Mahal

Would you mind having a look at the history for Taj Mahal and seeing whether or not there's enough vandalism there by anon IP's to warrant semi-protection? We've got an RFC running (see talk page) relating to POV pushing of some fringe-theory advocates, and the vandalism is quite consistently from anon IP who haven't added anything constructive in quite a while. Many thanks. --Joopercoopers 12:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the page has been semi-protected for now. Tell me whenever you feel protection can be lifted. Nishkid64 20:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
enormous thanks for that - it's been a source of some wikistrain for a number of editors fighting that off. After the RFC we're going to rewrite it to FAC standard. I suggest we unprotect it after the RFC has closed and see if we're still getting similar abuse. Thanks again. --Joopercoopers 20:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Email

What is up Nishkid, I have emailed you so be on the look out for that :). Cheers! ~ Arjun 00:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply! I have replied to your reply :S. Cheers! Thanks again...how ironic! ~ Arjun 00:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cingular Wireless

I realize a vote was taken and a majority wanted a revert but that's not suffeciant when the name of the company is no longer cingular. ads on tv reflect it their website reflects it. Banner ads on the web reflect it. do the right thing and make the article reflect it.(Ke5crz 01:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Bring it up at the article's talk page. I am not going to rename the article based on the complaint of one user. You need to establish consensus with the others involved in the discussion before coming to me with such a request. Nishkid64 01:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Arthur William Baden Powell, was selected for DYK!

Hi Nishkid64, Thanks for the advice, but I cant see the entry! Has it already been on the front page? GrahamBould 12:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the DYK!

I wish to extend my thanks for your issuing of the DYK for the Bernard J. Liska article. I greatly appreciated it. Chris 14:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK nomination for Jian Li was successful

Updated DYK query Did you know? was updated. On January 25, 2007, a fact from the article Jian Li, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.


Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 15:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary

I strongly object to your comment on the DYK nomination page. The article was still very much a stub and marked as a stub at the end of jan 14th. the major expansion beyond a stub occurred on jan 19. by the way when was the last time an article on belize made DYK? maybe never. please take another look at the timeline/ Anlace 06:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC
On the 14th, it was 3.1KB and tagged as as stub. On the 19th, Guetterda untagged it as it wasn't a stub (he was correct). It was expanded from 3.1KB to 8.5KB, but since it was not originally a stub expansion, I couldn't let it on DYK. Sorry. =( Nishkid64 21:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last night

"I'll look over your history, but don't expect me to change my mind or anything." - I'm magnanimous enough to accept that you deal with a lot of trolls and vandals and you've probably got a bit blasse about it, but please do look at the evidence if someone, who's not been a problem before, suddenly appears to be 'going rogue'. Prejudging guilt was quite unhelpful last night. Take care. --Joopercoopers 17:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sprotect of Buddhism

As a frequent contributor to WP Buddhism articles, I just wanted to thank you very much for sprotecting the Buddhism article. It desperately needed protection. (As an aside, I think someone has accidentally removed the sprotect message -- though how these protection mechanisms work is way over my head!) Thanks again! Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 23:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so what does it take?

Seems that it is very difficult to get an article semi-protected. Can you give me a sense of how bad it has to be? I tend to keep an eye on articles that get somewhat low traffic but seem to be an irresistable temptation for "kid stuff" type anonymous IP vandalism. But I'm not online all day, watchlisting only helps if you're there...how many times does an article have to get hit before we can get some help? It isn't a crisis, but it's a steady PITA (pain in the ---) Montanabw 00:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, usually if I see most of the last 50 edits have been vandalism and vandalism reverts from the last week or so, then I'll protect the article. So, I will usually protect when I see an article that is vandalized 2-4+ times a day on average. Nishkid64 01:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your action at Shawn Hornbeck

Could you unprotect the article? You are the protecting sysop. Regards, Navou banter 02:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 1 - January 2007

Project News
  • Project tagging:After a brief edit war over the addition of {{WP India}} to ancient archaeological sites now located in Pakistan, a "pre" parameter was introduced to remove the ROI flag from the template for pre-1947 articles, following discussion. After another large discussion on ANI alleging that the automated tagging by Ganeshbot and LostBot was "nationalistic", Ganeshbot was briefly blocked. Currently, the bots are again in action.
  • Swastika on Hinduism templates:Recently, an extremely large and at times emotional debate broke out regarding the use of the swastika on Hinduism templates, given its association with Nazism. As a result, {{Hindu Links}} now contains an educational message about the use of the swastika, as discussion on a more permanent resolution continues.
What's New?
Congratulations to all contributors
who helped to develop the above
content to represent the best of Wikipedia!
Need some help?

