User talk:Omicronpersei8/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

October 2006

Personal Attacks?

What constitutes a personal attack? The use of the following words in a sentence: Fuck, shit, poop, sunnuvabitch, cunt, snatch, pussy, motherfucker, hell, balls, dick, penis?

I don't get it. Telling somebody to "go to hell" is not a personal attack, rather -- driving instructions? Uh.. just kiddin'. Really, have a more liberal less bureaucratic attitude towards the usage of these words, not only is it free speech, but using these words, these expressions, constitutes freedom of expression. Freedom to express my anger and outrage through creative usages of words.

If anger does not exist on wikipedia and this is essentially a thousand subhuman stupid monkeys at keyboards, well, is wikipedia something that I or anybody else would want to be a part of?

This is a valid question, I feel that the admins need to discuss amongst themselves and their colleagues. Anger does exist, it is a valid human emotion, do not try to rubber stamp it and consider it a rejected application form. People get angry, allow them to express their anger creatively, not force them to submit to bottling it up.

Thanks --Mofomojo 00:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

You called Steel359 an "IDIOT!!!" [1] That by itself is a personal attack, and telling him to "GO TO HELL!!!" is in violation of WP:CIVIL. No discussion required. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Idiot is a word derived from the Greek ιδιωτης, idiōtēs ("layman," "person lacking professional skill," "a private citizen," "individual"), from ιδιος, idios ("private," "one's own"). I would say that he lacked "professional skill", wouldn't you?--Mofomojo 06:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

That's just splitting hairs. HalfShadow 00:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Telling him to go to hell is basically telling him to die and be in everlasting torture. You dont want that, do you? I dont think people on Wikipedia go to hell for doing whats right. [[User:Nwwaew|Nwwaew]] 10:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Order of the Upholders of the Wiki

This Order is awarded to you for your exceptional and distinguished contributions on wikipedia in the way of reverting vandalism and helping users.

Hope you like it Jeffklib 05:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler tags

I posted a message on Talk:The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Majora's_Mask regarding your revert of my spoiler tags removal. I ask that you read it and comment on it. --TheEmulatorGuy 05:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

You win, I give. I don't consider the issue that important, sorry. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 05:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Sinistercrx

thank you for the help.

How do I upload a picture?

And is there any way to sort of hide the site, so it does not get deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sinistercrx (talk • contribs) 08:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

it seems to have been deleted even with the hang on sign. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sinistercrx (talk • contribs) 08:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Trolling?

I don't think this and this could be regarded as trolling. It appears he was merely attempting to gain your friendship. Maybe this was exaggerated indeed. Raja Lon Flattery 08:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

See also: [2] [3] [4] -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, this appears indeed to be trolling. However, this seems like this users is complaining about what he thinks is harsh language. And I'm not sure what a seaweavel is, but it seems to be an affective term. Raja Lon Flattery 09:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, [5]. Really, at some point, you have to start calling shenanigans. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 09:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

yeah. Raja Lon Flattery 09:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Have a smiley.

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page!  Jorcoga  10:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, thank you, I don't recall receiving one of those before. No problem about the revert, any time! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 10:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Most questionable questions

?: How do you get the little boxes with the opinions and stuff on your main screen to pop up(i.e. the smily and stuff) I cant get it to work. *eep! help!* —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Da.Tomato.Dude (talk • contribs) 14:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Y.S. Raja Sekhara Reddy

Hi Omicronpersei8, Please let me reorganize and gather information on Dr. YS Raja Sekhara Reddy. Accepted that a lot has to be modified, but please don't simply revert, I'm open to discuss and will surely agree, but let us have enough information which can be trimmed down and biased information can be removed forthright. hope you co-operate, thanks harsha. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.118.38.2 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Josiah1107

I love you 2 man. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Josiah1107 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Scientology

What is your connection to the church of scientology? And how can you deny that experts believe Scientology's numbers are based on fraudulent counting? I give you links:
<snip>
<snip>
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ScienoSitter (talk • contribs) 21:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I object to your removing these on the grounds that other people edit those pages and might need to see them to understand our disagreement. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ScienoSitter (talk • contribs) 22:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

User:71.224.62.100

Don't tell me what to do. I hate Hilary Clinton. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.224.62.100 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Then perhaps you should learn to keep it to yourself. This is a place of facts, not opinions. Especially not opinions like yours.HalfShadow 00:28, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The Johnny Haynes entry on October 18

Looks like a valid entry to me, he just messed up the formatting. I cleaned it up. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 22:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. What actually tripped my trigger was "greatest ever player". -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that would have tripped me too...but it was a blue-link, so I checked it out. (Of course, blue-link doesn't always mean it's valid; kids sometimes enter themselves when they have a name that matches someone who has a Wikipedia bio. But entries like that typically show up under "Births" in the early 1990's (i.e. teenagers); it's a bit more unusual -- but not unheard of -- for a fake entry to show up under Deaths. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 22:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'll try to be more careful next time. I'm usually a little more thorough than that. Thanks for pointing it out. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

No harm, no foul. I don't think it's possible to fix hundreds of entries and not miss a call from time to time. I'm shocked that nobody has called me on my mistakes so far! (Two I remember offhand: Someone changed an entry for a Vietnamese name to the correct format with weird letters...I reverted it because it looked like a kid playing around (then realized my mistake a while later and fixed it). And a kid was playing around in 1992 and entered Barry Bonds birthday there...he got me so confused that I started to help him format it, for some reason thinking I was in the 1964 article. Took me a few minutes to sort it out. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 23:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

User:^Aftermath^

So he's allowed to leave junk on my page, but I can't even reply back? ^Aftermath^ 23:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

vandalism question

Hi

The Paint Shop Pro has been lightly vandalised recently but I cannot revert the article back to an earlier version. Could you please point me to an article where it explains how to do it? Or, if I need to have a special status to do that, would you do the restoring?

Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Outsid3r (talk • contribs) 20:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

framed

i have the right to know what i did to get this message, along with the one i got about vandalising god, i do not recall leaving a message about god. I AM BEING FRAMED HERE!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.81.95.119 (talk • contribs) 06:26, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

SEND ME A MESSAGE I WANT TO KNOW WHAT I HAVE DONE!!!!! RIGHT AWAY!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.81.95.119 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Calm down, pal. Check out your contributions -- it's right there. If you didn't do it, then someone sharing your IP did. The way to avoid getting "framed" for edits that aren't yours is to make your own account. Cheers. Lomaprieta 00:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Texaspete

Why do you delete my articles? Are they not spell enough? Conact soon please. TaxesPete —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Texaspete (talk • contribs) 07:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I feel like i am being attacked. What did wikipedia think of it? The stories were good. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Texaspete (talk • contribs) 07:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Removal of precognition research information

I would like to be able to add a section to the precognitive page covering some of the more recent parapsychological research, by both parapsychologists and skeptics to the precognition page. Could you perhaps give me some suggestions as to how to improve upon the initial one I gave to the page? Guthrie. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chem student (talk • contribs) 08:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Got accussed of attacking wikipedia

excuse me, I did not try to change, delete, or in anyway attack wikipedia. Please remove your warning and do not address me in such a manner again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.116.70 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Your warning to 70.226.216.204

I think that warning was a little harsh. That was that editor's first time editing. Maybe you could review WP:DBTN. Thanks! [[User:Nwwaew|Nwwaew]] 21:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the warning. Obvious vandalism from the anon user. zephyr2k 23:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I would have done exactly the same thing. When an anon starts his Wikipedia career by adding profanity to articles, you don't thank him for his test. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 23:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't see that at the bottom. OK, I reverse what I said- I think I would have done the same thing! [[User:Nwwaew|Nwwaew]] 00:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Defender of the Law

I tried cleaning up the mess that this loser made earlier for you..he/she attacked my page also --Mikecraig 06:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I see that now. Thank you for doing that. Sorry, I haven't been able to do CV today. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 06:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT

Thanks for the note, I've marked your request as withdrawn. Should the other bot not go through, and you want to reactivate it, just let me know. Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 18:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

TBTA

Well, Cronbot would have raised a lot less fuss but then it does force someone to be a monkey and bit block a lot. It's always interesting when this kind of proposal comes out, there's two groups, bot haters and bot lovers. Ok, 3, then there's the group that thinks Jimbo should just override community consensus and bypass RfA. In either case, thanks for getting Cronbot off the ground - I think it's going to have a great niche (read: checking WP:OP and automatically scanning them) -- Tawker 18:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

217.237.151.226

217.237.151.226 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 217.237.151.235 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 217.237.151.234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

I agree that it is difficult for an outsider to distinguish an edit war from vandalism, in particular because part of the argument took place on the German page. Regardless of the fact that informed people would not object to the claim that ebs was Germany's first private business school (as stated on the school's website and elsewhere), his posts (grammar, spelling, wording etc.) show he is extremely careless and aggressive. He reverts carefully edited text passges and inserts blunt statements with typos. He refuses to explain his position and only reacts to edits. His reasoning is erratic. Once you show him clearly that his argumentation is flawed, he simply comes up with a new way of rationalizing.

