User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite/archive5

We have a problem

See User talk:Elvispforlife and Special:Contributions/Elvispforlife and you welcomed him...

edit - nevermind, I fixed it. Af648 07:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Nomination

Greetings Ryan Postlethwaite, welcome to Wikipedia. If you would like to nominate yourself as an admin or nominate someone else, please visit this page. Thanks! Meteoroid » 01:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Majorly would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Majorly to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ryan Postlethwaite. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Above comment seems a little out of place, so I'll use this section. We're ready to go! Majorly _{(o rly?)} 09:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would more than support. – Chacor 09:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent :) Majorly _{(o rly?)} 09:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you guys for all the support it is very much appreciated, a few more tweeks and we'll be ready to go RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Going to put it on the main page then? Majorly _{(o rly?)} 19:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go on then :-S RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 20:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wish I was on earlier to catch this nom! Best of luck to you, I believe you will definitely earn the tools ;).¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Red Rain

Could you open a peer review? I prefer to log in my comments there. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, not a problem, got work now, so i'll open one when I get back, thanks for all your help RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 08:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to do what I can, though it's not really my field. I see User:Worldtraveller has commented on the talk page. It might be worth contacting User:CrazyC83 who wrote filed a previous peer review on it and also the India and Meteorology Wikiprojects. --Cherry blossom tree 12:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if anyone has university contacts to find out if GC-MS has been done on the samples? Normally this would have been one of the first tests when something unusual like this turns up. The silly space spores story has run long enough, and it's time for the nonense to be grounded. Unfortunately a number of people who didn't know any better ended up believing it. I'm not sure that an April Fool will do much other than give yet more unwarranted publicity to the fringe astrobio community. Davy p 04:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee#Hey

Good evening (GMT time); hope you're well! I've read your above comment, so let me answer for the committee. User:The Transhumanist, User:Audacity, User:FrankB and myself were the four original users who both revamped the welcome page, and TT proposed a bot to do exactly what you were suggesting.

Unfortunately, it was rejected by the other WelCom Welcoming Agents; I still think it's a great idea, but there is simply no way we can go against the community consensus.

Hope this clears things up!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 05:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied here RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

icon-based links

how do i place icon-based links to Wikia sites on WP articles? As this is different than placing a simple link, could you please clarify?--Rlakshmipriya 17:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied here RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

u've got me wrong.i can understand the usage of links.i need to know how i can place a link in the image form like an icon.--Rlakshmipriya 03:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:IMayBeTrailerTrash,ButILoveStarTrek

Thought you might find this one interesting. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ended up being a troll. Go figure. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for trolling, and by looking at the contribs, the user is a probable sock puppet (Due to going straight to WP:AN/I with their first contrib). Asside of that, username wise, well, I count 36 characters, in my opinion its a bit long, even if coherant, I'm not sure how I'd go on WP:RFCN - this is why WP:U needs to be clearer, how would you go? Allow or Disallow? RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 01:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You see, if we ever really had a discussion about what "extremely" is defined as, I think I would move us more towards 45 than 35. But, it seems that there are people who would rather have the power to decide what "extremely" means based on their own "common sense" despite the fact that not defining this allows them to vary their definitions based on how much they like or dislike another person. So much for rule of law and transparency in practices. Oh well...I have a feeling it will all work out eventually. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I definately agree, tomorrow I plan to go back to Wikipedia talk:Username policy and put in a propoer proposal, 45 letters seams fine to me, but maybe with the added statement, that 40-45 may be ambiguous and all usernames must comply with all the other requirements of WP:U RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 01:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Thanks for the welcome wagon, Charlie.NewuserNed 01:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, any questions, give me a shout here RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 01:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted

Was your button finger a bit drunk too? LOL --SooperJoo 16:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

heh, no unfortunately not this time, sorry again RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 16:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I can see people are allowed to vandalise my userpage without any correct response. Embargo 19:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Hi, Ryan. Just a quick note (I know you are busy right now with something ;)) - thanks for your support at my RfA. Much appreciated, and the very best of luck with yours. I'm sure it will be ok in the end. :) Bubba hotep 21:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hey Ryan, you might want to give this a look. Your input is valuable. Niko Silver 13:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

No problem, your welcome :) Artaxiad 16:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Award time!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For twice reverting tests on my user page, and making such a neat job of it, I, Anthony, award you, Ryanpostlethwaite, the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Keep up the great work! anthonycfc ^[talk] 00:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Thanks for the revert. :) Acalamari 21:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, glad I could help Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 21:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - I think we're all watching each other here :) - Alison^☺ 21:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've just submitted the vandal to RFC/U. There's something about the name I noticed. Acalamari 21:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for reverting that insightful and informative comment on my talk page! (and congrats on your soon-to-be adminship!) delldot talk 02:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!!!

Congrats on your successful RFA! :) Knew you'd make it. - Alison^☺ 20:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers alison! I really can't believe it. I'm like a kid at christmas, theres all these new buttons to play with :) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It'll get old fast, trust me. – Steel 21:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, as Alison says, you are now an administrator. If you haven't already, now is the time to look at the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Best wishes, Warofdreams talk 20:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice; your RfA passed with 80 in support, 8 against, and 3 oppose. It seems that near the end, Sarah changed from oppose to support. Acalamari 21:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Congratulations from me too. The Rambling Man 21:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations and happy mopping! — S.D. 21:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Leebo ^T/C 21:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, congratulations Ryan! Good luck with your new mop :) If you need some help, my talk page is always open. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh by the way, you've taken Arjun01's place of being the newest user who is an admin... just thought I'd let you know. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From a regular old user who's seen you on RFCN, congrats! Philippe Beaudette 22:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Ryan! Best of luck with the admin tools, and if you ever need any help, feel free to contact me. =) Nishkid 64 22:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, I know you will use the tools well! Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 01:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! And thank you for reverting some vandalism to my talkpage. Seems I was far too busy at RfD to notice.... Ooops! WjBscribe 03:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I find it fairly ridiculous that someone can be revealed as a plagarist and still pass RFA. It sends entirely the wrong message about what the community cares about (or perhaps the community has some pretty strange priorities). Regardless, you have tried to be pretty contrite about it and clean things up, which is a good thing. Keep in mind though that some of us will continue to check up on your contributions from time to time. Dragons flight 20:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like Ryan is an ex-plagiarist, in fairness. It's hardly fair to brand someone for life given that he's contrite and has done his best to make amends - Alison^☺ 20:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For journalists and publishers, plagarism is a career ending event, and so in the real world it often is a life long brand. On wiki perhaps it shouldn't be so bad, but I feel we certainly ought to have a heck of a lot longer memory than 3 weeks. Dragons flight 20:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I think Dragons flight was right to bring it up at the RfA, without a doubt. And I do think it was a major mistake on Ryan's behalf. But believe me, the people who voted support will be keeping a much closer eye on him than the ones that didn't – me included. Bubba hotep 21:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reply