Are you stuck at a point where admin help is needed? There are 21 Indian Administrators in Wikipedia at the last count. If you need some help with anything related to WikiProject India, they are just a couple of clicks away!

Note from Editor's Desk
  • Weekly Collaboration (Shortcut:WP:INCOTW): Collaboration of the Week has fallen from its once high feats. Please drop by and help rejuvenate it.
  • As before, we'd like to stress, this is your newsletter, and we want you to be part of it as well. Provide us with news tips. It can be anything related to the project, from discussions to calls for help, and other interesting stuff within our community. Sponsored content for recruitments within your WikiProject sub-groups are also welcome, including requests for copyediting, photographic work, peer review, etc. We'll be very happy to include them here.
  • Before we sign off, Happy New Year, everyone.
This edition special
  • Translation Department: Can you read and write any languages of India? Do you know multiple languages and are looking to keep your skills at a high level or improve them? If so, the Translation Depeartment may be for you!

The translation department of the India WikiProject aims to utilize high-quality non-English material related to India for the goals of the project. This includes both translating articles from and to other-language Wikipedias as well as assisting contributors with non-English sources. The department aims to provide services in transliteration, formulating scripts for various languages, as well as translating articles from one language to another and validating sources in other languages to that of the encyclopedia article. If you are looking for a friendly translator here is your go-to point. Currently, we are still seeking representation for Kashmiri, Nepali, Oriya, Sindhi and Tulu, as well as reinforcements in all other languages.

Signed...

Edited by YellowMonkey and distributed by Lostintherush

You are receiving this newsletter because you are part of Wikiproject India. If you'd like to change your subscription options, please say so at the Outreach Dept.

If you run a covert newsroom operation, provide us with ur news tips here.


Exile142000my school is blockedExile142000

any computer i get on in this school is blocked because of a "returning vandall" i know like 12 people in this school tat use wikipedia and i know none of them would ever vandalize the site so if you could unblock this ip address im on that would be cool 


                      -thanks 
                         Exile

Your removal at WP:RPP

Regarding this edit, what is the proper place then? —Dgiest c 03:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, admin backlogs are shown when we (admins) look at our watchlist. If you really want admin attention, go to WP:AN, and you'll probably find a few people who will take care of the situation fast. By the way, we know VoABot is not perfect, and it does mistakenly archive some unprocessed requests. That's why I usually go back and check the whole page to see if all requests have been processed, just in case the bot made a mistake. Nishkid64 17:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Incidents Noticeboard

Hi Nishkid. Hopefully I haven't overstepped the line but I was being bold! I answered a question on the admin incidents board here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=103270488 feel free to give me any feedback about the advice I've given, even if it's don't do it again! Mallanox 00:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, chalk that one up to experience! Mallanox 09:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's about time

If you want to go ahead and create the RFA article, I'll try to fill it out first thing tomorrow. Fan-1967 23:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Male, last I checked. I don't usually go by "they", though some prefer it. Fan-1967 00:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All set for round one. Steel is more than welcome to join, and anyone else you can drag off the streets. I figure I can use all the friends I can get. I have to leave now. Will check back in the morning. Fan-1967 00:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anything else I need to do before the RFA page gets transcluded? I've already had one vote from one of the many (?) fans who watch my Talk page. Fan-1967 22:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Accepted. You will find someone already took #1 (one of my User Talk page fans, that I didn't even remember). Fan-1967 23:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Krunk

Nishkid thanks for blocking vandals all accros the world!!!!!!!Rambo forever 16:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smiley

User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward2Jerry lavoie 22:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Lol, I sent you another :) ~ Arjun 23:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...

What have you been up to lately Nish? ;). ~ Arjun 02:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection of Basketball

Hi! Thank you for semi-protecting Basketball.

My experience with that article is that, when not semi-protected, vandalism occurs several times per day. The activity on the page since it was unprotected a couple of weeks ago shows this quite clearly. I'm of the view that basketball should be permanently semi-protected — vandalism is often and practically always from multiple anonymous editors.

From what I gather of the semi-protection policy, the circumstances qualify the article for it, but I'm not entirely sure (I'm somewhat confused by the page). I've changed {{sprotected}} to {{sprotected2}}. Do you think it qualifies for permanent semi-protection? If so, is there anything else that needs to be done, etc.?