Example:

... long history of annoying edits in the German version ...

He suggest ebs is no research university by pointing out that it is not member of an important academic association. Obviously, he studies at some competing institution. I add some context by mentioning the most reputable national research ranking where the school is listed among the "strongest". Currently, it hosts the annual meeting of the German Finance Association. He asks for a source. I provide the source. (wrong, che does not say leading)

I change "leading" to "strongest" to match the ranking document. He ignores the change and simply reverts. (revert, che does not say leading)

I revert. (Revert vandalism. I deliberately chose the word "strongest" used in the CHE source cited. The anonymous user is not interested in content and does not even read my edits.)

He reverts. (please stop your vandalism with random without context quotes from other sources, this is a advertisement platform) He probably means "not an advertising platform". Very funny, because his initial post was clearly out of context. My only reason to add the ranking was exactly to provide this context. I would never have added the reference if it hadn't been for his completely random membership statement.

Another user reverts. He makes a minor edit with a smartass comment to disguise his third revert. Note that he keeps reverting to a version with an obvious typo. (there is NO research assistant doctorete or a senior doctorate)

I am trying to be as friendly as possible, adding several requests for clarification on various user pages. No response. (Partial revert (close to vandalism). I do not care about advertising. It was YOU who started the DFG argument. You only keep facts that advance your own agenda. Tell the whole story or simply stop.) I admit an accurate translation would probably be "first state-accredited institution of higher learning" (http://www.ebs.de/index.php?id=1&L=1), which in fact sounds even more impressive. The current version is probably the result of edit wars he had with other users who eventually gave up. Standalone business schools cannot legally call themselves "Universitäten" in Germany. In English "University" is perfectly acceptable and commonly used by dozens of other vocational schools with virtually no academic standing. In this case, "university" is even part of the school's official name which was approved by the government (see logo in the upper right corner). He keeps deleting similar passages in the German version.

It is clearly not about accuracy, wording or even facts. He just hates on the school. (revert, wrong facts (ebs is not the oldest private institution in germany), ranking is of no interest and citated out of context)

Would it be possible to simply prevent editing by IP accounts? I assume the suspected vandal would not dare to reveal his motivation or any details about his background. Thanks for your consideration. -- 84.168.120.192 02:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey!

First of all: my english isnt good... im from Argentina...

Why you revert my messages in the page of languages!?!?!?!?!?!? is not vandalism!! im not looking for problems!! im contributing!!!!!!!!! the egypt heriogryphis are not in alphabetycal order in the list... i put it in the correct order. LOOK WHAT YOU ARE REVERTING! PLEASE! ... i ll wait for your words ... .... ! i.... really dont understand why you reverted what i did...

please answer me in the user Busyman99 (es.wikipedia.com..) (en español)

Guillermo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.231.166.223 (talk • contribs) 07:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

my bad

probably shouldn't edit when 1/2 asleep. grazon 08:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

need help

could you please explain to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Derex that yes Mark Foley is gay and that he needs to stop denying this. grazon 08:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

foley is gay

so what's wrong with writing that? Grazon 09:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Djmakeout

Hey Omicronpersei8,
We have noticed recent changes in Wikipedia’s Conquistador page and wanted to amicably resolve this conflict. The U.S. Trademark for Conquistador for use in a live performance, recorded music or music downloadable from a global network is owned by the group the Los Angeles group Conquistador, led by Alex Antebi. You removed link to two websites, which do not sell products of any kind. They are both purely informational sites with background on the artist. A reference to Wikipedia has even been made in order to redirect traffic. Wikipedia is a valuable service provider. In no way have we meant to offend or go against the rules or regulations of Wikipedia. In fact, we value the service that Wikipedia provides. Considering that there is no product being sold or promoted on either site and since this submission is in consideration of the rules and regulations of Wikipedia, we kindly request permission to have both links posted. We thank you for your attention and consideration in this matter.

Thank you,

Conquistador —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djmakeout (talk • contribs) 10:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting vandalism to my user page. MER-C 11:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

On assuming bad faith

This request was formulated 5 times by that user that you had him blocked. In this 5 comments, he was only following your suggestion you left him on his talk page along with the final warning. Blanking edits when someone is trying to communicate with you is obnoxious. No matter what that user did, he stopped vandalizing after the final warning and tried to contact you. Your choice to remove his edits and have him blocked is only assuming bad faith which it seems, as your case proves it, only normal users should avoid. 213.85.88.70 11:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, some people come to Wikipedia only to troll. This goes beyond the realm of assuming bad faith; it is clear, deliberate bad faith, and trolls should not be encouraged or humored. (That was over-the-top on preachiness, sorry. Still, I don't think anything good would have come of letting him troll freely on my talk page, considering there was nothing to discuss, just because a template invited him to (WP:LAWYER?).) -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 13:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

About Your Reverted Edit

On the Barry Bonds page, I cited my sources for my edit and I don't understand why it was changed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Playaofthegame34 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

001.jpeg

I found the picture of Avril Lavigne
at her fansite Avrilbandaids
first off the site is known my milion of Avril fans
and Avril herself.
So here is the evidence and proof
of the image i have uploaded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AHelpingHand (talk • contribs) 19:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Reverted Barry Bonds Edit

I put a notation next to Barry Bonds' stat of 734HR, and it was reverted. The Link stated clearly that Bonds admitted to taking steroids "unknowingly" and could have affected his home run total. I think readers of his article should be notified. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 19:47, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The way to do it is not by stealthly inserting it next to his homerun count, or, like User:Playaofthegame34, deliberately cut the number down by 1/7th while inserting the link. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 19:50, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but I didn't cut the statistic number down, I put the notation in and it wasn't stealthy. It was a clear notation that cited a source which implied that he took drugs that could have affected his numbers. I think it should stay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 20:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Was this also meant to be a subtle implication? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 20:12, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You do appear to have good edits in your contributions list, so thank you for those. But if you want to claim that a baseball player took steroids, it would be best done by adding it to a relevant area of discussion. By this I mean possibly adding a neutral, good-natured paragraph that discusses the allegations, and which makes a point not to insinuate that steroids are responsible for the player in question's performance overall. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 20:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

As far as the Bonds page, putting a link in is the same as Major Legaue Baseball has discussed doing with an asterisk. It's basically the same as putting in a small referral to call the numbers into question. The Giambi page was entirely truthful, being as he fully admitted to using steroids and all of his numbers should be eliminated or noted as ingenuine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 20:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

"By this I mean possibly adding a neutral, good-natured paragraph that discusses the allegations" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Giambi#BALCO_Scandal, apparently, there already is one, but most people aren't going to read the entire article down to that page and would be much more likely to see and click on a notation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 20:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Why wouldn't they read it? Sounds to me like it would be a popular section. Still, that doesn't excuse adding what amounts to an off-topic and non-neutral link next to his stats. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe my notations were either off-topic nor non-neutral. Argue the neutrality of the links. I didn't write them, they were published in fact. All his numbers could be affected by his use of drugs and it is relevant to each statistic listed in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 20:51, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

In addition, the "Balco Scandal" section of Giambi's article makes mention to the affair but makes no reference to the fact that "Performance Enhancing Drugs" may have enhanced his performance. Adding a notation next to all of his numbers as I did was completely acceptable, truthful, and neutral. I would appreciate a reply from you so we can come to an understanding before you completely eliminate my right to free speech on wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 21:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

So add your link to it in that section. If you put it next to his numbers it looks like you're asserting that he's a cheater. I don't really see why we're still arguing this; if you had put the link in the appropriate location in the first place, I wouldn't have reverted it. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 21:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

If taking steroids doesn't classify you as a cheater, what does? He is a cheater by baseball standards and the links were next to his numbers which is the appropriate location.FatClemenza 21:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Just admit you've been dominated.FatClemenza 21:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your vandalism of my comments here, if you really wanted to "annihilate" my argument, you could start by arguing something based on policy rather than claiming that I'm suppressing your freedom of speech. Here are good policies to start with: WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and most importantly, WP:BLP. I also find it interesting that this is a game to you. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the three policies you sent me:

-Reliable sources: It is a clear fact that Giambi admitted to using steroids, that's not even disputable. It's in the wikipedia article itself that he admitted it.

-Neutral point of view: See above. There was nothing biased about my addition, as performance enhancing drugs are often treated by baseball the same way, with a notation to signify the ingenuity of his statistics.