Short term block is {{subst:uw-block1}} while an indef block is {{subst:uw-block3}}. I believe block templates can be found with other warning templates at WP:UTM. Congrats on your RfA. :) IrishGuy ^talk 23:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, that helps a million! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

congrats!

Congratulations! I got a few seconds to check my wikipedia and wanted to congratulate you! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 04:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats from me too, Ryan. If you need any help, give us a shout! :) Bubba hotep 11:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on you successful nomination and good luck in all your future endeavors.:) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reassurance. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent news to hear of your promotion :-)! Matthew 19:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo! Use them wisely! Had I known you earlier than when we met, I'd have probably expressed opinion there too. Niko Silver 20:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am very glad you are an admin now. Well-deserved Ryan. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 21:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA & me

Hey, congratulations one more time. Thanks for your note on my talk page, you asked if I was planning to run for admin soon. Well, for interest's sake, I ran in January under my old username of Budgiekiller (ask if you wish...) and failed - read it here. I would be happy to run again but suspect that, for one thing, renom after just two months would show an unhealthy desire for the mop! So, in short, yes I'll run for adminship in the future. But when, I don't know. But this is your party, so nice one, enjoy, congrats one last time and hope to bump into you many times in the near, middle and distant future. The Rambling Man 20:24, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support, more soon. Enjoy your new buttons! The Rambling Man 20:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! > Kamope < 00:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, the IP's blocked now Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My usual rant

In case you hadn't noticed I responded in my talk. (I do that frequently to preserve continuity). Your input will be appreciated. Goodnight. ;-) Niko Silver 00:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, I slept before you did! Well, you're probably right: I have devoted a lot of time to this minor issue. IMO, the particular name is "potentially offensive and inflammatory", either if used by Greeks, or Slavs, or Bulgarians or whoever (check the citations in the subpage). Further, its use despite all other country/usenames being blocked is double standards. Finally, 5 admins blocked all other countries, and 4 users/admins agreed that this would be wise because they resemble "speaking on behalf of a country" ("imply authority"). Should we unblock all the rest, or should we block that one in particular? We have a problem with consistency, you know... Niko Silver 10:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to find some time around noon UTC. We have two problems: "Implies authority" and "consistency/double-standards". The only problem is not only with this particular username, as e.g. User:Australia is free and not blocked. The fact that a large number of countries (113/~200) is blocked, gives an advantage to those not blocked in certain disputes. Among others, they can fool new users that they edit with authority, they can confuse in watchlists (22:18 Fictionlandia (diff; hist) . . (0) . . Fictionlandia (Talk | contribs)), and they can create article-like userpages with POV that the community has proven that it fails to police. The latter can also confuse absolutely unfamiliar readers (non-editors) for being the respective WP article. We definitely don't need these problems, and the utility of solving them surpasses whichever liberties may be oppressed (to those who don't deserve them in the first place). Niko Silver 00:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Check User talk:NikoSilver/CountryUsernames. I have removed all user-specific information, and have made an outline of the case with the applicable policies. Where is "group account" prohibited? Kindly see if you want to add/change anything else also. Niko Silver 10:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mop time!!

You so need one of these on your userpage :) - Alison^☺ 18:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, Ryan! --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 18:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block of 71.133.46.40

You may wish to shorten the blocking period of that IP. It appears to be a shared IP, and has in recent days also had some very constructive edits that I've checked on. --Auto^{(talk / contribs)} 21:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

replied here Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 21:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None For Me.

Actually, Ryanpostlethwaite, there really is no point in me ever having an RfA. You see, other users won't trust me when it comes to usernames. They're likely to think I'll block names like mad. I really should abandon RFC/U completely; I seem to cause nothing but trouble every time I list a user. Acalamari 23:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should also leave RFC/U alone in case I'm blocked for reporting too many users...which is my I don't think I'll report anyone there again unless I have to. Acalamari 23:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep your head up, your not going to get blocked! You do great work. I've replied properly here :) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I liked your conversation with Ali-oops on my talk page. :) A shame I wasn't in that discussion. Acalamari 02:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar

Thanks for the Good Humor barnstar, Ryan! I'm not much of a comedian (or at least I don't try to be), so I was pretty shocked when I found out what kind of barnstar it was. Well thanks again, Ryan, and happy editing! // DecaimientoPoético 00:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well whether or not it was meant as humour, it made me laugh, and not any things on the wiki make me laugh! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'm glad to know that I can have that kind of effect on people! :D // DecaimientoPoético 00:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there

Hi there Ryan. I was wondering if you could do me a favour and protect Groanio's talk page? I keep on getting badgered by him and it seems unlikely to stop. I kinda wanna end this quickly and don't want to take up space by filing a report... Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, hope it helps Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I owe you one now. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Wikipedia
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message

Hey Ryan, thank you for your message, I really appreciated your very kind comments. However, I then saw your conversation with Allison on Acalamari's talk page and I realised that you're just a charmer and you're on a roll with charming the Wiki-ladies! ;-D LOL

Seriously, though, I know that you won't abuse the tools. I would never have come back around to support if I'd thought that was a possibility. I have been impressed with you and your work for ages now and when I saw your name on the nom list I went straight to the RfA page with the full intention of offering my strong support. If the diffs had all been from your early days, it really wouldn't have been such a concern to me. But it was the recent incident that really threw me. I didn't feel let down, though, so don't worry about that. I do understand that happened was a mistake and not some malicious thing you deliberately set out to do.