Thanks, User talk:Neonumbers / Neonumbers 04:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally feel that no article should be indefinitely protected, unless it's a high-risk template or the Main Page hehe. However, some articles can be protected for a few months at a time, and this may apply for Basketball. I don't think we should unprotect for a few weeks at least, so adding the {{sprotected2}} tag was a good idea. I might unprotect later on, but if vandalism returns, I will promptly re-protect. Nishkid64 17:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks — it would be really good if you could keep an eye on it, because it really needs one. Vandalism's been a problem on this page for years so even if you want to try unprotecting it every so often to see what happens I won't mind — just be prepared to re-protect it before long (about half a day, by my prediction, anyway).
Cheers. Much appreciated. Neonumbers 00:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, we may have the same name

Heya, we might have the same first name :p

Mine is Nishant - is that yours? Nish81 15:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Same Name

Cool, I'm ethnically Indian as well.

Nish81 18:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wihtdrawing my name

I have withdrawn my nomination. I added a note at the top of the RfA and un-transcluded it. Not sure what else may be needed to close it out.

There were some points I disagreed with (let's face it, Jeff and I are never going to agree) but, overall, the criticisms were valid, and I need to work on the points raised. I think I need to step away from RCP entirely for awhile and actually concentrate on article work, destress and let someone else deal with the kids and vandals for a while.

Thank you for your support. Maybe we can re-examine the possibilities at some point in the future, but it's too early to think about that. Fan-1967 20:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry it had to end that way, but I am glad it served as a learning experience, for the both of us. Hopefully you can improve based on the opposition votes, and maybe I can nominate you again in the future. Nishkid64 20:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GiorgioOrsini (talk · contribs) again

Hi Nishkid64, Could you please take a look at his recent contribution history? he has not broken the 3RR rules but his only contributions are to remove content he disputes. I have warned him in the past to that effect but I only received an unapologetic reply, basically suggesting that I could not block him as I have been involved in one of the articles (funnily enough, my only involvement was to support his WP:RM request). In any case, I would appreciate a second opinion from someone who knows his actions well. --Asteriontalk 23:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left him a stern message on his talk page. Hopefully he will understand and stop with his nonsensical antics. I have also fully protected Giulio Clovio, the page he was edit warring on. Nishkid64 23:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. I appreciate that. --Asteriontalk 23:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: DYK

Thanks; glad to see more biochemistry topics up there. I made a minor wording change because the previous version could be read as implying that the protein itself was a cause of Alzheimer's, when in fact it's a proteolytic byproduct that's implicated. Opabinia regalis 03:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Contacts

I actually don't use any IM services, sorry. I'm on freenode pretty often, but not in the Wikipedia channels. Heimstern Läufer 05:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Thank you! --Dweller 09:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yo

alright nishkid, I've butted heads with you a bunch of times beforem but I was wondering if maybe we could set aside our differences and discuss something. User Notorious4life has not only the hammer and sickle attached to his signature which being of an ethically russian background I find offensive (stalin was the worst mass murder of all time) he also has the swastika attached to his signature. Is this appropriate, I would argue not and as a fellow american I hope you take as much offense to this as I do. TotallyTempo 04:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)and uh could you respond on my talk page instead of here, I like getting that little box thing...hehh ehh[reply]

When did we butt heads before? I don't remember ever running into you before on Wikipedia. Anyway, where exactly do you see a swastika a hammer and sickle on Notorious4life's signature? I just see that he used non-English characters in his signature. I asked some other people too, and no one seems to see what you're seeing. Can I get a screenshot of what you're seeing? That might help me understand the problem here. Nishkid64 18:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Yeah okay if you look on here look under proposal to merge son of a bitch and bitch the swastika and hammer and sickle is there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bitch TotallyTempo 20:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently he has indeed changed his signature now, there is an explanation on my talk page he says he does it just cause he likes darker aspects of history, anyways if you could get back to me that would be appreciated

Liger

Hi! Liger still seems to be attracting vandalism despite the semi-protection you gave it. I'm still very much a newbie; do I just warn the culprit, or what? Philip Trueman 17:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection prevents newly registered users (accounts less than 4 days old) and IPs from editing the page. That user who vandalized has been here longer than that, so just revert and warn him for his vandalism. Nishkid64 18:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bolli Bollason

I just wanted to inform you that you made a mistake in the DYK articles. You credited Berig (talk · contribs) with creating the article Bolli Bollasson. Actually, I credited and nominated that article, and was the sole editor of it until Berig added three words to it just over one hour ago. I wouldn't mind the credits being corrected and the note on his talk page moved to mine.

Otherwise, thanks for working on the DYK template and the rest is fine. --Grimhelm 18:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I now see where the mistake was made. Thanks. :-) --Grimhelm 19:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nishkid64/Archive_19&oldid=1160695337"