-Biographies of Living Persons: See both of the above.

Look, I have made my point clear and there is no question that these should stay. You took away information and without it, it appears to a reader that the numbers Jason Giambi put out were genuine and permissable. With a statement from Giambi himself that he used performance enhancing drugs, it seems irrefutable that his numbers were at the absolute least, subject to fabricated enhancement and should be noted as questionable.FatClemenza 22:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You're still ignoring the reason why it was reverted in the first place: the placement. I've even invited you to put the link back in. The reason it was reverted was because of the placement; it shouldn't go next to his stats count, because it's POV and to say it's the reason he's as good or bad as he is is speculation, which is not allowed. WP:BLP is a strongly enforced policy here; if you have any problems with that policy, you should take it to Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. I'm not barring you from including that link in the article, just do it properly. Whether or not he's a "cheater", putting that link next to the statistics area is not helpful in defining the veracity of his stats and makes an obvious implication to the reader. And before you argue against that last sentence, no, it doesn't establish the truthfulness of his stats. We're looking for links that justify numbers, not argue against them (and that link doesn't really even do that). -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You said: "to say it's the reason he's as good or bad as he is is speculation, which is not allowed." Allow me to restate the last point I made: "it seems irrefutable that his numbers were at the absolute least, subject to fabricated enhancement and should be noted as questionable." His numbers should be, at the very least, subjected to question of their authenticity. If you want only links that establish "truthfullness" and not argue against it, that's restricting information to one side of an argument. Whether or not it is damaging to Giambi and his BLP or whatever the hell your policies are, it happened and should be noted next to each of his numbers. Posting the link without further explanation is simply making refernece to the event, not it's possible effects on his career and Major League Baseball. I'm essentially stating the same points here because you have failed to answer any of them successfully. I'm done making my point. Good luck making wikipedia a bad place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 22:22, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

| it happened and should be noted next to each of his numbers. Posting the link without further explanation is simply making refernece to the event, not it's possible effects on his career and Major League Baseball.

Heh, no. Sorry. You know better than that. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

And sorry if I somehow missed your points. Here's mine: it's speculation to directly link his scores to his steroid use, and irresponsible to the reader to imply as such. If this was acceptable, it would already be in the article. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:27, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandal Snipe

Hey there, keep up the great anti-vandalism work. I noticed that you are using vandal snipe and I was just wondering whether you like Vandal Snipe or VandalProof better and for what reason? Thanks a lot. Wikipediarules2221 20:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for that. I'd be happy to give some reasons; can you give me a little while first, though? I'm on RC patrol at the moment but I'd like to give you a well-thought out answer on your talk page a little later. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 21:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course, please take your time; no rush whatsoever. I greatly appreciate you taking the time to answer the question in the first place. Wikipediarules2221 21:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your greatly insightful and well-thought out response to my question. Your elucidation of the pros and cons of each Vandal fighting program is deeply appreciated. I have no experience with Linux so I think I will be sticking with VandalProof until a more Windows friendly version of Vandal Snipe is made available. Once again, thanks a lot for taking some time out (unfortunatley time away from fighting the good fight) to answer my question with such proficiency and care. Happy editing and continue your arduous efforts in counter-vandalism. Thanks and cheers! Wikipediarules2221 20:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Unfair Vandal Snipes

I feel I have gotten a lot of unfair Vandal Snipes. I cited my sources as well provided educational information and provided it in a classy way. I would just like to ask what exactly I was warned for and for what reason? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Playaofthegame34 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Modifying User:Omicronpersei8's posts once to say he didn't have a strong argument and that you should continue editing and again to suggest that he likes being cruel to animals seems a pretty good reason for a warning to me. HalfShadow 22:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

This editor is just deliberately trolling. Don't mind him (until he starts it up again, at which point he will be blocked). -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, obviously. I still like rubbing their noses in it, though. Might be a slight character flaw on my part, but so few things please me nowadays... HalfShadow 22:37, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

That's cruel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Playaofthegame34 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

So is wasting time contesting something so obvious. You could have done something with that thirty seconds. HalfShadow 22:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

MPOGD

I've really said all about the site that I know. It's basically an online encyclopedia of multi-player/online games. HalfShadow 21:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the blanking of my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo 22:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Vpbot gone mad?

Not sure if that's you lurking in the darkness of #vandalproof, but you may want to know that the bot picked up your name:
<vpbot> !admin [[User:Omicronpersei8]] has been reverted 6 times in the last four hours by whitelisted and admin users. [[Special:Contributions/Omicronpersei8]] [[Special:Blockip/Omicronpersei8]]
Oh well, just thought you might want to know. (on the off chance that omi8 isn't you) Happy editing! Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 23:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

hey

hey yo my bot is going crazy on me sorry Maoribug83 23:57, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Dane Cook edit

What in the hell is wrong with you? You have your Dane Cook page that lists his birth place as Cambridge, MA on the right side, but lists it as Myrtle Beach, SC in the text. I edited it to make it right, and you reverted it you idiot. I'm right. You're wrong.

http://movies.msn.com/celebs/celeb.aspx?c=227126&stab=3

That lists him as being born in Cambridge, as does your own site except for the text. You need to put your personal issues with me aside and let me make edits that are right and not just revert them you moron. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatClemenza (talk • contribs) 23:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

(Sorry, OP8 (har har, it am a pun). There's never really any call for talk like that. Didn't mean to overstep my authority or anything.) HalfShadow

It's fine, thank you for being on the lookout. (Also, my alternate IRC nick is "Opie8", ironically.) -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

So far, nobody's been anything but patient and helpful to me, so I'm just returning the favor. About the helpful part, anyway. HalfShadow 00:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that. RC patrollers (including myself) tend to get a bit cranky after a while, I guess. If you have any questions, you're welcome to ask them here. Judging by a quick look at your contribs and your recent edits I'm sure you'll be a great asset to the site. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Was the directed toward the topic creator? Because I meant that as a compliment. I'm quite impressed with how professional everyone is. HalfShadow 00:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Er, sorry, I misread you as saying "everyone's been anything but..." Sorry. The edit referenced by the creator of this topic was actually another example of me not reading thoroughly enough (although I stand behind my other reverts). -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's a huge site. I suppose you're quite busy. No worries. HalfShadow 01:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks about the userbox thing. I shall now try to compete with my computer on using those. Thanks again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Da.Tomato.Dude (talk • contribs) 15:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

More questions!!!
I've gotten the userbox to pop up but theres this weird text to the left of it...is it supposed to be there? Can i remove it? Much thanks... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Da.Tomato.Dude (talk • contribs) 16:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

ty

GJ WITH YOUR WAR ON VANDALISM —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.152.130.39 (talk • contribs) 01:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Toria w

You need to block the username Toria w. She is causing extreme vandalism to some of the pages and attacking other wikipedia users. I do not how to block her and hope you can help. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RichardMarcJ (talk • contribs) 02:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

alright man I'm done.

I just wanted to listen to my hero, Steven Colbert. But I'm done now. I thought I slipped it into the article rather nicely though? either way I'm through. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ddvorjak18 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Unfairly Labeled as Vandalism

Truth is subjective, and Wikipedia should be founded on that philosophy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.231.141.222 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Policy on Vandalism: Say please stop, then pretty please stop, then pretty pretty please stop, and it goes on for a while until finally a ban is set down. If you want to gain any semblance of credibility for this site (right now you have none, a research paper, a jorunal, or anything that uses wikipedia as a source will be immediately discredited) ban perpetrators the first time. Yeah, I just wanted to mess around to test out the site, oh and the 4th time, it was fun too, I'm practicing for serious scholarly input. Fat chance. And I will not post on wikipedia again, but I could, since I'm not banned, depsite the record of my tenure here. I hope you found this instructional. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.231.141.222 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

'Unfairly' labeled as vandalism? I suppose that's true to an extent; I'd have called it 'being ignorant', m'self. HalfShadow 04:12, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[6] -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:12, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

If it makes you feel any better, OP, they're just as much a problem on the board I admin.HalfShadow 04:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

User:LeeroyJenkins1

To the honourable Omicronpersei8,

This is LeeoryJenkins, the one who screwed ith Grizzly Bear. I was only attmepting ot add the fact that my gential region was once attacked by a Grizzly Bear, and that Stephen Colbert had a different opinion abut the Grizzly's rnage. Perhaps i should have put that under a new topic called "controversy". But anyways, my penis was in fact assaulte dby a grizzly,. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LeeroyJenkins1 (talk • contribs) 04:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

That's just too funny to revert. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 04:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

At least his kids won't be an issue. HalfShadow 04:20, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For being faster than the fastest bots in reverting vandalism everywhere on Wikipedia. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 04:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sarah

Hello, I think you should put your reverted part to a more specific subheading. The info about Sarah can be put at the top. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.202.118.160 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the attack on my talk page, and for dealing with the vandal concerned. --Michig 07:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

No statements or opinion on user page?