I hope your first days of adminship have been all you hoped for. Please feel free to give me a yell anytime if you ever need any help or support. All the best, Ryan, Sarah 13:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Co-Nomination.

You've known Alison longer than I have. Would you be interested in being the co-nominator on her RfA? (Sorry if I beat you to being the nominator.) Acalamari 18:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent co-nomination; you wrote about some things that I missed/didn't know about. I don't know about you, but I'll give my support as the nominator if she accepts. Acalamari 19:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, we have to wait anyway. Acalamari 19:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What?! She hasn't accepted?! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet; don't forget she could actually be answering the questions. Acalamari 19:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not to hopefull then, I asked her a couple of weeks ago and she said no! Lets just keep our fingers crossed, she'd make a great admin Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing those additions with the edit counts; I thought they had to be put in when the candidate accepted. Obviously not. Acalamari 20:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they do, but nevermind, it shouldn't be a problem :P Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Majorly, I'll update them if she excepts (didn't realise) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiThanks

Thank you, Ryan, and you Acalamari for being so supportive with the nom and for updating my counts. I've to keep a low profile during the process and get back to business here but I just want you both to know just how much I appreciate it :) - Alison^☺ 22:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your User talk vandalism

Hi there, I just noticed as I was patrolling the changes using VandalProof that you were having problems on your user page (or user talk page - I can't remember lol) anyway I'm glad to see you have sorted it out! Telly addict 19:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome! The IP address blanked the warnings on there talk page so I reverted it, I'll keep an eye out there too incase he does it again. Again - your welcome! Telly addict 19:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to keep leaving messages but he she is requesting unblock but has also removed there vandalism warns in the process, you may wish to review it and posibly revert it so his/her warnings appear to other editors! Telly addict 19:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah cheers, I've just noticed that, I've asked User:Majorly to review it for me because he's neutral in it all Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla's already declined the request. Acalamari 19:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(reduce indent); thanks, once again, for helping out. That IP had no business in posting business like that to the public, and I thank you for speedily reverting it. I'd give you a barnstar, but consider the original seconded! anthonycfc ^[talk] 19:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hehe, yeh no probs, wikipedia isn't the place for the stuff maria was putting - shes got a 24 hour cooling off period, and if she wants to contribute constructivly, she can do so after that. Hope everythings ok Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening (GMT time); everything is relatively okay, but (as Maria kindly pointed out) I've got some stuff to sort out, so see you after the WikiBreak. Again, a thousand thank you messages! anthonycfc ^[talk] 19:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... :) see you around. anthonycfc ^[talk] 19:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PUA.

1 Acalamari 21:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Late on the RfA.

I can't believe it; neither of us were the first to give out support to Alison, and we're the ones to nominate her! :) Not only that, but it seems some joker has vandalized the RfA already. --sigh-- How nice of that person to do that; at least it shows that the vandals know they'll have one more vandal-fighter to worry about. Acalamari 16:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to support your RfA

Ho ho ho! Go ahead, copper, run me through WP:RFCN. You'll never find my hundred socks, a majority of which are now part of the Cabal! De-sysoping will be the least of your worries. (although I must stress I am not threatening you with legal action. because that would be wrong.) Anyways, be of good cheer and try to not get bogged down. --Pig^man_dialogue 18:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe! That one certainly made me laugh, still considering an NPA warning...... actually I'll let you off on this one since you did support my Rfa ;) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another Place.

Look at this. Both Gamaliel and I show up there. Acalamari 22:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice when people off-wiki talk about you. :) Acalamari 03:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan

Apologies for calling you a wikinazi. However, please leave my user page alone. You're only proving my point by reverting it.

--PeterMarkSmith 02:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Appology accepted, if you wish I will put your userpage through Mfd if you want to keep it in its wikipedia offensive state, its entirely upto you Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting an opinion on a username

Hi there, I know you're a regular at RFC/U. I warned a user today about his username, Filiusdei (talk • contribs), as in Son of God. What do you think? My original post to him is here and his reply and mine are here. Regards, Flyguy649^talk_contribs 02:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your input. As you saw, I also asked Kukini for input and got essentially the same response. I also don't have a problem with his name. I guess I was more concerned about how others might react, since there seems to have been a bit of that lately at RFCU. I'll let the user be. Thanks again. Regards, Flyguy649^talk_contribs 13:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things I noticed...

Hey, Ryan. I know you're still a baby administrator, so I'm going to try not to bite. :) In handling the User:PeterMarkSmith page, I think that blanking it probably wasn't the best idea--the objection was to the whole page, not just one personal attack that could be removed. CSD under G10 might have worked; going straight to MfD would have been better. And when the user retaliated by vandalising your page, I think you may have wanted to give a lower-level warning than the one you gave. It's one thing if he did that and I gave the warning, but given this user's disposition, I think he would have interpreted your warning as more posturing/wikinazi-ing/whatever. It's just something to think about when the next unpleasantness hits. At any rate, you did fine overall, and I think you kept calm and solicited others' opinions, which is always good. And it's good that you didn't hit delete and then block, like I might have done when I was first an admin. ;) I've MFD'd the page now, so we'll see what happens. Keep up your very good work. -- Merope 03:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok you may help

Do you now anything about Fudokan? If you do write everything that is missing? Remember that is fourth school of karate in the world -- snake_bgd

Can you redert me to the templarate: major styles of karate

Heian Oi Kumi, Taiji Shodan, Kaminari, Kaminari i wrote again.