Ahem, cough ^{Wikipedians who don't wish to become administrators} cough :) Glen 09:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

That's a fact though, isn't it? It's not phrased like a commentary. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 10:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

HELP!

Erm, okay, I know I'm being a total annoyance but...
SOMEONE JUST DELETED MY WHOLE USERPAGE AND NOW IT IS TOTALLY MESSED UP AND I was just wondering if there is any way I could restore it. Because I have no idea how to. --Da.Tomato.Dude 02:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC) *is very agitated*

Oh wait now its better! Yay! --Da.Tomato.Dude 02:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC) *is very happy*

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. LittleOldMe 09:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

cheers

haven't been on the receiving end of vandalism to my user talk page before; thanks for the rv :) SMC 10:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just wanted to thank you for reverting vandalism to my talk page and user page (the latter I hadn't noticed, I just saw the revert notice). I'm a newpage patroller, and I had never met such a swift and persistent vandal, the amount of reverts he did manually in a matter of seconds is amazing; it took three admins to finally block him (although he's now protesting the block). Still, thanks for putting my pages right.  :) --Nehwyn 11:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair deal.

I had no idea. Fair deal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.116.19.211 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Remark

Thank you for your work on reverting of vandalism. It is, as I know myself, easy to get carried away when doing it. Please note that your edit summary here [7] might be construed as not being in the spirit of WP:BITE. Hornplease 08:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you're probably right. Sorry. The person in question had added that twice before and was persisting, which began to get frustrating. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 08:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out. A lot of new users in India first discover WP when looking for their local politicians, so there's a lot of that sort of thing happening at first. Thanks for all your work! Hornplease 08:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

There also seems to be a sizable bit of vanity entries coming from India as well, although this is just a personal observation/opinion, so that probably also fueled the frustrated edit summary mentioned above. Thanks for your kind comments; I'll try to tone it down. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 08:27, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Popeye Doyle

Thank you for the welcome.Popeye Doyle 10:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Right... More questions! (Since you are the only person yet to help, you are the target of my annoyance for this short period of time till I find someone else as patient.) How do you get a new page to pop up (ie: "Talk" or "Archives"...)? Da.Tomato.Dude 01:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Reg: Popping Up

By popping up i meant like having new websites/pages connected to the original. --*SMILYS FOR ALL!* 02:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello

THANKS! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.18GB (talk • contribs) 03:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my user page. (Sorry about this edit btw - I didn't read it properly!) --Casper2k3 03:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it happens. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 03:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Get This

Thanks for picking up vandalism on Get This - keep up the good work :) --Mikecraig 02:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC) (p.s - I feel sorry for all the stupid people out there who are vanadalising your wiki's)

Ed Kavalee

And also good work on keeping an eye on this wiki also...I am always trying to keep it clean --Mikecraig 02:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Flavor Flav

I just figured I'd let you know that I'm on the situation. I've blocked the blanking, goatsing IP. Such conduct will not be tolerated, and thanks for reporting. I've placed a stern warning on the page (I called their behavior "idiotic") and it has been watchlisted. The issue stems from whether they can include their CS clan (called Flava Flav) in the article. Alphachimp 03:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

They're going great. Oh yeah, I've decided to start corresponding normally (like you do) on talk pages. It just seemed quite a bit more logical. Have you given any thought to the offer from before? Alphachimp 03:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you caught me in one of those rare times where I don't do that! Good to hear the first thing, hope you're not being overwhelmed or anything. And about the offer, I'm not sure if I would have the time lately, and I don't really have the desire for a few different reasons. But I certainly appreciate it. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 03:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Haha. I'll just keep making it every month or so. Someday you'll just be bored or something and you'll take it (you can add it to your resume...). Alphachimp 03:49, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

About your reverted edit about Maurice Clarett

he is a dumb criminal and i think he should have a negative wikipedia page about him. Dont you agree —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.18.171.127 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiCookie

WikiCookie

Seeing that you have been working tirelessly on various wiki's relating to Triple M radio shows/personality - I thought you deserve a WikiCookie snack! --Mikecraig 05:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

How do i Copyrate my photo?

HEllo, you deleted the photo of marius moga that i'm the photgrapher of. I own the pic. How do i proove that, i didn't understand much from the step by step how to copyright a picture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.210.127.209 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

... for watching my back last night; that was one of the most unpleasant and illogical bunches of trolls in recent memory. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 15:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

EXCUSE ME

excuse me, are you racist? then stop reverting my correction of Borat's encyclopedic defination please —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.47.145.79 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, clearly this person is a racist! --24.77.216.252 20:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I did not vandalize the Mars page

Clearly you're crazy. My sentence was sourced and everything! Yes, you are quite obviously a fool if you do not think Men Live on Mars while Women live on Venus. Where have you been, dude?? --24.77.216.252 20:55, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Please

I am reverting vandalims on User:Illythr, back to the version written by User:Illythr himself. Please understand this, you aspiring admin, and look into things carefully before passing judgement. Blurb sock 21:20, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Blurb sock (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Khoikhoi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) --125.248.244.131 21:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

CheckUser please

Blurb sock (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Khoikhoi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)-please post a checkUser request in order to find the right vandal...--125.248.244.131 21:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Economy_of_Romania&diff=81284730&oldid=81283467 don't you think?Blurb sock (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Khoikhoi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)-125.248.244.131 21:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Please stop preventing Blurb Sock from reverting vandalism on my user page. Chisinau hasn't been part of Romania since WWII. --Illythr 21:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify this, the anon 125.248.244.131 is an obvious sock of permabanned User:Bonaparte, who has been on a private vendetta against User:Khoikhoi for a while and is now desperately trying to attack his RFA. Scabbers the Rat 21:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Thanks

For the double revert of my userpage. A couple angry annon vandals (obvious from the diffs). Keep it up! -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk) 22:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

apologies

I was trying to rvv the other vandalism on Reagan, and accidentally reverted back to the wrong version. Gotyear 01:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I'm sure that's one very minor whoops out of many great RC edits. Thanks for helping out. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

My first whoops. I pressed Edit this page before I even saw the page, which must've been the wrong page. Gotyear 02:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

may 16 page

I am attempting to learn about wiki, though I would do something harmless and nice for practice. However, if you are going to remove my harmless notation of a teacher, please also remove the birth dated 1993 that says: 1993 - Sinead, who is really rad, was born. It's sorta useless too.
Wes —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ai4px (talk • contribs) 02:03, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, just want to say thanks. I'm a new user who primarily reverts vandalism, nonsense etc. Half the time you manage to revert it before I do :) Pursey 03:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi Omnicron, I'd suggest a temporary semi-protection of your user and talk pages until the vandal gets bored. let me know if you'd like me to do this. Best, 03:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

User:69.180.102.202

Hi,

I've just received an automatic message I think is from you. I edited the Franklin D. Roosevelt article, specifically the link "[Historical rankings of United States Presidents scholarly surveys]" because it's not actually a link, it doesn't take you to any page. I put "[Historical rankings of United States Presidents]", which is an actual link.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.180.102.202 (talk • contribs) 03:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure, you're more than welcome to make that change. The revert/warning was over this, though: [8]
If that was a mistake, don't worry about it, it's been fixed. Thanks -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 03:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Really?

Yes, lets clall a truce while I look for a source. =) -68.202.16.122 04:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC) I'm finding it alot on fan sites, but I'd rather cite it on a sports news site.

reason for change

Hi,
My history teacher gave us homework to make a minor but random and incorrect change to Wikipedia because my class has been trying to convince him to let us use this site, which he believes is inaccurate. We challenged him that all the edits go away within 5 minutes.
I would never purposely spread false information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.19.48.213 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Could you please tell your teacher that he is an irresponsible enemy of knowledge for encouraging people to vandalize Wikipedia and should recommend for people to make improvements to the community pool of knowledge rather than damage it? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

not sure how to answer that last one and keep it in the same box...

yes, i will be sure to pass on the message. i felt badly, so i went back and added something that is possibly of use about what happened to the Tories after the war was over. it's not terribly important, but it's kind of interesting. and it's true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.19.48.213 (talk • contribs) 04:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I responded to this on your talk page. Sorry if I was preachy, I was kind of half-joking above anyway. Thanks for making amends like that, it's admirable. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

i have no idea if this is the right way to answer this...and i got your message on my talk page. didn't even know what that was or how to use it. maybe i should invest in a wikipedia account. you weren't preachy, i can see where you are coming from. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.19.48.213 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