No, no you don't understand i what to edit this article just as i edit templarate:karate schools Snake bgd 12:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alison's RfA

Sorry, you'll have to excuse me, i thought the RfA was a request for adminship with regards to server monitoring and soforth; i got the impression that from her contributions and soforth that she may not have been suitable, but i see it's for the sysop flag on mediawiki. I'll vote in the reciprocal; put me down for Support instead. J O R D A N ^[talk ] 15:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh no problem at all, I thought there may have been a misunderstanding, by all means keep it as oppose if you wish or I'm more than happy to help you change it (although you'll have to actually put the support bit on yourself! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Party Up

Enjoy the partying! I did my share this weekend (and last, and wait, the one before that too). lol. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, cheers Chris - lets just hope I don't come on later to edit (actually, I'll probably by too hammered!) Just finishing a few things up - then Kendal won't know whats hit it! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you poor thing (in advance)! Here - let me help ;) - Alison^☺ 17:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@

I thought about that as I sent that welcome. I am not sure why that is a rule across the board. I have seen many exceptions to this rule out there. My thoughts, delete my welcome and put it into the process. If the name should be blocked, we should run a search for all other names with @'s and ask them to change usernames. I gotta go, but if you have time to deal with it...I would appreciate it. Best, Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 19:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A belated congratulations

Ryan -- I was away from the wiki during midterms and somehow your RfA completely escaped my notice. I'm sorry I missed the chance to support you, and I have no doubt that you will be a responsible admin and continue to be a credit to the project. Rock on - A Train ^{take the} 19:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop this guy

This guy User:RogueNinja is acting vandlism in my article please block it so that he or she can't delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snake bgd (talk • contribs)

Hmmm - looks like a revert war. Also note Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fudokan - Alison^☺ 15:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our usual song-and-dance

Hey Ryan, once you've got some water and aspirin in your system to moderate that hangover, want to give mentoring another shot? Here's the gouge. If and when you make the approach, make it clear to WikiLoco that you're approaching on the behalf of a concerned group of editors, and that a community ban is on the table if his overall editing doesn't improve. Let me know what you think. A Train ^{take the} 15:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Page Design

Good evening (GMT time); as requested, I've drew up a quick something in the form of a possible new user page design. It's located at User:Anthony cfc/Sandbox/A; let me know what you think!

Kind regards,
anthonycfc ^[talk] 22:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - niiiice! - Alison^☺ 22:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony, you should credit the person who originally had that layout, FireFox. I think he was the first one to have that design (see his userpage history around September 2006), but it was "stolen" by others afterwards. By the way, you basically copied Arjun01's userpage and substituted it with Ryan's information. Try to be original? It gets boring when everyone has the same userpage. Nishkid 64 22:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

* Looks good. Acalamari 23:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted already. Looks like your new layout lasted ... oh ... 15 minutes? :) - Alison^☺ 23:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, didn't realise it was just copied across so I've removed it completely and I'll speak to Anthony about it tomorrow, thanks for the revert by the way :) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mine's reasonably unique, Ryan. So feel free to steal away on any/all of it if you like - Alison^☺ 23:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't realize it was someone else's, so I crossed out my message. As for my own user page/user talk designs, I'm going to keep them as they are; even If other users' think they look boring. Acalamari 23:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I owe you a thanks.

Thank you for dealing with the vandal of my userpage. TheBlazikenMaster 23:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next time some vandal vandalisms my page, I will report that vandal to your talkpage. TheBlazikenMaster 23:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah no problem, don't forget though, in cases where the user should obviously be blocked, it can be reported to WP:AIV but by all means if you want a second opinion, you know where I am Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KFed08 evading block/ban?

Kfed08 is somehow blanking his talk page again after you banned him. Any idea how this happens? JohnCub 01:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ombudsman

I have removed your User:Ombudsman section from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names because I had already posted such a section a couple hours ago. It was removed by User:Neil on the (false or mistaken) grounds that User:Ombudsman had not been given advance warning about the potential problems with his username. I have restored the original discussion and invite you to contribute to it. —Psychonaut 19:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I've been at work all day and I missed it, if it had already been discussed, I may not have readded it. Sorry for the confusion, I'll comment on your version now Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Checkuser request

Oh, wow. That seems like the sort of situation checkuser might be able to shed some light on, you could submit a request. As to whether the CUs would make the check, I couldn't (and, in the interest of neutrality, really shouldn't) say. I guess, if we're trying to see if Ed = the other account, then you could try and apply code letter F (community block evasion). – Luna Santin (talk) 02:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sorry for asking your opinion about it as I know you should stay neutral, thanks for the advice, I'm going to submit one with code letter F as I think it should be done before any blocks or unblocks are made Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Looking around to make sure the preload case input is okay, and such. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 02:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Idiot

Hey Ry...go take a look at my comments. If you think I am off-base, let me know and help me see why in the discussion. Thanks, Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 03:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, good research! Can't believe I'm not leanin towards disallow on this one now! Still, not striking my allow comments out until theres greater reaction! (I've commented all the same) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 03:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know me...I just want us to be consistent and careful. It shows the most respect to each other and the project at large. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 03:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Blah Blah Blah Got your lovey-dovey sad and lonely

Long enough for ya? Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 08:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

50 characters - but it is coherent, might I suggest WP:RFCN? We can't block this one on sight, the policies just too ambiguous. Would certainlt say disallow though others may have a different opinion Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 08:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As this remains an interesting shared issue for us, I thought I would pass it along. I am heading to bed. If you want to run it up the flagpole, let me know what happened...as it could effect the wording of policy, no? Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 08:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arrrrggghhh, I havn't got time to do it now, I'm going to work! If it hasn't been blocked already (for name or vandalism) we'll put it through later on - although it seams likely theres going to be a vandalism block on the cards! Nighty night Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 08:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me either...I need sleeeeeeeep....and see, there is a part of me loves names like this: User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back, but it might be the part of me that is growing up slowly. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 08:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I be an editor

I make small needed grammatical changes to pages. Nothing serious. That is who I am. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.107.227.68 (talk) 03:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Guess who is back.

Here ya go...same user with a slight change to the name. [1] Go here to learn how it happened...[2].Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 16:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That one isn't acceptable either! I actually thought you might have gone through a minor username change at first! would you like me to bring it up at WP:RFCN for you? (Think there might be a conflict of interest if you do it!) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I leave that up to you. Hey I have an idea...what about we create an "institutional memory" page for RFCN? On it, we would list historically blocked words, such as "retard," under various categories, based on policy. That way, we might have something to refer to quickly when it comes to usernames. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 16:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats a really good idea, although there shouldn't be precedents on wikipedia, we definately need some kind of continuity, I remember those jesusfreak usernames from last week, the first one got disallowed, and then the second one, which just had a different number on the end nearly got allowed. The catogaries section would definately be a better idea than the currecnt archive, although we could use the archive links to help us set it up. Any suggestions on where to put it? Userspace or a subsection of WP:RFCN? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:RfC/User names/Institutional memory

I would suggest that as the page...then we link it to the RfC itself and use it as a reference in these decisions. Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 00:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats a good call, theres no problems with random article clicking or anything. Going to bed soon so I'm not going to have chance to work on it tonight, but definately will do tomorrow. How far back do you want to go? As an immediate response, I'd say 4 weeks just to get it off the ground, then we can look at going further back. It's going to need manual entry, but I think there will be enough support to encourage people to archive there upon closing (an if not, it's easy to do once for just a few of us once its been created). I think we should archive all names that come to RFCN (including obvious allows) otherwise there could be bias. Would you like to get the ball rolling? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good start, although we have some problems...see below. Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 00:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really think it would be best to link to the archive as well as linking to the user, it would give clearly the reasons for allowing or disallowing the name. Think consistency may be an issue as we go through this and it may be an idea to comment on it on RFCN talk. Not sure on this one, but do you think it would be better to have seperate pages for each category? Might mean the page size is more accessible Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer one clean and simple page that would be easy to refer to. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest naming it "Index_by_reason" (as distinct from "Index_by_name"), because "Institutional memory" is too general (and could even refer to the Archive). I'd also suggest that the date given after "Blocked"* or "Allowed" should link to the archive oldid and section of the decision. *And "Blocked" should read "Disallowed", which is the actual decision; sometimes it results in a name change rather than a block. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 02:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's talk about the name for it in a bit...first let's make it shine. Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 02:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, what do you think? Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 16:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very impressed! How about I add usernames from between Feb 20th - March 6th and you do from March 7th - today? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep in mind that policy changes over time. Second of all, feel free to check out the username policy discussion at WP:U that is discussing a new policy related to religios figures. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats a good point, but it will be a good reference tool, and obvious new policy comes first Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it can and should be monitored and updated as policy develops. I also think it is time to make this resource available to all reviewers. Should we reference it on the main RFCN page now? Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 17:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should get a few more names on first, just so its not biased, also, theres a few groups that haven't been mentioned, like long names, random names, promotional names, think we should try and get all different headings of usernames that come to RFCN and then add it, might take a few days but it will be worth it Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

←Has this been brought up on the RFCN talk page? I think that might be a good place to start (Im my humble opinion). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I will likely use this tool in reference for blocking purposes on usernames regardless. I think this really improves consistency and transparency in our process. A good example of outcomes of this sort of study is the current rewrite of the religion portion of policy going on right now. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 17:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with consistency

Houston...we have significant problems with consistency. Look at User:Wikipediatrix which was ruled on last year. If we are ruling out all that use "wikipedia" as a user name, we need to go back and clean house. We cannot just treat newbies differently than all of us. --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 00:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Policy states that its only an issue if names were created after Jimbo's email (late feb I think) when he stated that names with wikipedia should only be disallowed from now on - problem solved (hopefully!!) maverick Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Thanks. I began our little project. I think we don't bother introducing it until we have it formed somewhat. Talk at ya later. Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hi. Thanks for offering. Hope you get some consensus at ANI. If you do, are the admin tools clever enough to deal with cases where others have responded to the about-to-vanish posts? How would you handle that? Hope you don't mind the question; I'm hoping to stand for adminship one day (undergoing coaching with The Transhumanist currently) and explanations like this can only help prepare me. --Dweller 11:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a new admin, Im still getting used to the rollback button! You can't rollback after someone else has edited, but you can rollback to any previous revision of the page; i.e. John made a couple of typo's so I'll have to go back a couple of revisions with it. For the ones where someone else has edited it, if its unrelated to the canvassing, I'll remove it manually, if it is related to the canvassing, I'm going to have to leave it as I don't want to be removing other peoples comments, does that sound fair? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, while you were kindly replying to me, Radiant's done it. Lol. Thanks! (Sorry) --Dweller 11:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I've just seen, my watchlists full of reversions. I wanted some practice :-(! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol, I'm sure a linkspam bot will be along presently. --Dweller 11:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John

Absolutely. >Radiant< 12:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some people just won't take advice. --Dweller 12:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its just a pitty that he didnt understand, I hope when his block expires he can come back and start being more productive Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 12:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since it appears to be a SPA, I somehow doubt that. >Radiant< 12:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this now "Resolved" so far as ANI is concerned? I'm just dying to slap a tag on it, lol --Dweller 16:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - I'd say so, the guys blocked so unlikely to cause any more disruption, I'll keep an eye on him after the block expires and wap another one on if he carries on. I'm quite dissapointed really - it seams that due to John's spamming efforts, CLawtons Rfa's now going to fail when it looked set to pass Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I !voted oppose. I have to say I was determined to support after I saw the canvassing(!), but my customary perusal of talk page + edit history gave me enough concerns apart from the Red Baron edit conflict. --Dweller 16:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfAs

Well, no argumentation could ever prove that a user will abuse the tools. Call it a hunch, if you will. :) —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I do fully understand all the concerns, but I don't get that hunch with this one (thats more what I meant to say) - I guess it doesn't matter really as its not going to pass. Anyway - I think the candidates had a rough time today - the canvassing by User:JohnHistory was way out of line and has completely discredited the Rfa. Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was a real mess. Actually, I think he really meant well, as he explained on his talk page. Maybe the block can do something to cool him down a tad. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think he meant well too, but there does seam to be some harrasment involved - as you say hopefully the block will cool him down, in 16 hours time hopefully we may have a reformed user!! :-) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm totally confident as to that... call it a hunch. :) —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Darkest Hour/monobook.js

Darkest Hour will need to purge the page cache to get it to work anyway; I left instructions to the IP on what to do. It is best to never touch someone else's js files, since it is code that is executed on their system. You should not do so unless you can confim the user, and are positive as to what you are doing. Since DH can do it himself, this shouldn't be needed. Prodego ^talk 19:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the reply, and again sorry, will certainly think ahead next time - thanks for the advice Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 19:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Working!