We'd love to have you here. Here's where you can sign up: link

Feel free to message me if and when you make an account, and I'll be happy to help you (and without the mouthiness this time!). -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:26, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

cool, i just signed up. don't worry about the "mouthiness". frustration is understandable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Puravida06 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks so much for all your help. if it's ok, i imagine i will be asking you for advice on how to set up my account and what not, now that i have made one.
as of now, however, i am going to head off to bed. it's getting late and i have to take the SATs in the morning.
thanks again for everything, imagine i'll hear from you again. ~maria 04:50, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Nate Stein, Pro Wrestling Unplugged

I'm so confused how people who are starting a deletion war against two entities, despite statements from those people that were hateful in message & support from other saying to not delete it due to being valid, yet those articles will still get deleted. It's absolutely insane. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.111.68.154 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Franklin D. Roosevelt

I was not experimenting with the Franklin D. Roosevelt page; someone had deleted roughly half of the article, from 1932 or so onwards, and I was restoring the original page. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.116.64.166 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I see what happened -- you were beaten to it by a slim margin and you actually reverted back to vandalized version: [9]
No big deal, though, it's all good now. Thanks for trying to help out. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 16:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Billy Meier

Okay, I see how that works. I agree ENTIRELY that the adding of 'fraudulent' under Billy Meier is a violation of neutrality. Seeing as how there's no conclusive proof either way, the photos may be real and they may be fake. This makes me wonder, however, if the same is not true for Al Qaeda? Al Qaeda and September 11....no CONCLUSIVE proof either way. Not a single shred of evidence on either side that hasn't been subjected not only to debate, but to EXTENSIVE debate. So, in just the way that Billy Meier's article can not be stated either way, Al Qaeda should not be either. It seems to me that pointing the finger at Al Qaeda without conclusive proof violates neutrality because it expresses YOUR opinion (which is just as much a violation of neturality as my opinion is.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by All5Horizons (talk • contribs) 18:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

hi

WHAT A NERD! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ninjafrog123 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

chess links

Hello,

You removed my link from the chess page of this site. At one point my link was posted on this page and removed for the following reason... Since it showed up in the review of correspondence chess servers it was stated that it did not need to be listed. Since then Red Hot Pawn and Schemingmind have added their links however they also show up in this review. If the Chess Maniac link is not allowed than these two links should also be removed.

Thanks for you help,

DennisChessmaniac 20:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Angleoflove2

hi i'm sorry to i somtome just get carred away and i'm really bord so i do it i'll try not to do it more and well i have to do a projeck on paleo indians and i was bord so sorryangleoflove2 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angleoflove2 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Irrelevant?

Not at all, especially if the person has no relation to Judaism, what makes him Jewish if one of his parent's weren't? 141.211.251.69 18:40, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I misread you. Sorry, my fault. I'll put your edits back. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 18:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

No prob. 141.211.251.69 18:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

bigot

This user changes anything disagree with, even if it is truthful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Betterer87 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Elephant

But Colbert said that it did. I believe Colbert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.163.65.156 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Umm...

I was editting something completely POV... it said "a word used by homophobic men to make themselves feel more manly" that isn't even accurate and is vandalism itself. Revert it yourself or I will. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.83.1.185 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

R.e:Thanks

It's no problem! Hopefully you'll get some peace after AiV has taken care of him/her --Casper2k3 21:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

I've never given a Barnstar before. If it doesn't go there pls put it where it's supposed to. Just figured you deserved one. --Home Computer 21:38, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Invest Sign on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Invest Sign. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aferistas (talk • contribs) 22:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Smile

Alphachimp has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Thanks for the nice note on my talk. I responded there, but I figured it'd be dumb to smile on my own talk page. Alphachimp 00:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello

You can move any UserBox You want to User:Menasim/Userboxes/User X Your Friend --Menasim( discuss | ) 01:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

User:205.188.116.70

I made an honest edit on the history of Baluchistan. I took out a line that was redundant and added some clarification. I think you should revert the edit that I made.

Moin Ansari —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.116.70 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't find the edit in question. Sorry, you're going to have to present a link to it if I am to do this for you. Otherwise, if I have reverted you in error, please accept my apologies and know that if you are making a good faith modification to Wikipedia, you are more than welcome to. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 03:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

No worries

Its ok mate, we all have to work together to make wikipedia a better place, thanks for the welcome!

--Suicidal tendancies 17:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

Trying to reach an infobox consensus here: [10]. Please can you weigh-in with your opinion?129.127.28.3 11:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

my brother

my brother was screwing with my computer so thats why all that crap was there —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.17.67.83 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

So call attack on yamila

This so called person threatened me, so I would remind you to warn her before you single me out —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sliat 1981 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks

Thanks for the revert on my talk page. More typical infantile vandalism... what would a day at Wikipedia be like without it? :-) Heimstern Läufer 00:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow

Don't blame me for something I didn't do. I'm not into politics, so really, I wouldn't change the John Kerry page. Check who it is your yelling at before you yell. Oh, and by the way, I'm NEW, I don't know what the heck a sandbox is. Bye.--Tishii 01:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

You weren't warned for something you didn't do. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Superman

Sorry about that... just had to do that as a bet to prove that it could be done. It won't happen again. My apologies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jonakam (talk • contribs) 01:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Did you win the bet, even though your edits have been undone? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I did. I had to print the page for proof and save it. Once again, sorry about that, but thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jonakam (talk • contribs) 01:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Indonesia now Japan

60.240.193.1 (Talk) has been given warnings and appears to be ignoring them, perhaps needs something more than test messages? SatuSuro 01:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC) and is now blanking sections in Indonesia SatuSuro 01:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC) Thanks for that SatuSuro 01:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Your revert on Censorship

Thank you for attempting to revert vandalism, but unfortunately your version still has vandalism from the version you reverted to. Please be more careful in reverting vandalism so that such an occurrence does not arise again. Thank you. PS I have reverted back to my version which contains no vandalism. --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 04:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't always look back 7 edits on every page to revert back over a day's edits when I'm being flooded by vandalism. Perhaps you could save your magnanimity for the person who vandalized the page? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 16:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Nomination for Adminship?

Do you want to be nominated for adminship? If so, please leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 06:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

edit on jack thompson

the changes I made are vaid! please email me and discuss with me why you have removed my edit

colesalewicz@hotmail.com

there has been a media frenzy on this matter in the United Kingdom and in the Netherlands.

Please email me,

I find this matter extremely important.

People deserve to know the truth about this man, who describes himself as a 'goodwilling Christian'

yours sincerely,

cole salewicz —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.154.141.104 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Cat

Your recent edit to Cat (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot4 23:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

ur dum -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

TOAD (software)

Could you temporarily lock the page due to ongoing feud over a paragraph, representing broad end-user opinion response about one of the software versions? I believe this is to be discussed prior to repetitive deletion of the whole para.

Address at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOAD_%28software%29

Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.212.112.2 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Michael Moore

My good friend Omicronpersei8,

Not everyone assumes that Michael Moore is anything more than a government schill whose movie "Farenheit 9/11" is meant to distract viewers from the truth about 9/11, which is that it was planned and carried out by the US government with controlled demolitions and remote controlled airplanes, and not 19 hijackers (something which Moore never mentions). Not everyone assumes that Michael Moore's true motive in making his film "Bowling For Columbine" was trying to raise attention to the problem of gun violence in America. No, some, indeed millions, of Americans, understand that Moore's films are precisely the type of films that a government which seeks to take away our guns and distract us from the most incriminating facts about 9/11 and the US government's involvement would put out to the mainstream public, in a way that would make many "dissidents" trust him, while making government supporters (who won't believe a word he says no matter what) enraged, effectively dividing the country, which is, once again, exactly what the US government wants. Divide and conquer. And distract with disinformation agents. Like Michael Moore.

WE'RE NOT ALL IDIOTS DUDE, SO GIVE US SOME CREDIT, AND LET THE REVISION STAND. THANK YOU. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.125.101 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

what about gloria steinem. Did you know she was a spook, Omicron? It was in Vogue magazine. She admitted it.