Its all working. I know what the issue was, all you had to do was purge the cache of the page. Thanks for all the help. And yes because I'm now paranoid because of this I have OvrLoad - sockpuppet to test scripts before putting them in my monobook. Again, thank you for your assistance. -- Darkest Hour 20:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 12	20 March 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream"	News and notes: Bad sin, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

I'm still learning Wiki really and it seems that Ivan III of Russia has been the victim of quite a bit of vandalism lately (one user eloquently put his edit as "added humor") and on the fly it seems like it should probably get semi-protection. I read about the protections and such but am not really sure how to nominate something for protection (my understanding is that only administrators can protect something) so basically I am doing that! =D Thanks, --JaymzRR 08:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Time.

How do you update the time on an RfA? I didn't get the chance to update the time on Alison's RfA; so I don't know how to do it on my own. Exactly what do I do? I've done everything else (except add my nomination to the discussion). Acalamari 16:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updated now! So get it added in :), I'm just going out now, so won't have chance to support you - I'll do it when I come back (I've got a week!) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 16:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was easier than I though; next time I'll know. Thanks! Acalamari 17:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFCN

Hi Ryan. You submitted User:Hellfreezesover666 to WP:RFCN. As you did not ask the user to change his user name first (per the policy on usernames at WP:U, and per the header at the top of WP:RFCN), I have removed this nomination. Please ask the user first in future, politely, if they would consider changing their name; don't just submit their name for an RFC and tell them about it. There is even a handy template for this, at {{UsernameConcern}}. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't nominate it! replied here Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution

Thank you for your suggestions concerning KazakhPol and dispute resolution. Unfortunately, we have already been down that route with a Rfc concerning him. Despite a consensus on incivility, nothing amounted from it. Do you have any suggestions that might have actual weight? Djma12 ^(talk) 00:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you too for suggestions regarding KazakhPol, however from what I've seen, it is impossible to resolve any disputes with kazkhpol. The user has absolutely no sense of civility, but the main problem is not that, it is the fact that he pushes his own POV on all articles he edits. In a way, he censors articles about Central Asia, by replacing facts about injustices and human right conditions, or at least alters them to show as few of the reality as possible. A simple look at his "contributions" will prove it. Again, I thank you for trying to help. TheColdTruth 17:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks, Ryan, for watching over me :) I could use it right now as I'm such a newbie. I owe you a detailed message later! - Alison^☺ 00:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha no problem, your probably too busy finding some vandals to block you little newbie!!! Think I sorted your problem out on associated talk pages though Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My editor review

Thanks for reviewing me! I'll be sure to put your comments to good use. Just one question: what do you mean by MOTD is a user page project? I know that it's a Wikiproject (like the various XfD's), but it doesn't affect my user edit count. THat must sound a bit confusing, but can you please help? --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 01:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I understand now. Thanks again! --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 01:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ADERANT

I have no idea how that happened. I certainly did not intend to delete any comment. To be honest, I don't remember seeing your comment at all when I was adding my comment. Perhaps it was an odd effect from an edit conflict?

Regardless, you have my apologies. I've put the comment back where it belonged. Rossami (talk) 19:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of HC Author

Why did you remove the HC Author article. I put a {{hangon}} on it and added notability info on the talk page. I didn't see any final explanation for why it was removed. Golden Eternity

Replied here Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully HC receives more recognition. I love some of his work. Thanks.--Golden Eternity 14:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rc tag

I want to change the Bg Color to Orange, so it is less of a distraction. The text can stay the same. The Evil Clown _{Please review me!} 21:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the one at the top of you talk page, its orange at the minute Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 21:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it chrome(ish). Look at the sandbox(a version of the hangon template) to see what I mean. The Evil Clown _{Please review me!} 21:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IT LOOKS AMAZING! THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! The Evil Clown _{Please review me!} 21:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 21:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closing RfAs

No worries, mate, it's just one of those little things :) – Riana ^ঋ 02:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guess it's probably a good think that I don't go closing Rfa's all that often! Thanks again Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shut up vs. fuck off

So, you're telling me being told to shut up isn't a personal attack? "Fuck" is just a word like any other. --Nélson Ricardo 11:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, fuck off is a very severe personal attack, please take my advice, click the link for shut up to show what chris was getting at Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is obviously innappropriate, disruptive and WP:UNCIVIL. If you had put shut up instead of fuck off there too, i would have given you the same warning.-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 11:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)`[reply]

I have also spoken to the other editor involved regarding civility, so please do not continue to argue in this way Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the prompt vamdalism-removal. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 13:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, I see you've sorted it now anway! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 13:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Protection and Revert Thanks.

Thanks for unsemi-protecting my user page. I guess you saw my message on Cbrown1023's talk page? Also, thanks for that revert. I can't believe it; my user page goes unprotected for a short amount of time, and some vandal hits it. Acalamari 20:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I did see your message to Cbrown1023, hope you don't mind me doing it! No problem about the revert - they're indef blocked now anyway Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't mind; that's why I thanked you! :) I'd better go and tell Cbrown1023 about it before he gets confused. :) Acalamari 20:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi Ryan; as I think you have discovered, I have posted my RfA. However it goes, thank you for your confidence.--Anthony.bradbury 23:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You'll be fine, your a great candidate, but best of luck anyway Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really dislike canvassing, but would you be so kind, if you think fit, as to tell User:Gwernol?--Anthony.bradbury 23:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I've emailed him :-) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Susan?

When's your birthday? I have the perfect image for you ;) – Riana ^ঋ 01:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After seeing that, I think it's March 25th, so you better get ready!! Just proposed it (on WP:CHU talk page), so we'll have to see what response we get :-) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:JohnHistory

Ryan, I have reported to AN/I regarding JohnHistory's disruptive behaviour at talk:Manfred von Richthofen. I'm still waiting for any comments and since you were the blocking admin (regarding the user's canvassing at Clawson's recent RfA), I decided to contact you. I have been trying to assume good faith with JohnHistory, but edits like this made me give up on WP:AAGF. I'd appreciate your input. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the heads up, I've actually been monitoring your talk with him and his contributions and was going to bring this up on WP:AN/I as well, would certainly endorse an idef with this one (but I've commented on AN/I anyway). Would like to say though, well done for working with the user, you did a really good job at trying to turn him round Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input and also for your kind words. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony-Bradbury.

I have invalidated my oppose !vote. It seems I'm now getting hit with bad faith accusations. I did not assume bad faith with Anthony-Bradbury at all; it's just that if you look on my talk page, a user said that they would support me in my RfA; and I would just have to tell them so they could give their support. I have not contacted this user, and wasn't planning to; as I believed it was extremely wrong. That is why I opposed Anthony-Bradbury; but I've reviewed the situation and withdrawn my oppose. I have also removed the link you mentioned from my user page. Acalamari 18:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No-one said you were assuming bad faith, they just stated that you weren't assuming good faith, I think you did the right thing in removing the oppose, it certainly wasn't canvassing and as others have pointed out, the way Anthony handled the situation was extremely good, by asking that I spoke to Gwernol regarding the Rfa as it isn't right for candidates to push there own Rfa - having said that, this wasn't Rfa pushing, it was simply letting someone who had offered a nom know that another user has nominated them Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kncyu38 Herassment

I know that kncyu38 is contacting you. If you read what I have done it is only to try to help. He and I have a history he's not telling you about. He wrote me one of the most offensive e-mails ever, I blocked his e-mail address and he vowed a vendetta against me. Please do not him use you as a pawn here. The MvR article has been vandalized while he obsseses with me for pointing it out. Lets focus on the task at hand, and that perpetrator who actually needs to be blocked. That is my only goal ,however, as long as Kncyu38 continues to herass me, mesaging me all the time talking about blocking me, etc, being offensive and snide to me on the discussion board, on my user page, I react and respond back that this is ridiculous. what can I do to file a herassment claim against Kncyu38. You wouldn't believe the names he called me, he puts on a real front here. What is my goal here? Just to try to help, right now to get the article cleaned up from the vandal. JohnHistory 19:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)JohnHistory[reply]

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

I told him I wouldn't help to advance one point of view and warned him to be civil, to which he didn't react well. That's all I'm going to say about that private correspondence. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt' react well? lol. Man, that's original. gotta give it you there. You didn't react well, to me quoting you and showing your hyporcritical satements, in a VERY civil way, using your OWN WORDS. that is when the name calling started!!!! and, it was started most definately by You! We didn't have to go here man, I tried to be nice and end it yesterday. I even said I honestly hope your life goes well, etc. but you just kept herassing me like your doing here, trying any excuse to get me blocked. Even ignoring a real vandal. JohnHistory 19:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)JohnHistory[reply]

He has taken it to such a level at this point despite me trying to put a stop to it with a nice civil post on his talk page, that I have no choice but to inform you of this name-calling hateful vendetta he perpetrated on me. He has stated that he will do everything in his power to block me, after calling me many names. Now he is trying to use you to finsih it. It is so pathetic! This article has been vandalized, I simply edited a tiny part and wrote that it had been vandalized and needed admins. Do you see what he is trying to do now? Ask yourself why he doesn't care about that the reall issue, instead focuing on me constantly??? Kncyu38 said he would help me, but all he did was say warning that the citations were wrong. The whole article has been vandalized!!!!! Am I the only one who actually cares about the real issue here...the article? calling me disruptive is slander, all I do is help, and its a joke in light of the serious disruption that someone else has been for several days perepetrating on the MvR page. If wiki truly is this corrupt then I don't even care anymore. So pathetic! Kncyu38, shame on you, man. And Ryanpostlethwaite if you can't see through this, well shame on you too. BTW, you made me sick with the "pat on the back" for telling kncyu38 that he did a good job with me and tried to turn me, read this talk page I am the one who tried to be nice and end this. In fact, I turned the whole debate with my sound logic and scholarship. Kncyu38 showed a weak will and the desre to compromise thus violating policy on "undue weight" and put in a source that itself claims to be "propaganda" meant for "pagans" (vii). However, I suppose you didn't know about all of the behind the scenes stuff, or maybe you just don't care about the article either so you missed this long debate of which I was right. From my first argument to my last, history will show and so does my reasoning displayed and agreed upon by many that what I did for this article was right and good scholarship, the book never made the claim expressed, and in fact if you had read the board in reality, you would know that the book as I quoted say "This book, is a Book of propaganda" (vii) Why do I even bother, you people could care less. What a joke is all has been. lol. JohnHistory 19:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)JohnHistory[reply]

Trying to get me blocked for editing one small section of an article that had been totally vandalized, in which I said "This article has been vandalized, Admins are needed" is truly pathetic and clear to see for anyone what that Kncyu38 has a vendetta here. I mean come on, that is ridiculous. BTW, I only did added that b/c I know he has such a vendetta and uncivil personality that after waiting all night and today with nothing but a warning about bad citations issued by him after I notified him about it on his talk page on the discussion there, I felt that was the best way to get a real admin to help, and to inform lay people that the article was destroyed and not accurate, was to edit a part of vandalization out and say "this article has been vandalized admins are needed". Of course, I should have known that Kncyu38 would immeditately got try to get me in trouble, but thats ok. There is a real vandal here people! Not to mention whatever Kncyu38 is for herassing me like this. It must be against policy. JohnHistory 19:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)JohnHistory[reply]