You make me sick. Michael Moore is obviously a spook, and Wikipedia won't even let users suggest that he is what he is. YOU MAKE ME SICK! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.125.101 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Cerebral

I have reverted racist material from Cerebral's talk page. It is contrary to wikipedia rules to espouse hatred against a religious or ethnic group on ones user page. I will continue doing so until an administrator is contacted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burgas00 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Do we really have to do it that way? Why can't you just discuss this civilly rather than force your point? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 23:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok but this user has been making racist remarks on articles in wikipedia which are getting on my nerves. I dont understand how you can defend the deliberately offensive content of a userpage of an individual who's only reason for editing wikipedia is to slander an ethnic/religious group.--Burgas00 23:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Omicron,

I guess Burgas' edit should not be reverted, as Cerebral's user page obviously contains highly offensive remarks. We have warned him several times, and he still keeps it Nielswik_(talk) 10:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Pointing Out The Fact That Steinem admits she was hired by the CIA to found Ms. Magazine is NOT Defamatory

Although I wouldn't describe it as a compliment, either. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.125.101 (talk • contribs) 23:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

You know what you're doing, and I know what you're doing. Provide sources beyond "I heard it in Vogue" or don't make the additions. That's all there is to it; now, please stop cluttering up my talk page with tirades. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 23:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia wont let me edit ANYTHING because my edits expose Gloria Steinem for the CIA agent she admitted she was in Vogue magazine

I WOULDN'T PUT ANY STOCK IN ANYTHING YOU READ ON WIKIPEDIA BECAUSE THIS SITE IS EDITED BY USERS, AS IT CLAIMS, BUT BY ADMINISTRATORS WHO MORE THAN LIKELY WORK FOR THE US GOVERNMENT. JUST SO YOU KNOW, FOLKS.

AND ALEX JONES CALLED JESUS A LIAR. AND STEVEN ADLER IS A BLITHERING COKEHEAD. IT'S AN ENCYCLOPEDIC FACT.

"MY PEOPLE ARE DESTROYED, FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE" - GOD —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.125.101 (talk • contribs) 00:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I KNOW WHAT IM DOING? I'M TRYING TO MAKE A SIMPLE, VERIFIABLE ADDITION TO THE GLORIA STEINEM SECTION OF WIKIPEDIA

AND MEANWHILE, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT I'M ENGAGING IN VANDALISM. SHAME ON YOU! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.125.101 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I KNOW WHAT YOU AREN'T DOING, AND THAT'S LOOKING UP THE VOGUE ARTICLE ON THE INTERNET SO YOU CAN VERIFY IT FOR YOURSELF. GET TO WORK! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.125.101 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Michael Savage and ALF

But you do admit that Michael Savage and ALF resemble each other, right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Capnsaveemm (talk • contribs) 00:30, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

User Page

Thanks for reverting the vandalism of my user page! I check my watchlist often, but always ignore my own page! Axeman89 00:39, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

please block cubfan111

this person cubfan111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is pretty obvious troll see image contributions [11] there are copyvio images with fake gfdl self not to mention the most recent attack images Yuckfoo 01:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Melissamilano2.jpg

Remember the three-revert rule. Now stop reverting my edits as I am trying to include a fair use rationale and you are vandalizing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The exclusive bad apple (talk • contribs) 01:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure "so people can see what she looks like" is a valid fair use rationale. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Except it is. The picture significantly improves the quality of the article by providing a visualization of the notable person. All biographical articles should include pictures. Unfortunately, your opinion does not matter in the grand scope of Wikipedia, so give it up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The exclusive bad apple (talk • contribs) 02:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

The admin didn't seem to agree with you. Shall you try the "because I say it is" argument with him now? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You said: "I don't know a whole lot about image policy here, but I'm pretty sure "so people can see what she looks like" is not a valid fair use rationale. Am I right about that?"

Yeah, you are right. In any case, we couldn't use a film screenshot solely to depict what she looks like. Additionaly, the image could be replaced with a free image (as she is still alive), so under WP:FUC, we also can't use the image. --Yamla 02:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Then go ahead and replace it with a free one then until then the image stays. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The exclusive bad apple (talk • contribs) 03:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

That's not what WP:FUC requires. Please reread WP:FUC. --Yamla 03:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for stepping in and assisting me on Duhman0008's talk page; I'm considering taking things to the next level and asking for an abuse report to be filed because of his threats. In my honest opinion, that user and his IP address should be blocked from editing Wikipedia forever; there's no good in somebody who talks to people like that. Thanks again, - ¡Kribbeh!^Speak!\_Contribs 04:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Cerebral Warrior's Userboxes

I saw where Burgas00 was admonished for editing the above mentioned page. I think the man should get a medal for removing hate material from a page on a not for profit educational foundation page. Take Care! Will314159 17:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Please don't edit my user page

Please respect the request on my user page not to edit it to bypass userbox redirects. WP:UM is not a policy, does not have consensus, and I do not support it. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

???

im sorry but i dont know what u are talkin about! i didnt touch anything, i never whent on anything that i changed.so get it right buddy.
p.s: sorry to be mean but dont blame me for something i never did ok thanks bye —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.163.101.10 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Have a cookie

Have a cookie for all your hard work!

The future test templates look great! Thanks for taking the time to work on these. And thanks a lot for your hard work playing cat and mouse with vandals :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 02:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

calling Michael Moore all those other things without even mentioning the possibility that he is a government operative

Is a form of commentary and analysis as well. And no less so. The whole article is written from the dogmatic assumption that Michael Moore does not work as a propaganda agent of the US government and its interests. And therefore, the article's assumptive tone about Moore's civilian status, as it stands without my "commentary", is a biased commentary in and of itself. Perhaps you have the courage to admit that and let it stand, or perhaps you don't. I'm only trying to do what I feel is some much-needed and well-justified historical revisionism, which I feel is well within the spirit of Wikipedia's "neutrality" policy. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.45.48 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Element 118

Everyone in the field will use "118" in their notation. I see no reason why you insist on using Uuo.

Mitch —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mitchandre (talk • contribs) 02:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, use it. I didn't know, my fault. Still, the other entries don't use numbers. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

As more nuclear chemists edit wiki pages that will change.

Mitch —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mitchandre (talk • contribs) 03:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Help requested

Hi

I'm writing to you - and others - because you are one of several people who appears to have experienced the same thing as I have noticed and experienced.

Namely a pattern of vandalism by an anonymous user. The IP # is 66.229.10.64

See this user's talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:66.229.10.64

This user has been temporarily blocked several times. I notice that the pattern is the same.

The person doesn't seem to respond to polite community requests to engage in dialogue - or to desist from repeatedly making edits that several editors consider to be vandalism.

I am not that experienced in these matters but can there be an attempt made to block this user permanently? Or at least for a period of time so that the person gets a message about respecting the community. Thanks. Davidpatrick 03:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandal action - Brittany

+++Vandal action - Brittany

There's a note added to the WP Brittany article by somone you have previously warned of vandalism (ISP user).

Can you fix it, please?

___Vernon White 09:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Late on the scene, but I've taken care of it. Thanks. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 11:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I hereby present RickK's Anti-Vandalism Barnstar to Omicronpersei8 for being so quick on the revert trigger that he can outpreform VandalProof2 manually. Astonishing! Kribbeh 05:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Smile!

btg2290 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

User:Thebigmanoncampus

Re: [12]:

Thanks for the report. Typically we only do indef blocks after the vandal in question returns to vandalize after her/she has been blocked at least once. If Thebigmanoncampus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) continues to vandalise after the 24 hour block has expired, I'm sure the next admin to handle the case will opt for a longer ban. -Loren 06:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Branxton Article

Hey, i was just wondering if i could get an explaination as to why the branxton update was cleared, this is my home town and i wished to add some information about it. I would understand if there was something rude, impolite or false in it-but i cant identify what was the issue. Just a brief explanation would be apreciated. Thankyou Todd —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.167.52.213 (talk • contribs) 06:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

St Joseph's College Gregory Terrace

I have been trying to edit the school page to show next year's college leaders but your VP tool is automatically deleting it. Could you please stop allowing your tool to do this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.107.228 (talk • contribs) 06:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

thankyou

SOrry to be a bother- was just making sure i hadn't done anything wrong. Thanks again. Todd-ps-still getting the hang of this.LOL —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.167.52.213 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

User:203.109.205.148

how dare you i did research dont you know who i am —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.109.205.148 (talk • contribs) 08:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to John Purchase Public School

Your recent edit to John Purchase Public School (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot4 09:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Quantapus

You've tagged this up as G4 a recreation, please be careful G4 does not apply to recreation of speedy deleted items, either the original speedy criteria stands (in which case tag it with that), or it doesn't in which case don't tag it G4. I'll delete this one as nonsense anyway. --pgk 10:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Password emails?

Hi, did you get a pile of password reminders from 211.26.126.68, an IP that you reverted the vandalism from? He attacked my talk page and your talk page. I got 12 reminders from it. How about you?  Jorcoga  11:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I have a complaint.