The article isn't the issue itself here, if you have a problem with a specific article, start a request for comment on it where neutral parties can have a look and issues raised can then be put into practice. What concerns me is the way you are trying to put across your point, accusing another editor of bulshit with his edits, accuing chris lawson of editing from an IP with no evidence to suggest this whatsoever, stating that I sicken you - these are my major concerns by far and your complete disgregard of assuming good faith is not helping the situation. Kncyu38 tried to help you at first, but your continued disruption has meant he can no longer continue with the help and hence why he brought it to my attention, again, read WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and proceed with caution Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ryan

You posted an indef block on that IP vandal. I tried to replace it with a temp block template, but messed that up too...you wanna go back and fix it or just leave it as it is? Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 20:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, yeah I realised! Think I've replaced it now with a temporary block template! Had to check to make sure I hadn't actually blocked the IP indefinately! Cheers for looking into it. Going to get back into the RFCN stuff from tomorrow so we'll get the index upto scrath, I've just been busy with work Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 20:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I am aware that it may offend people. I'm pretty sure that on his user page he said he is a Roman Catholic, that is why I said it. Have a nice week:) --James, La gloria è a dio 21:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Ryanpostlethwaite! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination

I'm a guy of few words. Thanks for the co-nom. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, best of luck Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 00:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:RFA

Could you explain why you've just hit every single RFA with an oppose vote and an insult? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 10:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Suggest user goes and does something useful with their life instead" isn't an insult (at least not to the user, perhaps it's an insult to Wikipedia). It's a recommendation. These people have a life to look forward to that would be markedly improved if they didn't involve themselves further with Wikipedia. And if that sounds like trolling, well, perhaps it is. You can keep your silly little project – Qxz 10:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're really going to go, then go, I can't stop you, but go without disrupting wikipedia or your going to earn yourself a block off someone Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 10:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:ais523 looked at Qyx' contribs and noted that he apparently hadn't slept in 24 hours [3]. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I've just seen, and after conversation with an admin on IRC, he's been blocked indef per request, I guess if he wants to come back he can always request unblock Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 11:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANNAfoxlover.

Thanks for telling her I'm not an admin. I don't know why she thought I was one; I simply told her about a week ago not to nominate herself for adminship; as she said on her user page that she was almost ready to nominate herself. I had to tell her not to nominate herself, as the request would probably heavily opposed. Mine will be over about this time in two days; and hers would be even worse. Acalamari 17:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:WikiLoco

He seems to have disappeared, that one. As appears to be becoming our pattern, being referred by me to you for mentorship is the Kiss of Death. :) A Train ^{take the} 22:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I think I have a curse, all users will be blocked indef within a week if referred to me! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Apology

Heh, no problem. :) Pagemoves can get a bit confusing, especially what with all the redirects and (sometimes) multiple moves. Thanks for getting that cleared up so quickly. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, glad you understand! Just couldn't let it do without explaining myself Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by 69.129.4.58

Ryan, I noticed that you removed a request I made for administrator intervention against 69.129.4.58 from the corresponding page [[4]], and no action seems to have been taken. Is there a particular reason for this? Cheers -- Semper discipulus 02:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because said vandal didn't re-offend after you posted your final warning - Alison^☺ 02:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well (s)he already had one final warning for repeatedly vandalizing the Dionysos page. My final warning was merely to document that the vandalizing didn't stop... -- Semper discipulus 02:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- But those warnings were from 3 or 4 days ago. Said anon editor only made one edit today - Alison^☺ 03:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok, I see your reasoning. -- Semper discipulus 03:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - What alison said! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 10:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Hey there, thanks for leaving your message on my talk page. I felt a little bored the past few days and thought reverting vandalism might be a decent way to spend time ... Thanks to the both of you for providing me with some more clues on how things work! -- Semper discipulus 10:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

		The 'You Can Be a Ninja Too' Award
		For reverting some fairly obnoxious vandalism to my userpage, and for general great anti-vandalism efforts, I award Ryan these nunchaku. Take your pick, mate ;) Might help with the lady problems, too... we all know that girls want boyfriends who have great skills! Nunchuck skills, bowhunting skills, computer hacking skills... – Riana ^talk 13:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thanks for the protection too. Stuff like that doesn't bother me anymore, but no one else needs to see it, so thanks :) – Riana ^talk 13:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Hope it all works out for you :) – Riana ^talk 23:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope all goes well

Thank you very much. I hope everything goes smoothly. =) Nishkid 64 13:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 13	26 March 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS
Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Measuring consensus

Ryan, may I ask how you arrived at this conclusion? It seems to me that enough people were *actually* (not just "potentially") offended to show that the username was indeed offensive and inflammatory. Partisan feelings being what they are, we could anticipate members of the opposite party not minding one bit... and that's roughly the division of opinion that resulted. Has policy now become that offensive names are permitted if they offend one-half of a two-party system, whom the other half wish to offend? Or were you "counting votes" rather than weighing policy-based arguments? Please, explain to me your reasoning in this, because it opens the door to all sorts of partisan attack-usernames, which may garner enough "votes" from the opposite party to prevent any "counting-votes"-type consensus, and thereby get allowed. That's a terrible precedent to set. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 23:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied here Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, please go to bed and sleep soundly, peacefully, comfortably. It's okay. Whatever problems remain tomorrow or the next day can wait until then. Sleep heals and strengthens. Sleep well. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 23:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closing

Nope, don't think you did anything inappropriate, it's just that the progress of the conversation crystalized my opinion. Originally, I was all like 'meh' and then I was totally like thinking about it and then I saw this cool album cover and I was like ohmigod and then I came back and was all "dude, this is totally ok" and then I edited and then drank some wickedly bad instant coffee. In other words, I just made a not of my previous comment because it explicitly mentions that I'm not making a judgement either way, and in the interest of disclosure I wanted to make sure that was clear. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 00:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]