You're not online enough. GET 10K MORE.-- MaxDuo (talk) 05:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

huh!!!

um Omicronpersei8 this is confusing. who is talking to whom??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beberlos (talk • contribs) 17:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

....

can some1 plz tell me what is going on!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beberlos (talk • contribs) 17:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Template

Which template did you use for this warning: [13]? -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

That is actually {{sofixit}}. Nice name, and useful! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 17:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I just might add that to WP:UTM. Where'd you find it? -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I really don't remember, but I saw it on another page in the Wikipedia namespace. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 18:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's already on UTM, but it's buried in the Miscellaneous section. Maybe some time I'll move it somewhere better. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

street art

these are valid changes. reverting without a discussion goes against the grain of the collaborative nature of the wiki to share/build knowledge. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.174.54.181 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

User:138.87.137.47

no problemo you passed the test ace;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.87.137.47 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Your contributions

Hi; I just wanted to let you know I appreciate the great work you are doing on recent-changes patrol. Thanks and best wishes, Tom Harrison ^Talk 20:27, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Same here. I see your username in recent changes while you work and think:

We will raise the temperature of your planet by one million degrees per day—for five days if our demands are not met!!!

— Lrrr

every time. Makes me smile when on RC patrol. Notary137 20:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Glad to hear I can brighten some days while unwittingly darkening some others. Thank you! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 20:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Batman

If 70.119.141.147 messes with the Batman article again in the next few minutes, let me or someone else revert it so you won't have to push the 3RR limit. Doczilla 21:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, 3RR doesn't apply to vandalism (see WP:3RR#Reverting_vandalism). The vandal in question isn't adding the same thing back over and over, either. Thank you for your concern, though, I appreciate it. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 21:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism to User:Blarneytherinosaur

Hi OmicronPersei8,

Thanks for dealing with the vandalism on my user page. Keep up the good work.

Love the user name.

Blarneytherinosaur talk 01:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Movie Gallery / GameCrazy / Asylum

(I dont know the Proper Channels of Reporting Vandalism so applogies in advance)

I have been made a Unofficial Representative of the Game Crazy: Asylum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_Gallery

Information that has been officially verified continues to be deleted and replaced with nothing more than lies by people who have a Vendetta against the Site and would like nothing more than to infuriate current members

The Information that should be up and mantained should read out like this

In 2004, Game Crazy started the Asylum program for frequent costumers who have MVP accounts. The inclusion to Asylum is a company decision, and a customer can not request to join. The only requirements to be accepted into Asylum seems to be spending a certain amount of money at Game Crazy And Accumulating a certain ammount of points by purchasing High Ranked Games. However, the importance of Asylum is debatable- while the original intent of Asylum was both to offer online services and to distribute free bonus items to customers, it is currently an online Message board and Chatroom for members, and Exclusive Contest are held on a Semi-weekley Basis. No additional features of Asylum exist- it does not otherwise enhance membership in any way other than Bringing fellow Gamers Together. Asylum is hyped as being a "secretive" club, taking quotes from the movie Fight Club to push its image of being private- however, this seems to be little more than an advertising gimmick as Asylum is not in any way a secret to Game Crazy employees or most customers. In addition, an Asylum page link exists in plain sight on the Game Crazy homepage although a Password and I.D. Tag Number is required to get any farther into the Sister Site.

anything else is to be considered False

for further information email the Webmaster of Asylum @ mrasylum@hlyw.com

Sega Forever! 03:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Quick(er) on the draw =)

I count at least 6 times you've beaten me to a vandal revert this evening. I obviously need more practice! --YFB ¿ 00:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I know it's annoying. I'm using a pretty fast tool is all, so it's not that you're not doing well or anything. Thanks for helping out! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

List of explorers

Just spotted your interventions on behalf of the above. Thanks!  Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 00:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Get a life, bot. Lol. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.195.9.20 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Seriously

Stop hogging all the vandal reverts and give other patrollers a chance! Great work, keep it up! --Alex (Talk) 00:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm really not that fast and I apparently miss quite a lot. Take it easy on me! (Thanks for the good tidings.) -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

User:65.182.51.67

The bottom two Roman Heart External links no longer work, I was trying to update it to the one that does: http://www.malepornstars.com/stars/h/roman_heart/index.htm -- it is no more a commercial site than the other sites listed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.182.51.67 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Celine Dion Sales

Hi, I am a big fan of Celine Dion and I have spent days trying to complete her albums and singles discography. Albums worldwide sales has always been a problem. Nobody knows it for sure. I want these numbers to be accurate. The numbers you're talking about (before these pages were put) were also by me. But they were to low. I didn't change them knowing that I will soon create a new albums discography page. I'm a freak about Celine's chart positions and sales for many years now and I have gathered many informations.

The last official info said she has sold 175 million till August 2004. It was official (Sony Music, IFPI, World Music Awards, Celine official website - they all said that). So after August 2004 Celine released only 2 more albums: Miracle and On Ne Change Pas. They sold together over 4 million copies for sure. And if we add Celine's early French recordings form the 80's which were not included in 175 million (and sold over 1 million at least), it will give us over 180 million.

Now, all those totals from before don't give us 180 million. The numbers I posted now, give that. There can be misteakes, but these are the best numbers that can be. So please don't change them....Thank you.-- Max24 12:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your edit to Gibraltar:

Your recent edit to Gibraltar (diff) was reverted by automated bot. You have been identified as using a shared IP address to edit a page that experiences frequent malicious edits by users that continue to edit via shared IP ranges. Since these ranges are too large (collateral damage) to be blocked and user's IP addresses are not visible, edits to this page by logged-out editors of shared IP ranges or new users are reverted. The changes can be reviewed and restored by established users. To avoid this in the future, you can start by making an account. // VoABot II 23:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The bot seems to have stopped, though I turned it off as "limited IP range" should be an impossible revert reason for a user. Voice-of-All 23:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

It seemed to be suffering from some lag, which may have made it look like it stopped when it was still going; it reverted me four times, I think. Thanks for taking care of that! Thanks for running a very helpful bot, too (seriously – I know how these things can happen occasionally, no big deal). -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 23:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, the bug that could sometimes cause users to count as shared IPs has been fixed and I added a new measue to all edit-type based reverts that should stop it from reverting established users such as yourself.Voice-of-All 00:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt fix. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Karl Stefanovic

Thank you for your quick attention to the vandalism on Karl's entry. Roaming27 00:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I am sure that the Stefanovic wiki will seek various attacks of vandalism due to the radio show Get This promoting various "statements" regarding Karl and their constant discussion regarding wikipedia and the vandalism that they enjoy. --Mikecraig 03:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I congratulate you on your extremely quick reversion!

Bluglass —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bluglass (talk • contribs) 23:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Omicron..you are going to be busy today as Get This made reference again today regarding this wiki article and the vandalism to it "with possible encouragement" to the listeners today --Mikecraig 02:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I had no idea. Sounds like page protection time. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes I think so, I was going to do it but thought seeing you have done heaps of reverts today it is best coming from you this time - fingers crossed --Mikecraig 02:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I assure you, I won't stop you if you try. (I'm a bit overwhelmed with RC patrol at the moment, in other words.) Not that this is your responsibility or anything. Thanks for the heads up about this. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I've requested protection: [14] -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 05:00, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

User:206.255.7.144

unblock me because i only said things that were true —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.255.7.144 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Matt Bryant

--- The recents additions to the "October 23rd" and "Matt Bryant" pages on my behalf are 100% legitimate. I understand why you might not want to include the addition to the "October 23rd" page considering the holiday is not a significant event, but the occurance marks a momentous point in Matt Bryant's Career.

Here's the Link:
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/15829711.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sirpinesol (talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the link. I Google searched this before I started reverting you and got zero results, which is why I decided it was a hoax (the recent vandalism from your user account didn't help either). I'm still not sure how other editors will react to this addition, though. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand you! Pardon the past vandalism, those were accidental jokes mistakenly submitted. Should I make the addition to the page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sirpinesol (talk • contribs) 02:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

If it's a real statement from the actual mayor, sure. I won't stop you. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Spiffy! Thank you for listening! Sorry for the trouble! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sirpinesol (talk • contribs) 02:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't Let the Devil Get You, Son

Omicron,
What exactly do you mean to imply in calling my evangelistic postings "blank content?" There is nothing "blank" about the words and teachings of our Savior. What I posted was a full two-page response to the so-called "criticisms" of Christianity so deviantly showcased on Wikipedia. It included not only a clear, rational refutation of the "criticisms," but also an open invitation for all who have sinned in posting that article to turn from their perverse, depraved, deviant, swineish ways and receive Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

Don't let the Devil get you, son. He's out on the prowl for men's souls. He wants nothing more than to see you flung headlong into the firey pits of hell. Won't you open your heart to Jesus? Won't you come and receive Him as your Savior?

Regards From,
Pastor F.J. Bruce —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.227.157.191 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Isaac Newton

I see the Cultural depictions of Isaac Newton article eventually becoming something like Cultural_depictions_of_Joan_of_Arc. Newton is easily a more prominent figure than Joan of Arc, so building up that article should (hopefully) be easier. Borisblue 05:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Kakivi vandalising Rugby World Cup

Hey, I caught Kakivi again vandalising Rugby World Cup and see that on his talk page you have already reverted three of his edits. I think it may be time to block him. - Shudda ^talk 00:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

He or she has been reported and blocked indefinitely. Thanks for the notice. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

VandalSniper Rejection

Perfectly well understood: I expected as much, anyway. I'm very new and, as you've said, I need to prove myself. Thanks very much for the consideration and polite rejection. I'll try applying again once I've got a few hundred more edits under my belt. Erich Blume 06:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do. You're doing well and, as my boilerplate template message said, it's nothing personal. Thanks for the polite follow-up. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 06:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

problem

I did not vandalize this page, I havene't even been on wikipedia in like 3 weeks. It says I edited many different pages, but I didnt. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.163.101.10 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Compact Cassette

Hi. I'm the guy who took Compact Cassette through the Featured Article process. I've seen the terrible things that happen to the Featured Article of the Day (see my fifth rule) so I was actually kind of bummed when I heard it was going to be on the front page. Just wanted to drop you a line to say thanks for looking out for it, since I can't bear to watch. Kafziel ^Talk 02:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I actually didn't know it was the featured article today. Guess that explains the sudden vandalism. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 03:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

vandalism-only account

Hi, I saw your recent vandalism reverts at circumcision and thought you might want to look at the entire account for possible blocking; it seems to be a VOA that has been in use sporadically for several months. Here's the user contribution page [15] Dasondas 03:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Since it's an IP (and thus we can't really label it as a vandalism-only account per se), the best we can do is watchlist the user's talk page and popular article destinations and give short blocks where applicable. Thanks for the report, though; I'll try to keep an eye on this user. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Great work on the vandalism patrol

Recently you seem to be cleaning up a number of the articles on my watchlist on a regular (hourly) basis before I even see them. In recognition of your work I award you:

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Since you already have the RicKK barnstar - for tireless efforts on vandal patrol I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. Megapixie 04:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Block 195.165.112.243

I recommend that user 195.165.112.243 be blocked from editing Wikipedia based on his edit [[16]] of List of Resident Evil 4 creatures, the second time he edits the article to include extensive references to bacon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrostyBytes (talk • contribs)

I've given the user a firm warning. You can use WP:AIV for any future vandalism. Alphachimp 14:14, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

question

Omicronpersei8,

I find no reason for you to have made this deletion. Neither did you provide a reason, suggesting not only ignorance of Wikipedia's reverting procedure, but also the possibility of a personal attack. Please respond by listing and linking to the exact URL (or URL and anchor) of the infraction you allege that I committed.

UK —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uberkuh (talk • contribs) 22:05, 27 October 2006.

See point #3 under WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 22:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Followup redirected to Talk:Nothing#question -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 04:01, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Our computer friend

Might not be a bad idea. I get the feeling that this is a student who's a bit slow in getting the message. I'd say go for it. - Lucky 6.9 07:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Say what?!? You aren't an admin? Would have bet a week's pay that you were. I'll gladly nominate you. - Lucky 6.9 07:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

And you're far too humble. I saw the notice right after I offered the nomination. Offer stands firm if you ever change your mind. I sometimes wish that I didn't have the rollback button, but I'm far too fond of the site to see it get hammered by people who seem to think this is some sort of public chalkboard. BTW, I like that RC patrol mistakes template and the Barnstar page. I'd like to borrow those if you don't mind. - Lucky 6.9 07:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

You bet. I'll rearrange the "mistakes" template into one of my own after my break. Definitely gonna stay away over the weekend since I need to pull the starter on my son's Buick, replace some power steering components on a '69 Ford Ranchero that I just picked up for peanuts (and which I can sell at a really nice profit) and finish hooking up a bathroom sink and vanity. I was suffering from a bit of insomnia thinking of the "fun" I'm about to have, which is why I'm here in the first place. See you soon.

Lucky 6.9 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Devilmaycares

I'm putting together a RFC against this user. Would you be willing to co-sign? ---J.S (t|c) 17:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, page is here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Devilmaycares ---J.S (t|c) 17:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Have you given any though to this? ---J.S (t|c) 21:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC(

Devil has been quite smart about how he goes about editing as well. Always "near" the line but never crosses it twice. I fear this editor has more experience then is represented by contributions list. ---J.S (t|c) 21:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure, if that's what you'd rather do. I think the process is not entirely formal. (This is the first RFC I've been apart of) ---J.S (t|c) 07:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

yo foo, wha tchu doin!?!?

Why do you want to delete bens page, he has inspired me to do great and wonderful things with my life, he is my hero and i owe my life to him and his teaching! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nebby70 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Opie/....Wanna laugh?

User talk:144.139.3.77

Now theres a guy what can't control himself. HalfShadow 05:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I want to laugh but that person's contributions list is just too sad. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 05:17, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I was watching this too, and I was thinking "why doesn't Ryulong just wait til it's sprotected, then revert it?" Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 05:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Scenekidsareez

SHUDDUP, HOE. stop messaging me your shit, i could careless. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scenekidsareez (talk • contribs) 05:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh deary deary deary dear... HalfShadow 05:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks again for the tip! Wikichange 07:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

217.43.18.66

This user has gone and lost his/her cool and has started attacking User:Kittybrewster on his/her talk page. I've given the IP a warning but the IP seems too wound up to stop at this point. -WarthogDemon 09:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Bough Beech

Leave bough beech alone! Do you live there? no. Anything written by me, as a resident, is factual not opinional —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.80.20.10 (talk • contribs) 10:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Opinions and nonsense are not factual. And keep off of my page you despicable little troll. HalfShadow 16:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For a quick reversion of my page. Thanks, Opie.HalfShadow 18:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Naturelle

My bad. I wasn't aware of the notability tag or I would have used it for that page. Thanks for fixing it. -WarthogDemon 19:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem. If you want to {{prod}} it I wouldn't object to that, either. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 19:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I've done so now. Hope I prodded it okay. -WarthogDemon 19:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the protection heads up

Thank you for informing me about the protect tag. I greatly appreciate the advice you gave since I just recently really started to put my account to use. I'll see what I can do as far as alerting an admin in the future :). Once again thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal 22:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

mistake on RC patrol

a small mistake was made while on RC patrol. No big deal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brunky (talk • contribs) 22:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Is this is in reference to the message above from Persian Poet Gal? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

• Ya, my apologies guys, I'm trying to learn not to jump the gun or auto-assume (as I did have 3 out 20 reverts yesterday being possibly mistakes). I'm slowly becoming more use to how RC patrol works :P. Thanks to Omicronpersei8 I haven't made as many mistakes in my recent reverts. (or added the protect tag which works with the implement of admins only lol, my inexperience eeps out :P)¤~Persian Poet Gal 18:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The reference desk... as a general rule

..People don't usually vandalize the RD, in fact, it almost never happens. So in the future, if you see an anon doing something odd to the RD archives, it's probably a valid change. Also, there's a pretty good chance it will be me, as I tend to do tedious maintenance work while logged out, in this case the edit you reverted was part of a change over to a new archive system, thus the redirect from the old Subpage, to the new one. No harm done, really more of a loose end, since the page wasn't in use anymore --VectorPotential^{RD HAS A BOT !!!} 22:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay. For the record, though: while I could have done more research on why that specific link was being added and thus might've discovered that it belonged there, I actually reverted it because it looked like an accident, appearing to have used a faulty #REDIRECT tag. I'm not exactly sure why #REDIRECT is on the page again now, either, but it's none of my business. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I guess this explains that, though. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The problem with a formal redirect was that at the time, Tawkerbot was in a bad mood--VectorPotential^{RD HAS A BOT !!!} 22:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Haha – I see, and I sympathize. I've had fun with bots myself from time to time: [17] [18] [19]
I also got into an edit war with another RC bot, which reverted me six times back to a heavily vandalized version, last week or the week before that; I can't offer diffs because those edits were oversighted by an admin. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Ed Kavalee again (sigh)

It seems like this wiki is going to be a pain today to keep an eye on. I was saying to Ninevah today that these anon IP people are getting annoying. I think she has asked for protection. Anyhoo..keep up the good work --Mikecraig 00:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it's quieted down for now. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't count on it! It needs to be permanently protected! --Ninevah 01:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Elliott Tittensor

RE:Elliot Tittensor...I wish someone would expand these kind of stubs. People go out of their way to keep the stub on wikipedia and not to have it get deleted, and then do absolutely nothing to expand the article. Because the way the article is right now, it doesn't really tell you anything about its subject. If the person is notable enough to have a stub, then there should be enough information available to write a proper article. --MonkBirdDuke 22:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

--MonkBirdDuke 05:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

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

← Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 →